Skip to comments.A Brief Compilation of DemocRAT Hypocrisy
Posted on 09/19/2003 8:15:48 AM PDT by BOBTHENAILER
"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 [here], 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.
"[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." 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 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 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, Dec, 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 Rockerfeller (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.
"[W]ithout 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.
SO NOW THE DEMOCRATS SAY PRESIDENT BUSH LIED, THAT THERE NEVER WERE ANY WMD'S AND HE TOOK US TO WAR FOR HIS OIL BUDDIES??? Right!!!
I'm hoping they'll be prominently mentioned in Gray's upcoming report on WMD. Complete with pictures of the destroyed units and chemical analysis of the warhead contents.
ROFLMAO.......let me know how much he squirms.
It's time for Damnocrats in disarray! Hit 'em again... harder, HARDER!!!
You do the same.
Doesnt that fact that Clinton and the dumbacrats believed in the existence of Saddams WMD cause you the least bit of concern that they were wrong? Somehow, the fact that Clinton believed that Saddam posed a threat to the US doesnt raise my confidence in the truth of the matter. It does raise red flags when I hear President Bush agreed with him.
You gotta be kidding, right?
If not, you need to ask the Kurds and the Iranians if Saddam had or used WMD.
Course then, he probably destroyed them and lied about it so he could undergo YEARS of sanctions, then invasion, when all he really needed to do is let thousands of inspectors in to prove he didn't have any, right?
Then where are they?
You're welcome and have fun listening to the tap dancing from your liberal friends.
Perhaps you dont know what this site is all about. From the FreeRepublic splash page:
We're working to roll back decades of governmental largesse, to root out political fraud and corruption, and to champion causes which further conservatism in America
That means both Republican and Democrat fraud and corruption.
DemocRATS invented hypocrisy !! ...
Deciding to sacrifice American soldiers lives to overthrow an Arab dictator and have the US taxpayer foot the bill for the reconstruction of an Islamic state Telling the American people that Iraqs WMD posed a significant threat to the United States and now is unable to find any proof of their existence.
Islamic State? State your proof.
Your a fool who needs to pull your head out of your Hillary.
If you really think that Iraq will be some Middle Eastern democracy then you are incredibly naive. That notion is an absurd construct designed to keep the Republican sheep in line. Hows that democracy stuff working out in Afghanistan? Where are those weapons of mass destruction? All you can do is throw insults...
That's all you fuc-ing deserve, you friggin' idiot. Check the FR archives for an article in the WSJ entitled "What the Iraqis Really Think".
It is a poll conducted by James Zogby in Iraq, polling Iraqis. BTW, since you're so dense (another deserving insult), Zogby is no friend of this admin. I ain't gonna do your homework, DU troll, look it up yourself and read it and weep.
As to the WMD, patience, fool, all in good time.
As to Afghanistan, check Diogenisis' "Gotta See This" threads. Same for Iraq.
As to the good news in Iraq, which doesn't fit your DNC talking points, check out Ragtime Cowgirl's threads on the stuff you DNC kool-aid drinkers don't want to see the light of day.
Go back to DU a$$hole.
Ha! Thats a joke. How much time? A year? 2 ? 4? - Oh yeah, I forgot. Bush is saving it to humiliate his opponents. The fact is (and it is a fact) there are no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. President Bush sent our troops into harms way based on faulty information. Men and women died in a cause based on that faulty information and now the American taxpayer is about to pay for the rebuilding of an Islamic state.
Like most sheep who cant (or wont) think for themselves, you cant even present an argument to the facts. You can only insult and point other threads (as if that carries any weight). You dont even have the courage to debate on you own; relying on others to come to your defense.
Since you won't look it up yourself, lazy a$$hole, here is your answer to our building and Islamic state. As I said, read it and weep.
You can only insult and point other threads (as if that carries any weight). You dont even have the courage to debate on you own; relying on others to come to your defense.
I'll debate your sorry a$$ anyday, anywhere, anytime. The above quote from the article you won't read is defeat number one. As to courage, name the place and time, pal, and I'll be there . I only pinged the others to expose a DU troll, so all could see. I don't need their help with you.
The fact is (and it is a fact) there are no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.
I've been dueling with a DU troll and I found Kayak's posting of this to another thread.
Didn't mean to steal your thunder Kayak, but I found your posting within another thread when tracking the postings of one "thtr".
What a treasonous piece of dung Graham is. I can't find the darned quote from the recent debate aired on FNC, but it was summarized in a report like this:
"...the Democratic candidates attacked President Bush for the state of postwar Iraq, with Sen. Bob Graham of Florida charging that Bush had deliberately misled the country before the war.
Oh my God, You are actually basing you argument on a poll????? And who took this poll, and who was polled? This is laughable! - You have no understanding of Middle Eastern culture. There is absolutely no chance that Iraq will establish a democracy. The second our troops leave, the country will dissolve into civil war. (Perhaps sooner). Meanwhile the US taxpayer will spend years sinking money into a bottomless pit of re-building schemes designed to keep party contributors happy and fat. The sad thing is Republicans like you will politely bend over and pay the price.
There is nothing to prove. They dont exist. You cant prove some doesnt exist because it doesnt exist. But the fact that you cant point to any evidence, and that our government has not pointed to any evidence re-enforces the fact that WMD do not exist in Iraq.
Ill ignore all the tough man talk, the boorish language and the hackney DU troll talk; its typical of those that cant phrase an argument.
As we used to say in New Mexico,
DON'T LET YOUR MOUTH CASH A CHECK, YOUR ASS CAN'T BACK UP.