John Kerry > October 9, 2002
"I will be voting to give the president of the US the authority to use force if
necessary to disarm Saddam because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of
mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security."
Senator Hillary Clinton > October 10, 2002
"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that
Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock.
His missile delivery capability, his nuclear program. He has also given aid,
comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists including Al-Qaeda members. It is clear,
however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his
capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare and will keep trying to develop
nuclear weapons."
Dick Durbin > September 30, 1999
"One of the most compelling threats we in this country face today is theJohnny Edwards > January 7, 2003
proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. Threat assessments regularly warn
us of the possibility that North Korea, Iran, Iraq, or some other nation may
acquire or develop nuclear weapons."
"Serving on the intelligence committee and seeing day after day, week afterTom Daschle > February 11, 1998
week, briefings on Saddam's weapons of mass destruction and his plans on using
those weapons, he cannot be allowed to have nuclear weapons. It's just that
simple. The whole world changes if Saddam ever has nuclear weapons."
"The (Clinton) administration has said, 'Look, we have exhausted virtually our
diplomatic effort to get the Iraqis to comply with their own agreements and with
international law. Given that, what other option is there but to force them to
do so?' That's what they're saying. This is the key question. And the answer is
we don't have another option. We have got to force them to comply, and we are
doing so militarily."So the question is, did they lie to us? Did these democrats mislead us into war? If not, and they believed what they were saying, why didn't they do anything about it? Why were they allowing this threat to exist, even thrive when Clinton was in office? Either way, it doesn't look good for the Dems.
14 comments:
Heheh good job Rhino. Ah those Democrats, they love eating feet and crow don't they?
Let me explain it to you simply. The Bush administration lied us into war. Many Democrats in Congress--and much of the public--believed the lies.The truth came out.
Sorry to dissapoint you gary, but the democrats in the senate who sat on the intelligence committe got the EXACT same info as the president. Also, the foriegn intelligence services were saying the same thing. Also, BJ Clinton was the president when he made some of his statements. so i guess he believed GOVERNER Bushs lies at the time. ummm yeah, thanks for playing gary.
What I can't get over is why everyone wants to say someone lied...No one lied. People were not even really wrong...just off a little bit. They have found weapon making facilities and they have found dangerous weapons just not WMD. I think the most problematic part of the war is not whether or not there was WMD but if there was the process in place, where did it go? Don't tell me that it couldn't have been smuggled out of the country because we know certain weapons were there and we know people are still coming and going now. It's hard for me to hear the Dems say they were lied to because it is not true...that is a lie. The same info was given to everyone. They don't want to say that maybe the intelligence was faulty and they were gullable or ignorant to specific truths. They want to say Haliburton is running the country and our president is a liar/devil...They don't want to admit that their Democrat president Bill Clinton ignored correct real intelligence on Osama Bin Laden and Al Queda until his semon inadvertantly spilled somehow on his fat ho's dress...He reacted to that didn't he...I remember missiles going off almost simultaneously as impeachment hearings were in motion. Clinton ignored real evidence in Rwanda and the former Yugoslavia (not intelligence but EVIDENCE) but Democrats only want to talk about the Big Bad Bushies...Who signed the contracts w/Haliburton Gary? No, not Bush...your buddy Clinton because he knew then that war w/Saddam was inevitable. Somehow the Clintons and their bitch ass counterparts have forgotten all of this and would rather play the "I was tricked into the things I said and did" card rather than being what? Honest, impossible. Stop being a victim Gary. Be a man.
I think that there was a mixture of incorrect and fabricated intelligence. News accounts leading up to the war were full of stories of CIA "anonymous sources" complaining that they were being pressured to skew intelligence. The Office of Special Plans manipulated and "cherry picked" intelligence and utilized fabricated intelligence from defectors such as Chalabi.The goal was to sell the Congress and the public on the war--a war that had been planned for years.
Fortunately, the American people in ever-increasing numbers are seeing through the lies.
Yes, Clinton tried to kill bin Laden with cruise missiles--only to be accused of "wag the dog" by Republicans.
Gary u say a war that had been planned for years. Who planned it? Bush when he was Governer of Texas? Clinton? Bush senior? Or was it Chalabi? i know you like your conspiracy theories, but this one is ridiculous. Are you one of those people who thinks the President planned the 9/11 attacks? are you saying the Isreali's did it? The things you say are nonsensical. Intelligence was "cherry picked"?? by who? The president had the same intelligence as his opponents, they all said the same things. The only thing that has changed from then to now is the fact that we didn't find the smoking gun. We found tons of Uranium, and we found factories to produce biological weapons, but we didn't find the smoking gun. That's it. And the Dems have tried to use that to their advantage. they have manipulated the (very willing) press to spread the story that Bush lied, while everyone conveniently forgets that they said the exact same things as Bush when they were looking at the exact same intelligence. That's the reason for the post today, just to remind everyone who reads us (you and jim)! They are hypocrites, and they are undermining our efforts in the war, and doing harm to our troops. It makes me sick to my stomach that they don't get called out on it every day.
