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

Skip to comments.

If The Bush Administration Lied About WMD, So Did These People (Updated)
Right Wing News ^ | June 19, 2003 | John Hawkins

Posted on 06/19/2003 6:11:23 AM PDT by conservativecorner

Since we haven't found WMD in Iraq yet, a lot of the anti-war/anti-Bush crowd is claiming that the Bush administration lied about Iraq's weapons of mass destruction. The story being floated now is that Saddam had no WMD (or almost none) and that the Bush administration didn't tell the truth about the WMD threat.

Well, if they're going to claim that the Bush administration lied, then there sure are a lot of other people, including quite a few prominent Democrats, who have told the same lies since the inspectors pulled out of Iraq in 1998. Here are just a few examples of what I'm talking about...

"[W]e 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." -- From a letter signed by Joe Lieberman, Dianne Feinstein, Barbara A. Milulski, Tom Daschle, & John Kerry among others on October 9, 1998

"This December will mark three years since United Nations inspectors last visited Iraq. There is no doubt that since that time, 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 refine 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." -- From a December 6, 2001 letter signed by Bob Graham, Joe Lieberman, Harold Ford, & Tom Lantos among others

"Saddam's goal ... is to achieve the lifting of U.N. sanctions while retaining and enhancing Iraq's weapons of mass destruction programs. We cannot, we must not and we will not let him succeed." -- Madeline Albright, 1998

"Iraq made commitments after the Gulf War to completely dismantle all weapons of mass destruction, and unfortunately, Iraq has not lived up to its agreement." -- Barbara Boxer, November 8, 2002

"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retained 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 capability. Intelligence reports also indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons, but has not yet achieved nuclear capability." -- Robert Byrd, October 2002

"What is at stake is how to answer the potential threat Iraq represents with the risk of proliferation of WMD. Baghdad's regime did use such weapons in the past. Today, a number of evidences may lead to think that, over the past four years, in the absence of international inspectors, this country has continued armament programs." -- Jacques Chirac, October 16, 2002

"The community of nations may see more and more of the very kind of threat Iraq poses now: a rogue state with weapons of mass destruction, ready to use them or provide them to terrorists. If we fail to respond today, Saddam and all those who would follow in his footsteps will be emboldened tomorrow." -- Bill Clinton in 1998

"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, though there is apparently no evidence of his involvement in the terrible events of September 11, 2001. 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. Should he succeed in that endeavor, he could alter the political and security landscape of the Middle East, which as we know all too well affects American security." -- Hillary Clinton, October 10, 2002

"I am absolutely convinced that there are weapons...I saw evidence back in 1998 when we would see the inspectors being barred from gaining entry into a warehouse for three hours with trucks rolling up and then moving those trucks out." -- Clinton's Secretary of Defense William Cohen in April of 2003

"Iraq is not the only nation in the world to possess weapons of mass destruction, but it is the only nation with a leader who has used them against his own people." -- Tom Daschle in 1998

"Saddam Hussein's regime represents a grave threat to America and our allies, including our vital ally, Israel. For more than two decades, Saddam Hussein has sought weapons of mass destruction through every available means. We know that he has chemical and biological weapons. He has already used them against his neighbors and his own people, and is trying to build more. We know that he is doing everything he can to build nuclear weapons, and we know that each day he gets closer to achieving that goal." -- John Edwards, Oct 10, 2002

"I share the administration's goals in dealing with Iraq and its weapons of mass destruction." -- Dick Gephardt in September of 2002

"Iraq does pose a serious threat to the stability of the Persian Gulf and we should organize an international coalition to eliminate his access to weapons of mass destruction. Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to completely deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power." -- Al Gore, 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." -- Bob Graham, December 2002

"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction." -- Ted Kennedy, September 27, 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." -- John F. Kerry, Oct 2002

"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 mandates of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them." -- Carl Levin, Sept 19, 2002

"Over the years, Iraq has worked to develop nuclear, chemical and biological weapons. During 1991 - 1994, despite Iraq's denials, U.N. inspectors discovered and dismantled a large network of nuclear facilities that Iraq was using to develop nuclear weapons. Various reports indicate that Iraq is still actively pursuing nuclear weapons capability. There is no reason to think otherwise. Beyond nuclear weapons, Iraq has actively pursued biological and chemical weapons.U.N. inspectors have said that Iraq's claims about biological weapons is neither credible nor verifiable. In 1986, Iraq used chemical weapons against Iran, and later, against its own Kurdish population. While weapons inspections have been successful in the past, there have been no inspections since the end of 1998. There can be no doubt that Iraq has continued to pursue its goal of obtaining weapons of mass destruction." -- Patty Murray, October 9, 2002

"As a member of the House Intelligence Committee, I am keenly aware that the proliferation of chemical and biological weapons is an issue of grave importance to all nations. 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." -- Nancy Pelosi, December 16, 1998

