So You Still Think Bush Lied....

[Guest slamminshaun]

Hey, I'm catching up for lost time here. I just got my DSL back today. I found a collection of quotes that were rather amusing considering what these same people say now. Interesting how many of these quotes are prior to Bush taking office.

"Without question we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator leading an impressive regime. He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation. And now he's miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction." John Kerry, January 23rd, 2003

"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." -- Bill Clinton, February 17th, 1998

"We must stop Saddam from ever again jeopardizing the stability and the security of his neighbors with weapons of mass destruction." -- Madeleine Albright, February 1st, 1998

"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again as he has ten times since 1983." -- Sandy Berger, Clinton national security advisor, February 18th, 1998

"We urge you, after consulting with Congress and consistent with the US 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." That from a letter to President Clinton signed by Senators Carl Levin, Diane Feinstein, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others, October 9th, 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." -- Nancy Pelosi, December 16th, 1998

"Hussein has chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies." -- Madeleine Albright, Clinton's secretary of state, November 10th, 1999

"We begin with a common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandate of the United Nations, is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them." -- Senator Carl Levin (D-MI), September 19th, 2002

"We know that he has stored nuclear supplies, secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country." -- Al Gore, September 23rd, 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, September 23rd, 2002

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

"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of '98. 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." -- Robert Byrd (D-WV) October 3rd, 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." -- Senator Bob Graham, Democrat, Florida, December 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, 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." -- Senator Hillary Clinton, October 10th of 2002

"There was 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 that we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction." -- Senator Jay Rockefeller, October 10th, 2002

"I will be voting to give the president of the US the authority to use force if necessary to disarm Saddam because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security." -- Senator John Kerry, October 9th, 2002

I guess EVERYBODY lied.

[all4tribal1414779019]

bush is still our president? i thought he was up in the Most Wanted Top 10 list ???

[Guest web_norah]

so Shaun tell us how you really feel about Lewis Libby and Dick Cheney?

enough of this Bush b-shit, noone wants to talk about that, the indictment is the HOT topic in politics.

[Guest slamminshaun]

so Shaun tell us how you really feel about Lewis Libby and Dick Cheney?

enough of this Bush b-shit, noone wants to talk about that, the indictment is the HOT topic in politics.

I'll talk about anything political you want Norah. Let me get this straight, Libby committed no crime, but now faces 30 years in prison for lying about the source of the information he used to commit no crime. Seems fair to me!

I know a former President who also lied to a grand jury about something that wasn't a crime and liberals ran to his rescue. Now all of a sudden, liberals are concerned about lying to grand juries about things that weren't crimes to begin with? Not sure why this is such a "HOT" topic.

You know what I find more interesting? The fact that this guy is being demonized for "outing" a CIA operative, yet, the Washington Post today outed the locations of an entire network of secret CIA prisons but liberals don't seem to care about that.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/11/01/AR2005110101644.html

[Guest JMT]

who really gives a crap. no one even knew who this libby character was or even existed until this. like bcn says, zzzzzzzzzzzzz.

[Guest web_norah]

so Shaun tell us how you really feel about Lewis Libby and Dick Cheney?

enough of this Bush b-shit' date=' noone wants to talk about that, the indictment is the HOT topic in politics.

[/quote']

I'll talk about anything political you want Norah. Let me get this straight, Libby committed no crime, but now faces 30 years in prison for lying about the source of the information he used to commit no crime. Seems fair to me!

I know a former President who also lied to a grand jury about something that wasn't a crime and liberals ran to his rescue. Now all of a sudden, liberals are concerned about lying to grand juries about things that weren't crimes to begin with? Not sure why this is such a "HOT" topic.

You know what I find more interesting? The fact that this guy is being demonized for "outing" a CIA operative, yet, the Washington Post today outed the locations of an entire network of secret CIA prisons but liberals don't seem to care about that.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/11/01/AR2005110101644.html

in that case, if Libby is innocent, so was Judith Miller, yet she still served time for not giving up her source.

don't bring up Clinton, he has nothing to do with Rove, Libby or Judith Miller and the famous WMD....that's a weak argument.

[Guest slamminshaun]

in that case, if Libby is innocent, so was Judith Miller, yet she still served time for not giving up her source.

don't bring up Clinton, he has nothing to do with Rove, Libby or Judith Miller and the famous WMD....that's a weak argument.

Libby's not innocent and neither was she. He lied to a grand jury, she refused to talk to one. As far as Bill goes, there's nothing weak about comparing two people who lied to a grand jury and how each of them were treated differently by the liberal media machine.

I'm just laughing my ass off because you know damn well you liberals were praying for Karl Rove, Cheney, and everyone else to get indicted. But it didn't happen!! All you've got is someone nobody cares about lying to a grand jury.....wow!!

[Guest web_norah]

Judith Miller didn't refuse to talk, she talked ...get your info correctly, she declined to give the source that helped her write that op-ed article for the NYT, that's a very different thing....

journalists tend to protect their sources, it is called ethics Shaun. a good reporter digs the truth, and publishes it without taking sides no matter what people in the higher ranks with clearances might say/ feel, and thats what Miller did ..

i am not laughing about anything ...i think it is very sad actually

but sooner or later, it was going to come out, and it did. Bush's people knew it all along.......

