Must read WaPo article breaks down Kay Report, makes clear Bush's treason

Oh, the irony!

You've done nothing but peddle parroted excuses and lies for a year now.

And the best you can come up with to defend your hero against the growing mountain of evidence that he lied is some Aussie making a vague claim that Iraqi attempts to get dangerous materials "have met with modest sucess" while at the same time calling the sanctions "pretty good"?

Boy, I pity you. You must be just dying inside watching your little weltensschaung circling around the drain just before it plunges into the abyss. To be played for a dumbass chump by your own hero. Ouch. No wonder you stick to insults and avoid all facts. Of course, if you wish to respond to Mr. Bush's statements, here are just three from Mr. Finnegan's post:

"I would remind you that when the inspectors first went into Iraq and were denied—finally denied—access, a report came out...that they were six months away from developing a weapon," the president said. "I don’t know what more evidence we need."
Sept 7th 2002
Press Conference

"Yes, we found a biological laboratory in Iraq which the UN prohibited." – President Bush in remarks in Poland, published internationally June 1, 2003.

"We've learned that Iraq has trained al-Qaeda members in bomb-making and poisons and deadly gases ... Alliance with terrorists could allow the Iraqi regime to attack America without leaving any fingerprints." – President Bush, Oct. 7.

There's a lot more where those came from.

And nobody's even gotten to Mr. Powell's UN speech yet.

 

you have been well trained sir - you seem a fine enough fellow, so i should inform you that your brain is clean enough to eat off of

you not so much... i mean your idea of fair coverage is sean hannity?!

 

When did Clinton say that?

To which proposed military operation was he referring?

What were the effects of that military operation?

And, finally, for extra credit, is it your opinion that Bush's intelligence on Iraq consisted of intelligence dating from the Clinton Administration?

 

You're the thoughless one if you think Saddam was done being a bad guy.

 

Too *#*#*#*#ing easy. Time once again for my very favorite link:

http://www.lunaville.org/WMD/billmon.aspx

the case of Saddam Hussein, we've got a dictator who is clearly pursuing and already possesses some of these weapons. - Dick Cheney, Vice President, Detroit, Fund-Raiser 6/20/2002

Simply stated, there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons of mass destruction. Dick Cheney, Vice President, Speech to VFW National Convention, 8/26/2002

Hm, Dick seemed pretty certain.

There is already a mountain of evidence that Saddam Hussein is gathering weapons for the purpose of using them. And adding additional information is like adding a foot to Mount Everest. Ari Fleischer, Press Secretary, Response to Question From Press, 9/6/2002

Hm, Ari seemed pretty sure. There was no "evidence" more recent than Desert Fox in that Everest? The same administration that shelved Clinton's anti-terrorism plan, to its cost, is trusting Clinton-era intelligence implicitly? That's what you're saying?

Right now, Iraq is expanding and improving facilities that were used for the production of biological weapons. George W. Bush, President,
Speech to UN General Assembly, 9/12/2002

But...that's not five years ago. That was 2002. Clinton wasn't president, was he?

The Iraqi regime...possesses and produces chemical and biological weapons. It is seeking nuclear weapons. We know that the regime has produced thousands of tons of chemical agents, including mustard gas, sarin nerve gas, VX nerve gas....And surveillance photos reveal [yeah, five year old photos, huh, ASF?] that the regime is [hm, guess not] rebuilding facilities that it had used to produce chemical and biological weapons....After eleven [as opposed to seven, ASF] years during which we have tried containment, sanctions, inspections, even selected military action, the end result is that Saddam Hussein still has [as opposed to, had in 1998, ASF] chemical and biological weapons and is increasing his capabilities to make more. And he is moving ever closer to developing a nuclear weapon....We've also discovered through intelligence that Iraq has a growing fleet of manned and unmanned aerial vehicles that could be used to disperse chemical or biological weapons across broad areas.... George W. Bush, President, Cincinnati, Ohio Speech, 10/7/2002

In case you're wondering? I'm about 1/10 of the way down the page. I'll let you read through the rest at your leisure.

EDIT - whoops, almost forgot! There's one miserable liberal traitor who actually thinks that Clinton's Desert Fox operation helped end Saddam's WMD capabilities!

http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/10/02/kay.report/

Information found to date suggests that Iraq's large-scale capability to develop, produce, and fill new CW munitions was reduced -- if not entirely destroyed -- during Operations Desert Storm and Desert Fox, 13 years of UN sanctions and UN inspections.

