Bush Caught In A Major Lie

What rot. Bush has not generated a mountain of lies. Your letting your ideology color your judgement.

[Mia]

He lied about this war from the beginning. I liked Bush - this is not ideology getting in my way. The man lied right at the start. Saying Iraq was 6 months away from being capable of a nuclear offensive. Within days it was shown that was not true. I never believed a word that came out of his mouth after that.

[dotcoma]

</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (dave654,)
What rot.  Bush has not generated a mountain of lies.  Your letting your ideology color your judgement.<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'>

HA! He lied about his relationship with Ken Lay. He lied about his National Guard Record. He lied about circumstances surrounding the passing of patriot act II. He lied about not knowing John Kerry while he was at Yale. He lied about not hearing about suicide hijackings before 9/11 (Missile Batteries at G7 were armed to take out suicide hijackers). Those are just off the top of my head.

Very weak Roxdog.

[dotcoma]

Oh yes, Bush in bed with financial, stock manipulating terrorists is not very significant...

Okay, I'll bite. What financial, stock manipulating terrorist is Bush in bed with?

[Mia]

</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (AlecBaldwin666,)
Mia,

After 11 years of incomplete inspections, hudreds of our planes being fired on by the Iraqi military and many months of us saying we are comming in and the UN forcing further delays, do you really believe he couldn't have simply moved the WMD to Syria or Iran?

Every one knows he had them because Saddam had admitted it and used them in the past.

Not that 270 mass graves and jailed children should not have been enough for you.
I guess the hundreds of thousands dead there that we stopped from growing in numbers Mia made you feel betrayed?
Were you some fan of the rape rooms, the jailed kids, tapes of torture and all the death?
How can you feel what George Bush did here was a bad move?<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'>



I didn't say it was. I said he lied. BTW, how could he move them with inspectors and our intelligence watching his every move? He's only saying that to have a reason to invade someone else. I guess he hasn't decided whether that's Iran or Syria and that's why he hasn't claimed where they were moved yet.

[Write Winger]

Speaking of liars!

"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 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, 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 a pace 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 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.23.2003

[Mia]

Write, you didn't addressed what was posted. Nice distraction, though.

[Paavo]

Offtopic a tad:

Why is it that when someone's questioning the current POTUS, people need to drag in stuff about Clinton and how bad he was? What the hell has that got to do with anything?

Let's say Mr Blue raped an old woman, and Mr Red punched a kid. Does the fact that raping an old woman seems worse than punching the kid -- make punching the kid alright? The logic is just childish and doesn't lead anywhere.

[Mia]

Yes - all this blaming along partisian lines is idiotic. We should put blame where it belongs regardless of party lines.

[Osborn F Enready]

Ill just say this.... Bush Jr. and his entire presidency, his conception of government and his ideals are all a big lie. The man is a walking pile of contradictions, and I am amazed he can stand unsupported.

Clinton, his entire presidency, his conception of government and his ideals are all a big lie. The man is a walking pile of contradictions, and I am amazed he can stand unsupported.

Republican and Democratic party loyalists, and all their presidencies, their conception of government, and all their ideals are a big lie. The groups are walking piles of contradictions and hot topic blame pushers, I am amazed they can stand unsupported.

If you took offense to this, GOOD. Party loyalist should take offense, and rightly so. Those parties only exist to REPRESENT THE WILL OF THE PEOPLE, but you must have forgotten that somewhere along the lines of buying into that scheme. Classism, failure. United we stand, divided we fall, rather simple. Protect all rights, or forego all rights, rather simple.

[Mia]

No matter how many times you say it, it won't make it so. Iraq was not part of the war on terror, it was a distraction from it.

We needed Bin Laden dead more than we did Saddam, but he is still at large due to our other project.

[dotcoma]

</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (AlecBaldwin666,)
</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by
Mia asks:
BTW, how could he move them with inspectors and our intelligence watching his every move? <hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'>

You sound totally detached with what's happening in the world here Mia.

#1 Over 11 years we have had nothing but arguments about being allowed unrestricted access to Iraq. That never happened.
#2 Our satellites only go ever at certain times and when the terrorists camps were in Iraq, they knew to go inside as the satellites flew over.

I don't know where you get your information, but in this case it is all wrong.

Happy Easter by the way.<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'>


HAHAHA, i saw it in Patriot Games, it MUST be true!!!

Come on Mia. There's not enough inteligence assets to perform to the level you're describing. Saddam could have done anything while satalites, planes, and inspectors were trying to monitor him.

[dotcoma]

Are you kidding? Ever heard of Darpa?

[Paavo]

Alec, why didn't Bush invade Saudi Arabia instead? Isn't that the place where the hijackers mainly came from? Isn't Bin Laden pretty much from there? Doesn't the administration of Saudi Arabia harbor terrorists, even fund them?
Why Iraq of all places?

[Mia]

exactly. While the link to terrorism has never been formed to Saddam, it has tothe Royal family in KSA. Alac, you say you watch the news. The President is constantly fighting criticism from all corners that the war in Iraq had nothing to do with the war on terror. It's not some crazy idea a few of us have.

Paavo, he is from KSA, not just pretty much. 15 of the highjackers were from KSA. There was a money trail directly from the Royal family to one of them.

But they are our oil buddies, so we overlook this. KSA is also the most repressive islamic regime. Women still get stoned. They are not allowed to drive. Men are treated badly too. But again, they are our buddies, so we don't give a flip.

Alec, WAKE UP, MAN!

[Mia]

If you want to talk about human rights violations, there are people far worse off than Saddam's. If you want to talk about threats to the US, there are far more dangerous countries. Saddam couldn't hurt anyone BUT his own people after years of sanctions and inspections and bombings. This was a personal vendetta of your brother George.

That we are all paying for. Too bad I don't own an oil company....they are the only ones getting their money back.