"Even today, Iraq is not nearly disarmed. Based on highly credible intelligence, UNSCOM [the U.N. weapons inspectors] suspects that Iraq still has biological agents like anthrax, botulinum toxin, and clostridium perfringens in sufficient quantity to fill several dozen bombs and ballistic missile warheads, as well as the means to continue manufacturing these deadly agents. Iraq probably retains several tons of the highly toxic VX substance, as well as sarin nerve gas and mustard gas. This agent is stored in artillery shells, bombs, and ballistic missile warheads. And Iraq retains significant dual-use industrial infrastructure that can be used to rapidly reconstitute large-scale chemical weapons production." -- Ex-Un Weapons Inspector Scott Ritter in 1998

"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. And that may happen sooner if he can obtain access to enriched uranium from foreign sources -- something that is not that difficult in the current world. We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction." -- John Rockefeller, Oct 10, 2002

"Saddam’s existing biological and chemical weapons capabilities pose a very real threat to America, now. Saddam has used chemical weapons before, both against Iraq’s enemies and against his own people. He is working to develop delivery systems like missiles and unmanned aerial vehicles that could bring these deadly weapons against U.S. forces and U.S. facilities in the Middle East." -- John Rockefeller, Oct 10, 2002

"Whether one agrees or disagrees with the Administration’s policy towards Iraq, I don’t think there can be any question about Saddam’s conduct. 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. He lies and cheats; he snubs the mandate and authority of international weapons inspectors; and he games the system to keep buying time against enforcement of the just and legitimate demands of the United Nations, the Security Council, the United States and our allies. Those are simply the facts." -- Henry Waxman, Oct 10, 2002


TOPICS: Foreign Affairs; Front Page News; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: barbaramilulski; diannefeinstein; intelligence; iraq; joelieberman; johnkerry; tomdaschle; wmd; x42
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-83 next last
We all need to keep pressing the flip floppers with their own words.
1 posted on 06/19/2003 6:11:24 AM PDT by conservativecorner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

I'm sure I'll be flamed handily for saying this, but it's been bugging me for a while now. We've talked so much about how much more we can "trust" President Bush than someone like the 'toon. But, I can't help but see an disheartening similarity between clinton's finger waving, and Mr. Powel holding up the vial of "anthrax" powder at the u.n. To me, the Bush administration made it all about the urgency - the impending disaster. Sure, you can argue all you want about, "well, the u.n. was looking for months, it will take time". But to me, just an average joe in Wisconsin, I honestly expected them to be able to produce SOMETHING in the way of evidence, especially after how they had hounded us daily about the MASSIVE amounts of weapons at his disposal. I read somewhere else here this morning that the administration feels that any voter displeasure over the inability to find any WMD will be overshadowed the the overall succcess of the operation. Well, say what you want, but I hold the administration to a higher standard than that.
2 posted on 06/19/2003 6:16:22 AM PDT by homeschool_dad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: homeschool_dad
an = a (sorry for the bad grammar)
3 posted on 06/19/2003 6:17:34 AM PDT by homeschool_dad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: conservativecorner; kristinn; Angelwood; FreeTheHostages
Bump! These would make some nice Posters for a Freep


4 posted on 06/19/2003 6:21:38 AM PDT by W04Man (Bush2004 Grassroots Campaign aka BushBot www.w-04.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: conservativecorner
bump for later reading
5 posted on 06/19/2003 6:22:16 AM PDT by boxerblues (God bless the 101st and keep them safe)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: conservativecorner
I think it was on Scarborough last evening where I saw a graphic which showed the chemical and biological cache Saddam admitted having in 1998. It was unnerving to see how much of many lethal substanced he had.

The tone of recent allegations against GWB and the Iraqi Regime change has been that the WMD's may not exist.

Since Saddam admitted having them in 1998, the bigger question, if they are not found in Iraq, is "Where are they now?" Such lethal substances just don't dissolve into thin air.
6 posted on 06/19/2003 6:27:13 AM PDT by TomGuy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: conservativecorner
We all need to keep pressing the flip floppers with their own words

Sounds like the investigation into our intelligence agencies needs to go back quite a bit farther than originally thought.

We've got "leaks" trying to imply Iraq has attacked us clear back to at least OKC, let's get some people sworn in before an independent panel and find out the truth.
7 posted on 06/19/2003 6:29:37 AM PDT by steve50 (I don't know about being with "us", but I'm with the Constitution)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: homeschool_dad
Have you really read what Powell said?

Check this out:
Powell didn't say, as you imply "Iraq HAS ........ YADDA YADDA YADDA."

One example:

"...Second, as with biological weapons, Saddam Hussein has never accounted for vast amounts of chemical weaponry: 550 artillery shells with mustard, 30,000 empty munitions and enough precursors to increase his stockpile to as much as 500 tons of chemical agents....."