Amazing that Bush's intelligence didn't pick up on that, dontcha think?

 

"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line." President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998


"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program." President Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998

"Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face." Madeline Albright, Secretary of State, Feb 18, 1998

"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983." Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998

"We urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs." Letter to President Clinton, signed by Sens. Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others Oct. 9, 1998

"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process." Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998

"Hussein has chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies." Madeline Albright, Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999

"There is no doubt that ... Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies." Letter to President Bush, Signed by Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL,) and others, Dec, 5, 2001

"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandated of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them." Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002

"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country." Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002

"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power." Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002

"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction." Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002

"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..." Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002

"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force -- if necessary -- to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security." Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002

"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years ... We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction." Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002

"He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do" Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 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, and 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." Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002

"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction." Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), Dec. 8, 2002

"Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ...And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction ... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real ..." Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23

 

an oxymoron if i've ever seen one

 

Truly, a ship of fools

Game, set and match to the "Bush lied" side as the self-deluded Bush worshippers admit defeat by retreating to their usual desperate "Blame Clinton" dodge to try to distract everyone from the fact that their hero lied his ass off to start a war that has done nothing to fight the real terrorists.

The entire Bush team repeatedly made very specific, ironclad claims about Iraq's supposed WMDs that they knew weren't true. "We know exactly what he has and where it is", they told us. "Trust us, because we can't back up anything we say cuz we have to protect our intelligence assets (ironic, given the outing of the CIA dude, n'est-ce pas?)." "We've found the WMDs!", they proudly trumpeted, despite engaging in the most perfunctory sham search. "It will be announced in 72 hours!" Oops, no they didn't. Now that they've been conclusively busted, they're shucking and diving like kids caught shoplifting - whining and crying and trying to shift the blame on everyone else but themselves. Finger-pointing, memo-leaking, name-calling. Sweet merciful crap, the White House has has become a junior high school. And these are the manly, tough guy heroes of the Right complete with ridiculous action figures? These whiny liars trying to weasel their way out of responsibility for their own words and actions? How pathetic.

And talk about "parroting", look at the poor saps who worship these guys. Is there anything so patently false that they won't believe it if helps them maintain the fantasy of their hero's integrity just a little longer? Is there any distraction they won't try? Is there any problem from Iraq to Bush's DUI to male pattern baldness that they haven't tried to blame Clinton for? It must be so simple having one answer to all life's conundrums. Your car broke down? Blame Clinton. Dog died? Blame Clinton. Can't get it up? Blame Clinton. Blew off your hand because you forgot to let go of the M-80? Danged if it ain't Clinton's fault somehow.

And the truly ironic part is that while Clinton certainly was not a member of the Ridiculous Right, he wasn't even a real liberal but a "moderate Republican in drag", as were most of his staff (ie. the morally repugnant Madeline "It was worth it" Albright). Just more proof that labels and mere symbols count more to these people than substance or objective reality.

If it wasn't for the fact that good folks are dying over this whole ball of stupidity, fantasy-mongering, ego and self-delusion, it would be the funniest thing ever. Really, you can't make shit like this up if you tried.

 

BLAH BLAH BLAH Liberal hatred BLAH BLAH BLAH attack the messenger...BLAH BLAH BLAH.

Okay i am going to try to bring this thread back to the topic - did Bush LIE?

ASF and House18 those are really nice quotes and all but which of those individuals brought us to war? Which of those individuals is the commander and chief of this nation responsible for Iraq War 2?

Since your buddy Michael Russ dissapeared as soon as he was presented with the evidence it is up to you two to defend the President. In the following three quotes please explain how our President was not flat out LYING in order to gin up support for the war?

"I would remind you that when the inspectors first went into Iraq and were denied—finally denied—access, a report came out...that they were six months away from developing a nuclear weapon," the president said. "I don’t know what more evidence we need."
Sept 7th 2002
Press Conference

Do such IAEA document even existed. When pressed Bush aides said he was referring to a document from 1991. That document said nothing of the sort.

"Yes, we found a biological laboratory in Iraq which the UN prohibited." – President Bush in remarks in Poland, published internationally June 1, 2003.

WE DID?????

"We've learned that Iraq has trained al-Qaeda members in bomb-making and poisons and deadly gases ... Alliance with terrorists could allow the Iraqi regime to attack America without leaving any fingerprints." – President Bush, Oct. 7.