[Guest slamminshaun]

journalists tend to protect their sources, it is called ethics Shaun. .

And what was Jayson Blair's source that he so ethically protected? Oh wait, he made up his sources (and stories) out of mid-air. Point is, if the grand jury wants to know your source, you tell them.

But let's face it, she wasn't doing this to protect her source. She did it to preserve having a high-ranking official at the White House feeding her information.

[Guest web_norah]

no you don't tell them ...it is called ethics ---- albeit, we already know ethics is a widely loose term in the eyes of our government.

the thing is, now we know she didn't make anything up....and that's where Libby and Cheney will get their heads cut off...... stay tuned.

[Guest JMT]

and no one gives a shit. blah blah blah, im getting so bored with politics these days. its the same crap back and forth and its never ending. im starting to agree with pod. both sides are the same problem for different reasons, and accomplish nothing but their own joint self-preservation as a result and release a lot of hot air in the process. ah, im just bored with it. libby who??

[Guest teabag]

Bush had a plan to go after Saddam period....he used every resource available to accomplish his plan, including quoting bad intelligence from former President Clinton.....o yeah Clinton lied, but no country got invaded, because of a sad blowjob...... my question is Shaun now that you know what we all know, would you still support an invasion?

[Guest mursa]

Bush Lied , People Died

[all4tribal1414779019]

Bush Lied , People Died

and they still dying, lots n lots of them...the numbers we see on tv r a joke, its at least double the fatalities...it will never end, middle easterns know their land way too well...

[Guest Civs]

not into politics, but found this book to be interesting the way the govt conducts foreign policy.

Confessions of an Economic Hit Man By John Perkins

Editorial Reviews

Amazon.com

John Perkins started and stopped writing Confessions of an Economic Hit Man four times over 20 years. He says he was threatened and bribed in an effort to kill the project, but after 9/11 he finally decided to go through with this expose of his former professional life. Perkins, a former chief economist at Boston strategic-consulting firm Chas. T. Main, says he was an "economic hit man" for 10 years, helping U.S. intelligence agencies and multinationals cajole and blackmail foreign leaders into serving U.S. foreign policy and awarding lucrative contracts to American business. "Economic hit men (EHMs) are highly paid professionals who cheat countries around the globe out of trillions of dollars," Perkins writes. Confessions of an Economic Hit Man is an extraordinary and gripping tale of intrigue and dark machinations. Think John Le Carré, except it's a true story.

Perkins writes that his economic projections cooked the books Enron-style to convince foreign governments to accept billions of dollars of loans from the World Bank and other institutions to build dams, airports, electric grids, and other infrastructure he knew they couldn't afford. The loans were given on condition that construction and engineering contracts went to U.S. companies. Often, the money would simply be transferred from one bank account in Washington, D.C., to another one in New York or San Francisco. The deals were smoothed over with bribes for foreign officials, but it was the taxpayers in the foreign countries who had to pay back the loans. When their governments couldn't do so, as was often the case, the U.S. or its henchmen at the World Bank or International Monetary Fund would step in and essentially place the country in trusteeship, dictating everything from its spending budget to security agreements and even its United Nations votes. It was, Perkins writes, a clever way for the U.S. to expand its "empire" at the expense of Third World citizens. While at times he seems a little overly focused on conspiracies, perhaps that's not surprising considering the life he's led. --Alex Roslin

From Publishers Weekly

Perkins spent the 1970s working as an economic planner for an international consulting firm, a job that took him to exotic locales like Indonesia and Panama, helping wealthy corporations exploit developing nations as, he claims, a not entirely unwitting front for the National Security Agency. He says he was trained early in his career by a glamorous older woman as one of many "economic hit men" advancing the cause of corporate hegemony. He also says he has wanted to tell his story for the last two decades, but his shadowy masters have either bought him off or threatened him until now. The story as presented is implausible to say the least, offering so few details that Perkins often seems paranoid, and the simplistic political analysis doesn’t enhance his credibility. Despite the claim that his work left him wracked with guilt, the artless prose is emotionally flat and generally comes across as a personal crisis of conscience blown up to monstrous proportions, casting Perkins as a victim not only of his own neuroses over class and money but of dark forces beyond his control. His claim to have assisted the House of Saud in strengthening its ties to American power brokers may be timely enough to attract some attention, but the yarn he spins is ultimately unconvincing, except perhaps to conspiracy buffs.

[Guest slamminshaun]

Bush had a plan to go after Saddam period....he used every resource available to accomplish his plan, including quoting bad intelligence from former President Clinton.....o yeah Clinton lied, but no country got invaded, because of a sad blowjob...... my question is Shaun now that you know what we all know, would you still support an invasion?