Second example:

Iraq declared 8500 liters of anthrax. But UNSCOM estimates that Saddam Hussein could have produced 25,000 liters. If concentrated into this dry form, this amount would be enough to fill tens upon tens upon tens of thousands of teaspoons. And Saddam Hussein has not verifiably accounted for even one teaspoonful of this deadly material. And that is my third point. And it is key. The Iraqis have never accounted for all of the biological weapons they admitted they had and we know they had.

Source: State Dept Web site:

http://www.state.gov/secretary/rm/2003/17300.htm
8 posted on 06/19/2003 6:29:46 AM PDT by W04Man (Bush2004 Grassroots Campaign aka BushBot www.w-04.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: homeschool_dad
The WMD's went somewhere. If your confidence level in Bush is this low, then go back into your cave. We will let you know when the storm has passed.
9 posted on 06/19/2003 6:30:40 AM PDT by ohioman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: NYC GOP Chick
* ping
10 posted on 06/19/2003 6:32:05 AM PDT by CholeraJoe (White Devils for Sharpton. We're bad. We're Nationwide)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: homeschool_dad
Oh, forgot to add. We have found evidence of his WMD program with the mobile Bio Trailers. We will find more evidence. I'm sure of it. Hold your horses while we continue to capture more of the bad guys.
11 posted on 06/19/2003 6:33:18 AM PDT by W04Man (Bush2004 Grassroots Campaign aka BushBot www.w-04.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: conservativecorner
Using Democrats as credible sources! Pro-war freepers are becoming desperate!
12 posted on 06/19/2003 6:35:14 AM PDT by Captain Kirk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: W04Man
That al-Tikrit guy captured yesterday was said to have "launch authority" for WMDs. He was an important capture, so maybe the Coalition will get alot of information out of him.
13 posted on 06/19/2003 6:37:47 AM PDT by TomGuy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: homeschool_dad
I concur. We elected this President because we wanted to wipe out the deceit and dishonesty of the Clinton years. Saying "they lied too" just reduces GWB to the disgusting level of those he's being compared to.

I want to know that GWB wouldn't intentionally lie to us. And, if he was given incorrect information purposely, those responsible should be handed over to Shiite courts.

14 posted on 06/19/2003 6:40:31 AM PDT by grania ("Won't get fooled again")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: homeschool_dad
I'd feel the same way you do if every security apparatus in the world basically endorsed the same outlook on Iraq:

They've produced them, bought them, deployed them against foreign enemies, and deployed them against domestic populations.

The above are facts that exists before war against Iraq was even contemplated. From there, intelligence gathers evidence and you, at some point, have to decide for yourself whether you need to wait for something approaching 100% certainty before you act.

I put myself in Mr. Bush's shoes and based on what information was avaialble to the press, I would have gone to war.

The fact is that most democrats in the Clinton administration felt there was sufficient evidence to go to war as well. What upsets me as a conservative is that had Gore won, you might have seen the same democrats urging Clinton to war, urging Gore to war. Why weren't they behind Mr. Bush? Politics.
15 posted on 06/19/2003 6:41:35 AM PDT by RinaseaofDs
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: W04Man
Well, if Powell didn't imply it, why hold the vial up in the air for the whole world to see? Are these the games our Administration plays? Aren't we tired of that?
16 posted on 06/19/2003 6:49:30 AM PDT by homeschool_dad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: homeschool_dad
an = a (sorry for the bad grammar)

The faulty grammar is one thing...the faulty logic is something else.

Eventually you have to try to reason through the situation. Even if you don't trust W (and I certainly don't blame anyone for not trusting a politician) you have to reason whether Saddam was a real threat to us or not.

If he was a threat then it was the president's responsibility to remove that threat or at least neutralize it.

If you thing Saddam wasn't a threat...well, I don't know what to say to you about that one.

Think it through.

17 posted on 06/19/2003 6:54:11 AM PDT by evad (Lying..It's WHAT they do, it's ALL they do and they WON'T stop...EVER!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: grania
Saying "they lied too" just reduces GWB to the disgusting level of those he's being compared to.

Who in the Bush administration has said that?

18 posted on 06/19/2003 6:56:45 AM PDT by evad (Lying..It's WHAT they do, it's ALL they do and they WON'T stop...EVER!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: homeschool_dad
You seem to fall into the camp that was more than willing to give inspectors months and years more, but are unwilling to give time to the coalition which has more than had it's plate full with crushing an opposing force and returning services to the people of Iraq. We are talking about a land mass that is as big as California, and the Iraqi Regime had 12 years to perfect their hiding of weapons. I should also mention all the missiles that have been found in vioation of their various UN resolutions.
19 posted on 06/19/2003 6:59:36 AM PDT by conservativecorner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: homeschool_dad
Well, if Powell didn't imply it, why hold the vial up in the air for the whole world to see? Are these the games our Administration plays? Aren't we tired of that?

The ultimate question is: Are we going to act pre-emptively or post-operatively?

Are we going to react on an as-they-occur basis [Clinton era] or try to prevent future 9-11's at their sources[GWBush era]?
20 posted on 06/19/2003 7:01:09 AM PDT by TomGuy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-83 next last

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