Posted on 11/27/2005 11:14:50 AM PST by wagglebee
2008 presidential candidate Hillary Clinton won't say whether she read a key intelligence report on Iraq's weapons of mass destruction before she voted in Oct. 2002 to authorize the Iraq war.
Asked directly by the Boston Herald whether she did her homework by reading the report on the threat posed by Saddam Hussein's WMDs, the paper reports that the Democratic frontrunner "declined to say."
Though billed in the press as a supporter of the war, the former first lady has been highly critical of the Bush administration's so-called rush to judgment of Iraq's pre-war threat.
But in Oct. 2002, while explaining why she intended to vote for the war, Clinton clearly left the impression that she had read all the intel on Saddam's WMDs that she could get her hands on.
"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," she told the Senate before voting to authorize the war.
Asked last month whether she regretted her vote, Mrs. Clinton told NPR: "You know, I really can't talk about this on the fly. It's too important."
The reason for her silence is that in spite of the media telling us how smart she is, the word intelligence and Hillary Clinton don't go together! :-)
I have a feeling that as soon as the official interview was concluded, the NPR reporter who asked this caught hell for daring to ask Her Heinous something that wasn't on the pre-approved list.
They will.
Hillary Mum on Able Danger ............... I wonder why.
But Mousie, thou are no thy-lane,
In proving foresight may be vain:
The best laid schemes o' Mice an' Men,
Gang aft agley,
An' lea'e us nought but grief an' pain,
For promis'd joy!
Excerpt from "To A Mouse" by Robert Burns
Actually your great President GWBush declared the Iraq War to be all over but for a few mop-up actions in May of 2003. Little Dubya failed to account for 2100 dead American troops and countless thousands of dead and tortured Iraqis.
Your post isn't insuating that our Fearless Leader is an abject pathological liar, are you?
If I were a press worm, The first question I would ask them would be if they took a look before they voted, and why not if they didn't.
As a matter of fact, the question was never asked.
And Rush was right; the rats went 180 over Thanksgiving and now ARE trying to claim credit for the war.
This must mean Iraq is going to turn out better than we'd hoped.
Is MurryMom Molly Ivins!?!?!?
If she and the other Rats had not voted for the war, there would be no war to demogogue. If you wanna lose a war, first you gotta have one. Ya gotta do what ya gotta do.
My post is not 'insuating' anything. Your post is a sassy, bare-faced lie. I certainly hope you are not a citizen of the U.S.
Simply abandoning equipment or handing it over to the Iraqis, as was done in Vietnam, is not an option. And even if it were, the new Iraqi army is by all accounts much weaker, less skilled, less cohesive and less loyal to its government than even the South Vietnamese army was. For all intents and purposes, Washington might just as well hand over its weapons directly to Abu Musab al-Zarqawi. Clearly, then, the thing to do is to forget about face-saving and conduct a classic withdrawal.
A withdrawal probably will require several months and incur a sizable number of casualties. As the pullout proceeds, Iraq almost certainly will sink into an all-out civil war from which it will take the country a long time to emerge — if, indeed, it can do so at all. All this is inevitable and will take place whether George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld and Condoleezza Rice like it or not.
For misleading the American people, and for launching the most foolish war since Emperor Augustus in 9 B.C. sent his legions into Germany and lost them, Bush deserves to be removed from office and put on trial along with Scooter Libby.
OK MM, from where did you cut and paste that piffle?
Anyone know of a link to the original article in the Herald? I hate citing to NewsMax....
I was trying to decide if you sounded more like Goebbels or Baghdad Bob. However, your ridiculous lies (which do reveal your shallow intellect) would be closer to Baghdad Bob's propaganda, rather than to Goebbel's.
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.