It's hard to support it knowing what we know now. But as usual, many have missed my points. I did support this invasion originally, and so did John Kerry, Bill Clinton, Madeline Albright, Diane Feinstein, Ted Kennedy, Tom Daschle, Al Gore, Nancy Pelosi, Hillary Clinton, etc, etc, etc....the difference is that I don't blame just Bush. I blame ALL OF THEM. It's sad that you guys are so liberal, you can't bring it upon yourself to blame your own.

Sure, Bush shares in the blame....but so do all of the politicians. The liberals came out supporting it with "guns blazing", but now say Bush lied to them because its politically easy to do that. Look, they had the SAME intel that he had and supported it every step of the way.

Everybody lied, troops died. They must have had the same plan Bush had. Just re-read some of the quotes from above and you'll see they were more pro-war than most conservatives.

[Guest JMT]

Bush Lied , People Died

and they still dying, lots n lots of them...the numbers we see on tv r a joke, its at least double the fatalities...it will never end, middle easterns know their land way too well...

what is "at least double"? unless you have been there no one here can say.

[Guest mursa]

Bush had a plan to go after Saddam period....he used every resource available to accomplish his plan' date=' including quoting bad intelligence from former President Clinton.....o yeah Clinton lied, but no country got invaded, because of a sad blowjob...... my question is Shaun now that you know what we all know, would you still support an invasion?

[/quote']

It's hard to support it knowing what we know now. But as usual, many have missed my points. I did support this invasion originally, and so did John Kerry, Bill Clinton, Madeline Albright, Diane Feinstein, Ted Kennedy, Tom Daschle, Al Gore, Nancy Pelosi, Hillary Clinton, etc, etc, etc....the difference is that I don't blame just Bush. I blame ALL OF THEM. It's sad that you guys are so liberal, you can't bring it upon yourself to blame your own.

Sure, Bush shares in the blame....but so do all of the politicians. The liberals came out supporting it with "guns blazing", but now say Bush lied to them because its politically easy to do that. Look, they had the SAME intel that he had and supported it every step of the way.

Everybody lied, troops died. They must have had the same plan Bush had. Just re-read some of the quotes from above and you'll see they were more pro-war than most conservatives.

The commander in chief is the one who needs to take full responsibility ....

..

. " oh, but some democrat said huseein was dangerous in 96 " excuse doesn't hold much water .

There we other ways of keeping saddam in check , and I think its quite obvious that Bushey came into office with the mind set of finishing off his Dads work ........and if you think otherwise, then ....no hope for you

[Guest Spankmeister]

OK...I totally dismiss any and all of the quotes related to Clinton or his administration...Talking about something and actually acting on it are two different things....I do believe that if Clinton really had hard evidence then action would have been taken...

Any of the quotes from 2002 from Dem's and that....totally taken out of context....There HAS to be a level of trust in Govt, and when the President brings forth falsified documents 'proving' that Saddam had WMD's, many people took these to be fact and supported the attack accordingly..

Not being 100% truthful about recieving oral in the oval office and 'outing' a undercover CIA operative are two completely different things....one is just something that 90% of the presidents have done, and the other is actually putting someone's life at risk-only because the operative's husband was putting down the Administration's decision to start this sorry excuse for a war...

Sad, Sad, Sad....Liberals, Conservatives...neither are innocent...but with all this fighting, the only ones that lose is the American People. That is because once people lose hope, lose faith completely in this corrupt system we call a Government, then that is when all is really lost.

[Guest slamminshaun]

You had a decent argument with the "one democrat back in '96 said it", but I've outlined just about EVERY Democrat over a six year period including the front-runner for President in '08. Even Cindy Sheehan shunned her, remember?

You can't come out with guns blazin' because its the politically wise thing to do, but then turn around and say you never supported it. History will decide everyone's legacy.

[Guest web_norah]

no matter how you slice it, in the eyes of Republicans/ Bush supporters, he still did great job going to war, he didn't lie, etc, etc.

and my point about Karl Rove, Libby and Cheney still stands, watch out --because they're going to get what's coming for them, for making up all this WMD shit, just like Judith Miller printed in her article.

[Guest JMT]

Sad, Sad, Sad....Liberals, Conservatives...neither are innocent...but with all this fighting, the only ones that lose is the American People.

every day i agree more with that notion.

[Guest JMT]

and my point about Karl Rove, Libby and Cheney still stands, watch out --because they're going to get what's coming for them...

ok charles bronson.

[Guest Spankmeister]

Sad, Sad, Sad....Liberals, Conservatives...neither are innocent...but with all this fighting, the only ones that lose is the American People.

every day i agree more with that notion.

A little off topic, but did you see the article in the Sunday Sun about the real 'Big Lebowski'????

I read it and thought of you with your sig...

\end hijack

[Guest JMT]

Sad, Sad, Sad....Liberals, Conservatives...neither are innocent...but with all this fighting, the only ones that lose is the American People.

every day i agree more with that notion.

A little off topic, but did you see the article in the Sunday Sun about the real 'Big Lebowski'????

I read it and thought of you with your sig...

\end hijack

no, what was it about?? i havent had a chance to read a full paper since before the hurricane. i will have to go see if its still on their website.