Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Did the President Lie about Iraq
Insight on the News ^ | 27 September 2004 | Bobby Eberle

Posted on 09/27/2004 4:18:42 PM PDT by concretebob

In every presidential campaign, there is an issue which rises to the surface and dominates the debate. In 1992, it was the economy. In 1980, it was inflation, unemployment, and a tarnished national image.

In 2004, it is the war on terror, and in particular, the Democrats are attempting to make this election a referendum on the war in Iraq. Time and time again, Democratic presidential nominee Sen. John Kerry has said his opponent has "misled" the American people on Iraq.

(Excerpt) Read more at insightmag.com ...


TOPICS: Editorial; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: hussien; ovaloffice; wmd
OK, you have to read the WHOLE article before you land on me.
1 posted on 09/27/2004 4:18:43 PM PDT by concretebob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: concretebob

Too Bad. Then don't excerpt it. Zot! I'm just kidding! :) HA!


2 posted on 09/27/2004 4:20:40 PM PDT by writer33 (Try this link: http://www.whiskeycreekpress.com/books/electivedecisions.shtml)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: concretebob

I would not have landed on you, I've read Mr. Eberle before, and like his work.

Good article, lays it out pretty well.


3 posted on 09/27/2004 4:23:35 PM PDT by Theresawithanh (FLUSH THE JOHNS IN 2004!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: concretebob

Does Bob Eberle still tour with the Jimmy Dorsey Orchestra?

:-)


4 posted on 09/27/2004 4:28:47 PM PDT by Freepdonia (Victory is Ours!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: concretebob

1. Some time ago, while speaking from the Oval Office, the president looked into the eyes of the American public and said: "Earlier today, I ordered America's armed forces to strike military and security targets in Iraq. They are joined by British forces. Their mission is to attack Iraq's nuclear, chemical and biological weapons programs and its military capacity to threaten its neighbors."

The president added that the purpose of this military action was "to protect the national interest of the United States, and indeed the interests of people throughout the Middle East and around the world." The president explained that Saddam Hussein "must not be allowed to threaten his neighbors or the world with nuclear arms, poison gas or biological weapons."

During the course of his Oval Office address, the president said that other countries possess weapons of mass destruction and ballistic missiles, but with Saddam, there is one big difference. "He has used them," the president said. "Not once, but repeatedly."

"Unleashing chemical weapons against Iranian troops during a decade-long war, not only against soldiers, but against civilians. Firing Scud missiles at the citizens of Israel, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain and Iran. And not only against a foreign enemy, but even against his own people, gassing Kurdish civilians in Northern Iraq," the president explained.

Setting an ominous tone, the president declared, "The international community had little doubt then, and I have no doubt today, that left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will use these terrible weapons again."



2. Continuing with our examination of the president's actual statements, the president noted that by working through the United Nations, "The U.N. Security Council voted 15 to 0 to condemn Saddam's actions and to demand that he immediately come into compliance."

"I made it very clear at that time what unconditional cooperation meant, based on existing U.N. resolutions and Iraq's own commitments," the president said. "And along with Prime Minister Blair of Great Britain, I made it equally clear that if Saddam failed to cooperate fully, we would be prepared to act without delay, diplomacy or warning."

The president added: "This situation presents a clear and present danger to the stability of the Persian Gulf and the safety of people everywhere. The international community gave Saddam one last chance to resume cooperation with the weapons inspectors. Saddam has failed to seize the chance."



3. In taking questions from reporters following his Oval Office address, the president was asked whether military action was the right thing to do.

"This was the right thing for the country," the president said. "We have given Saddam Hussein chance after chance to cooperate. We said in November that this was the last chance. We acted swiftly because we were ready, thanks to the very fine work of the Defense Department in leaving our assets properly deployed. We had the strong support of the British."

In looking forward regarding the situation in Iraq, the president added, "I hope Saddam will come into cooperation with the inspection system now and comply with the relevant U.N. Security Council resolutions. But we have to be prepared that he will not, and we must deal with the very real danger he poses. So we will pursue a long-term strategy to contain Iraq and its weapons of mass destruction and work toward the day when Iraq has a government worthy of its people."

In talking about regime change, did the president "show his hand"? Did he want Saddam out of power simply for personal reasons, perhaps to the extent that he would lie to the American people about Iraq's weapons programs?

Regardless of the intelligence gathered and studied by American sources regarding Iraq's WMD programs and the fact that conclusions were supported by both British and Russian intelligence sources, the question still remains as to whether the president lied.

Based on the strong and definitive statements cited here by the president, he must be called to account before the American people. The brave servicemen and women who are called into harm's way by the president of the United States must have confidence that their commander in chief is acting on credible information and not "lying" to the American public.

Thus, President Clinton, please come clean.


5 posted on 09/27/2004 4:44:02 PM PDT by expatpat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: concretebob
.....because it's only in the last line that it becomes evident. The quotes didn't sound right at first, but it clears up at the end.

Fine work. Worth reading twice.

6 posted on 09/27/2004 4:44:34 PM PDT by perfect stranger (The Hummer is a regular Pat Buchanan on wheels." PJ O'Rourke from C&D magazine)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: concretebob

Misled or not George Bush has led, while Kerry has ducked and darted and spun till we and he have no idea where he stands.


7 posted on 09/27/2004 4:44:48 PM PDT by sgtbono2002 (I aint wrong, I aint sorry , and I am probably going to do it again.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: concretebob
.
"Connect the Dots . . . Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden"

http://www.archive-news.net/Articles/SH040923.html.
.

8 posted on 09/27/2004 5:19:46 PM PDT by christie (John F. Kerry Timeline - http://www.archive-news.net/Kerry/JK_timeline.html)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: christie

and everyone else....Thank you all very much.

Christie, my belief is that Saddam Hussein attcked this country as early as 1993. No matter what anyone says, Hussein, in one way or another, has been behind every attack, including TWA 800 & AA 587 over Queens, and his alliance with OBL could very well go back farther than that.
Thanks for the link. I was unaware of the indictments, but that puts it in the courts, and our justice system is not geared to handle pure evil. Our justice system assumes everyone involved in the process will "tell the truth,...., so help me God". I doubt OBL or SH will lay a hand on the King James Version and repeat that oath with any conviction.
Just shows you that Clinton & Co regarded OBL as a criminal and not an enemy.


9 posted on 09/27/2004 6:28:45 PM PDT by concretebob (Honor a Veteran...Vote on 2 November)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson