No Weapons of Mass Destruction

[la4angus]

If you really believe that President Bush lied, THAT THERE NEVER WERE
ANY
WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION IN IRAQ AND HE TOOK US TO WAR SOLELY FOR HIS
OIL
BUDDIES -- then please read this.


"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 [the USA], 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, 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 (D-MA), 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, Clinton
Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999

"There is no doubt that ... Saddam Hussein has invigorated 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,
December 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 is calculating 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. 2003

SO NOW THE DEMOCRATS SAY PRESIDENT BUSH LIED, THAT THERE NEVER WERE ANY

WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION AND HE TOOK US TO WAR FOR HIS OIL BUDDIES???

 

[dun]

I've posted this before on several forums. The anti-Bush folks think that Clinton was just mislead, but that Bush knew better. hmmmmmm
None are so blind as those that "will" not see.

dun

 

[Anonymous]

Well if its true so where are they (WMD)????? If you can show me the WMD, then I will believe you...so far.....very little evidence. What evidence they found are old WMD he used back in the 80's and they are no good... Most of these people were misled to believed the falsifed reports by the inspectors....that is why quite few of them has either quit or commit suicide..... Please wake up and smell the coffee. At least when Bill Clinton made those remarks, he didn't go to war, did he?

 

[dun]

Kind of proves my point doesn't it?

dun

Well if its true so where are they (WMD)????? If you can show me the WMD, then I will believe you...so far.....very little evidence. What evidence they found are old WMD he used back in the 80's and they are no good... Most of these people were misled to believed the falsifed reports by the inspectors....that is why quite few of them has either quit or commit suicide..... Please wake up and smell the coffee. At least when Bill Clinton made those remarks, he didn't go to war, did he?

 

[jw]

No, Bill did not go to war. He chose rather to go to his private room with Monica.

 

[Ann Bledsoe]

I just don't see how anyone can doubt that Saddam had WMDs, he used them! We know he used them. He used them against his own people.

Just because we didn't find stockpiles of these weapons doesn't mean that they did not/do not still exist. It only means that we pussyfooted around with Saddam long enough for him to either hide them or move them out of the country.
I mean heck, if you had something illegal in a particular location, and the authorities told you they'd be there to look for it on a particular date several weeks in the future, wouldn't you hide it somewhere else?
Pretty stupid to leave it sit there, where you know they'll be looking, just begging to be found.
Saddam wasn't stupid, he knew where the inspectors would be looking and he kept ahead of them -- I would have been surprised if they had actually found anything.

I'd be the first one to say that I don't like George Bush, but I do believe that the opposition has went too far lately. They're basically accusing Bush of treason, and that's wrong -- there's not a one of them that can say that they would have handled the whole 9-11/Iraq War situation any better.

Ann B

 

[dun]

It isn't that I'm that big a fan of BW, but I detest kerry.

I watched part ofthe open 9/11 hearings and it seemed like more of a witch hunt then hearings. And all week-end I heard more of the same type of crap from at least one of the dems on the committee.
20:20 hindsight is such a wonderfull things, especially if your partys man wasn't in the whitehouse.

dun

I just don't see how anyone can doubt that Saddam had WMDs, he used them! We know he used them. He used them against his own people.

Just because we didn't find stockpiles of these weapons doesn't mean that they did not/do not still exist. It only means that we pussyfooted around with Saddam long enough for him to either hide them or move them out of the country.
I mean heck, if you had something illegal in a particular location, and the authorities told you they'd be there to look for it on a particular date several weeks in the future, wouldn't you hide it somewhere else?
Pretty stupid to leave it sit there, where you know they'll be looking, just begging to be found.
Saddam wasn't stupid, he knew where the inspectors would be looking and he kept ahead of them -- I would have been surprised if they had actually found anything.

I'd be the first one to say that I don't like George Bush, but I do believe that the opposition has went too far lately. They're basically accusing Bush of treason, and that's wrong -- there's not a one of them that can say that they would have handled the whole 9-11/Iraq War situation any better.

Ann B

 

[D.R. Cattle]

I just don't see how anyone can doubt that Saddam had WMDs, he used them! We know he used them. He used them against his own people.

Just because we didn't find stockpiles of these weapons doesn't mean that they did not/do not still exist. It only means that we pussyfooted around with Saddam long enough for him to either hide them or move them out of the country.
I mean heck, if you had something illegal in a particular location, and the authorities told you they'd be there to look for it on a particular date several weeks in the future, wouldn't you hide it somewhere else?
Pretty stupid to leave it sit there, where you know they'll be looking, just begging to be found.
Saddam wasn't stupid, he knew where the inspectors would be looking and he kept ahead of them -- I would have been surprised if they had actually found anything.

I'd be the first one to say that I don't like George Bush, but I do believe that the opposition has went too far lately. They're basically accusing Bush of treason, and that's wrong -- there's not a one of them that can say that they would have handled the whole 9-11/Iraq War situation any better.

Ann B

So exactly what do you hold against him?

 

[Ann Bledsoe]

I just don't see how anyone can doubt that Saddam had WMDs, he used them! We know he used them. He used them against his own people.

Just because we didn't find stockpiles of these weapons doesn't mean that they did not/do not still exist. It only means that we pussyfooted around with Saddam long enough for him to either hide them or move them out of the country.
I mean heck, if you had something illegal in a particular location, and the authorities told you they'd be there to look for it on a particular date several weeks in the future, wouldn't you hide it somewhere else?
Pretty stupid to leave it sit there, where you know they'll be looking, just begging to be found.
Saddam wasn't stupid, he knew where the inspectors would be looking and he kept ahead of them -- I would have been surprised if they had actually found anything.

I'd be the first one to say that I don't like George Bush, but I do believe that the opposition has went too far lately. They're basically accusing Bush of treason, and that's wrong -- there's not a one of them that can say that they would have handled the whole 9-11/Iraq War situation any better.

Ann B

So exactly what do you hold against him?

Well for one thing, he was not the duly elected President.
For another, he and Cheney have been too involved with "Big Oil", their loyalties reflect it. Neither one understands the common person.

But he was also left with a total mess in the Middle East by his predecessors, and he stepped up to the task at hand and IMO is handling it pretty well.

Ann B

 

[la4angus]

The way the election process is set up, he is the duly elected President.

 

[Ann Bledsoe]

He was put in office by a Supreme Court decision -- not by the election. Al Gore had the votes, Bush didn't.

Ann B

The way the election process is set up, he is the duly elected President.

 

[D.R. Cattle]

Whew! Is anyone upset that Al Gore wasn't elected President? Imagine Americans having their guns taken away and then 9/11 comes along.

 

[BLACKPOWER]

No, Bill did not go to war. He chose rather to go to his private room with Monica.

The old right wing stand by comment when they have nothing to say.

 

[jim]

It seems funny, that Algore had one of the biggest election theives in history working for him as his election manager. I think that this is just liberal anger because they tried to steal the election and failed as they do at everything else. Losers continue to lose don't they? {:^)

 

[Campground Cattle]

I just don't see how anyone can doubt that Saddam had WMDs, he used them! We know he used them. He used them against his own people.

Just because we didn't find stockpiles of these weapons doesn't mean that they did not/do not still exist. It only means that we pussyfooted around with Saddam long enough for him to either hide them or move them out of the country.
I mean heck, if you had something illegal in a particular location, and the authorities told you they'd be there to look for it on a particular date several weeks in the future, wouldn't you hide it somewhere else?
Pretty stupid to leave it sit there, where you know they'll be looking, just begging to be found.
Saddam wasn't stupid, he knew where the inspectors would be looking and he kept ahead of them -- I would have been surprised if they had actually found anything.

I'd be the first one to say that I don't like George Bush, but I do believe that the opposition has went too far lately. They're basically accusing Bush of treason, and that's wrong -- there's not a one of them that can say that they would have handled the whole 9-11/Iraq War situation any better.

Ann B

So exactly what do you hold against him?

Well for one thing, he was not the duly elected President.
For another, he and Cheney have been too involved with "Big Oil", their loyalties reflect it. Neither one understands the common person.

But he was also left with a total mess in the Middle East by his predecessors, and he stepped up to the task at hand and IMO is handling it pretty well.

Ann B

If your so opposed to Big Oil quit driving your auto's and tractors . Where were you when we were losing American jobs. Tree huggers EPA have drove the price of gas up. Why aren't you mad at this? Is easy to blame in ignorance, the Clinton Admi. let us lose jobs and security by condoning these takeovers and mergers. Where I work we use to make three grades of gas now we have to make over 150 blends to go to different regions of the country. This creates shortages as you can no longer send gas just anywhere. In the last few years we have lost Amoco, Mobil, Arco, Soho, Texaco due to they couldn't survive under the Clinton Admin. The signs are still in front of the stations as you are duped to support the forgien companies. We now only have one of the three major oil companies being American which is Exxon. When you were talking about being in bed with BP which took over Amoco, Arco, Castrol, and Bayer Chemical or Royal Dutch Shell. Most don't even realize you are spending your American dollars on forgien companies. Oh almost forgot Citgo is owned by the Venezuelans and I might be mistaken on this one but I think Phillips was bought by our allies the French. In all the above take overs we lost 100,000's of American jobs to bolster forgien company profits. Is this the big oil companies the current admin is bed with I don't think so as the oil industry as we knew colapsed under the goverment regs and taxes under Slick Willy.

 

[Campground Cattle]

The recent announced marriages of British Petroleum Co. PLC-Amoco Corp. and Exxon Corp. -Mobil Corp. Overshadowed by the Exxon-Mobil linkup was a major European merger the same day between France's. Total SA and Belgium's Petrofina SA, which would create the world's third biggest oil firm Oil analysts suggest that Chevron Corp and Texaco Inc. are likely merger partners and that Conoco Inc., recently spun off from Du Pont & Co., is an almost certain takeover target. This was all taking place under Slick Willys watch and many other small oil companies were eaten up. If anybody was in bed with big oil,when Monica wasn't available was Slick Willy.

 

[Craig-TX]

You speak the truth. Just to add, Willie finished off what the liberals had started in the 70's. Don't forget Carter's demonizing of big oil and his brilliant Windfall Profits Tax. Remember when lot's of towns had a refinery? Big towns had several. Ft. Worth had five or six. All those jobs are gone because the evil oil companies were taxed and regulated out of the refining business.

Craig-TX