Technically speaking...
And here we have yet another ignoramus, this of the talking head variety. In a CNN report today one of their resident geniuses, Jamie McIntyre tells us that chemical weapons rockets found in an Iraqi bunker are not "technically" chemical rockets. Yes, these 122mm.rockets are specifically designed to hold chemical weapons and they are the same type as have been actually found holding chemical weapons in the past, but no..."technically" they are not chemical weapons as they don't presently hold chemicals.
This logic is something we can easily get a grip on. To wit: an Abrams Tank is not "technically" a killer weapons system. In reality it is 40 tons of metal sculpture. Only after it fires it's main gun disintegrating another amored vehicle, I suppose, does it actually become a tank. An M-16 is, for all purposes, an eight pound plastic stick, until you fire a 5.56 round thru someone's head...then it becomes a rifle. Using this theory we should allow violent felons to carry 9mm pistols. After all they're just paper weights until one loads ammo into one, and surely a violent felon wouldn't dream of obtaining actual ammunition and using it!
I should be surprised that Mr. McIntryre deems to think that anyone will take him seriously, unfortunately I'm not surprised at all. There are a plethora of ignorami who will believe quite readily that this in not "a smoking gun". After all these are just a few unloaded rockets and Saddam says he doesn't have chemicals to put in them. Why shouldn't we believe him? Until he actually uses them "technically" Saddam is Santa Claus.
And here we have yet another ignoramus, this of the talking head variety. In a CNN report today one of their resident geniuses, Jamie McIntyre tells us that chemical weapons rockets found in an Iraqi bunker are not "technically" chemical rockets. Yes, these 122mm.rockets are specifically designed to hold chemical weapons and they are the same type as have been actually found holding chemical weapons in the past, but no..."technically" they are not chemical weapons as they don't presently hold chemicals.
This logic is something we can easily get a grip on. To wit: an Abrams Tank is not "technically" a killer weapons system. In reality it is 40 tons of metal sculpture. Only after it fires it's main gun disintegrating another amored vehicle, I suppose, does it actually become a tank. An M-16 is, for all purposes, an eight pound plastic stick, until you fire a 5.56 round thru someone's head...then it becomes a rifle. Using this theory we should allow violent felons to carry 9mm pistols. After all they're just paper weights until one loads ammo into one, and surely a violent felon wouldn't dream of obtaining actual ammunition and using it!
I should be surprised that Mr. McIntryre deems to think that anyone will take him seriously, unfortunately I'm not surprised at all. There are a plethora of ignorami who will believe quite readily that this in not "a smoking gun". After all these are just a few unloaded rockets and Saddam says he doesn't have chemicals to put in them. Why shouldn't we believe him? Until he actually uses them "technically" Saddam is Santa Claus.