No, Clinto could have killed Bin Laden and didn't...He could have intervened against the Hutu in Rwanda and didn't...He could have stopped the other genocide in the Serbian/Croatian conflict and didn't...He could have done a lot of things but instead he did use his power to wag the dog at a barely attractive intern who I wouldn't have wagged anything at on fifty cent draft night at the local go go lounge. Were Americans seeing through the lies then...Whitewater land deals and witnesses against his criminal activities being arrested and mysteriously dying in jail? Did they see the lies in those circumstances...or only when they get a chance to second guess, back seat drive, or whatever it is Democrats do? You lost. Suck it up and wait until it's your turn again to make nothing out of something just like Clinton liked to do. By the way, what would you call the intelligence that was supposedly supressed by Libby and Chaney's office? Was that cherry picked? Would you call it obejective? They sent someone who was against the war from the start (Afghanistan as well as Iraq) and working for John Kerry to gather info proving there was no reason to go to war...that was the objective. And guess what, he found it...what a joke.
Ok, to respond to rhinoculous:
1) that the neo-conservatives in the Bush administration had been planning to invade Iraq for years is so well-documented that I can't believe you even question it.
2) I do not believe Bush planned 9/11.
3)Saddam's son-in-law, the general in charge of the WMD programs, defected to the US and said that all the WMD programs had been dismantled. The transcripts came out later. Look it up. The administration knew this but concealed it.
To respond to Gadfly:
Oh my God! The Clinton administration was the most investigated in history--due to the fact that his political opponents controlled Congress. They dumped the first Special Prosecutor because he wasn't partisan enough, to replace him with Kenn Starr. After all that, the only thing they could find on Clinton was Monica.
It seems to me that first you bothbelieved the lies and now you believe the spin. When Clinton said he did not have sex with "that woman" I did not believe him for a second.Have you noticed the truth usually comes out?
By the way, shortly after Bush was re-elected I made a prediction that the Bush administration would crash and burn. It has begun.
I believe he ALLOWED it to happen.........
How many years? he was in office for less than a year when 9/11 happened. We invaded Iraq in march of '03. If they started planning this war on the first day in office we are talking about only 2 years and 3 months. Are you saying this was the first thing on the agenda? from day one? Saddams son in law said something? Who cares, the CIA was saying something else. If they wanted to suppress it, they would have killed him. Or do you think they want gary buell to now they lied to us? come on, if they wanted to keep it from us, it would be kept from us. You can't have it both ways gary, first you say they're evil geniuses who pre planned and set all this up, and then you say they're keystone cops who can't even keep one mans statements from us. which one is it? Here's a crazy idea, maybe they're telling the truth.
Oh and warlike, how about i beat you like my bitch........ you know, just for old times sake!
Typical Long Island "I',m a tough guy" bantor(nigga please!).Everybody knows-save the threats for out-of-towners. Newsflash: North korea has WMD. What are we going to do about it?
Gary, on another point, there were more convictions in the clinton administration than any other administration in history. including Nixon. he was impeached, not for banging some fat intern but for lieing about it. For you to say the only thing they got was monica is just silly. Also, the big thing that we'll never know is what was sandy berger covering up? some of the documents he destroyed have no copies, what was it? In a time of war, while our troops are in the field dieing, the former national security advisor goes to the national archives and steals top secret documents so that the 9/11 commission can't get their hands on them. That was by far teh most corrupt administration in history. right down to the first lady stealing furniture on the way out and actually having to return it. Anyway, the biggest crimes that clinton committed were right out in the open, the ones mentioned by gadfly in his comments. his INACTION is what was truly criminal. monica was ntohing more than a distraction. if he didn't lie about it, he wouldn't have been impeached.
Actually I think the Reagan adminstration holds the record for number of convictions. Be that as it may, I was speaking about Clinton himself--they didn't find anything on him except Monica. No he should not have lied. (He also shouldn't have been asked the question). Kenn Starr should have stuck to Whitewater and Travelgate. (The two most boring political scandals of all time).
Oh, and the neo-Conservatives had been promoting war with Iraq for years before Bush took office.
The poor Dems such victims, I feel bad that they are so gullible to be play by the dumb guy Bush.
Post a Comment