ZERO, ZILCH. NADA. NO INTELLIGENCE HAS EVER SAID THIS!

 

Hmm, this is interesting, note how the Dems are staunchly against this...oh wait that fits with the quotes I posted, but ZZFinnegan likes to ignore any support liberals gave Bush.

http://www.cnn.com/2002/ALLPOLITICS/10/11/iraq.us/

Now go ahead and post more of your all-caps "he lied" crap. Then post how the Dems were all against this and had nothing to do with it.

 

What the hell does craven Dem capitulation have anything to do with the fact the President lied?

 

ummmm aren't these some of the people he lied to? were they not voting on the basis of the false claims? i still don't see how any of this absolves bush of lying through his teeth

and for the record, i am not a liberal - one need not be a liberal to realize the that W is trash

 

Okay, let's try this again: Go back and read the quotes I posted, then look at the vote. You will then realize that many Dems supported this before Bush "lied" and that many Dems must also have "lied." I was simply responding to the liberals who insist that the Dems do no wrong.

P.S. How about those Blues...Rams aren't doing to bad either!

 

This thread sucks.
Ya'll need a blow-job.

 

Wow you are really good at avoiding the subject at hand. Your like a really bad magician trying to get our attention elsewhere - "look over here Clinton sad Saddam was a bad guy and evil too!"

Did any of those individuals you quoted lead us to war where thousands have died or been maimed?

I guess that is irrelevant huh?

Additionally there is a difference between believing something based on the best available intelligence and flat out lying.

Bush lied in order to gin up support for his war. Let's go back to those quotes AGAIN. Please explain how he is not flat out lying in these?

"I would remind you that when the inspectors first went into Iraq and were denied—finally denied—access, a report came out...that they were six months away from developing a nuclear weapon," the president said. "I don’t know what more evidence we need."
Sept 7th 2002
Press Conference

No such IAEA document even existed. When pressed, Bush aides said he was referring to a document from 1991. That document in turn said nothing of the sort.

"Yes, we found a biological laboratory in Iraq which the UN prohibited." – President Bush in remarks in Poland, published internationally June 1, 2003.

WE DID?????

"We've learned that Iraq has trained al-Qaeda members in bomb-making and poisons and deadly gases ... Alliance with terrorists could allow the Iraqi regime to attack America without leaving any fingerprints." – President Bush, Oct. 7.

ZERO, ZILCH. NADA. NO INTELLIGENCE HAS EVER SAID THIS!

Finally, where the heck did any of us say "Dems do know wrong". Who exactly are you responding to? Yourself? This thread has been about the lies of Bush and his pals. You posted a series of quotes picked from NEWSMAX that had nothing whatsover to do with the lies that led us to war and somehow you think this proves that Bush is innocent of lying. Weird man, weird.

 

Game,set match. Thread should be closed. Brilliant Dan, Brilliant.

 

Yeah, that was brilliant...if your IQ is on a par with Evan Marriott, that is.

 

You are right about that, it is getting a bit old.

As a peace offering, I will make the following concession, but as a sign of good faith I would hope that if anyone ever uses my admission they will include the complete sentence when quoting me.

"I do believe that Bush and some administration officials lied about the quality of the intelligence in Iraq when they said we "know" information, when an unbiased person would have only said "we have reason to believe" such information.

OTOH the major reason the U.S. made to the U.N. for war, was the fact that Iraq was not cooperating with inspectors as called for in U.N. resolutions, thus making it impossible for us to "know" what was happening in Iraq, so trying to claim that we shouldn't have gone to war because we did not really "know" some things that the administration claimed to "know" is not a very convincing argument.

 

1-that's because it's the only reasoning the UN would have accepted

2-hardly changes the truth in it though

 

Sorry ... say again?

Considering it unacceptable that someone who says 'we KNOW Saddam has x, y and z and intends to do a, b and c with them, so we must go to war (war!!!!, for chrissakes!) NOW' when in actual fact they didn't KNOW anything of the sort, but went to war anyway and got hundreds of Allied soldiers plus thousands of Iraqi civilians killed is a snivelly, lying little coward and a dangerous man to have in power is "not a very convincing argument"!?!?!?!

Suffering snakeskin shitspoons ... you armchair generals just get riper by the second.

 

That was some good shit. Give the man his due.