Bunch of Liars, Every One Of Them

I posted these quotes at my personal blog back in November 2005. Here we are two and a half years later and the same stupid partisan Democrats are saying the same stupid things. But if we are going to convict the liars, I say go for it. Here are a few liars that we can try along with the Bush administration.
Joe Biden - August 4, 2002
“This is a guy who is an extreme danger to the world, and this is a guy who is in every way possible seeking weapons of mass destruction.”

John Kerry > January 23, 2003
“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. His consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction.”


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

John Kerry >
October 9, 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 Carl Levin >
September 19, 2002
“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.”

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

Senator Hillary Clinton >
October 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, 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.”

Jay Rockefeller >
October 10, 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.”

Joe Biden >
August 4, 2002
“[H]e does have the capacity, as all terrorist-related operations do, of smuggling stuff into the United States and doing something terrible. That is true. But there’s been no connection, hard connection made yet between he and al-Qaida or his willingness or effort to do that thus far. Doesn’t mean he won’t. This is a bad guy.”

Robert Byrd >
October 3, 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.”

Madeline Albright > February 18, 2002

Iraq is a long way from (here), but what happens there matters a great deal here, for the risk that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest national security threat we face — and it is a threat against which we must and will stand firm.”


Al Gore >
September 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.”

Bill Nelson >
August 25, 2002
“[M]y own personal view is, I think Saddam has chemical and biological weapons,
and I expect that he is trying to develop a nuclear weapon. So at some point, we might have to act precipitously.”

Hillary Clinton > October 10, 2002
“In the four years since the inspections, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability and his nuclear program.”

Nancy Pelosi >
October 10, 2002
“Yes, he has chemical weapons. Yes, he has biological weapons. He is trying to get nuclear weapons.”

Dick Gephardt >
September 23, 2002
“(I have seen) a large body of intelligence information over a long time that he is working on and has weapons of mass destruction. Before 1991, he was close to a nuclear device. Now, you’ll get a debate about whether it’s one year away or five years away.”

Evan Bayh > August 4, 2002

“I’m inclined to support going in there and dealing with Saddam, but I think that case
needs to be made on a separate basis: his possession of biological and chemical weapons, his desire to get nuclear weapons, his proven track record of attacking his neighbors and others.”

Russ Feingold >
October 9, 2002
“With regard to Iraq, I agree Iraq presents a genuine threat, especially in the form of weapons of mass destruction: chemical, biological and potentially nuclear weapons. I agree that Saddam Hussein is exceptionally dangerous and brutal, if not uniquely so, as the president argues.”

John Edwards > January 7, 2003

“Serving on the intelligence committee and seeing day after day, week after week, briefings on Saddam’s weapons of mass destruction and his plans on using those weapons, he cannot be allowed to have nuclear weapons. It’s just that simple. The whole world changes if Saddam ever has nuclear weapons.”

Hillary Clinton >
January 22, 2003
“I voted for the Iraqi resolution. I consider the prospect of a nuclear-armed Saddam Hussein who can threaten not only his neighbors but the stability of the region and the world, a very serious threat to the
United States.”

John Kerry >
January 31, 2003
“If you don’t believe…Saddam Hussein is a threat with nuclear weapons, then you shouldn’t vote for me.”

Joe Biden >
August 4, 2002
“We know he continues to attempt to gain access to additional capability, including nuclear capability.”

Bill Nelson >
September 14, 2002
“I believe he has chemical and biological weapons. I think he’s trying to develop nuclear weapons, and the fact that he might use those is a considerable threat to us.”

John Edwards > February 6, 2003

“The question is whether we’re going to allow this man who’s been developing weapons of mass destruction continue to develop weapons of mass destruction, get nuclear capability and get to the place where — if we’re going to stop him if he invades a country around him — it’ll cost millions of lives as opposed to thousands of lives.”

Al Gore >
September 23, 2002
“We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country.”

Joe Biden >
August 4, 2002
“First of all, we don’t know exactly what he has. It’s been five years since inspectors have been in there, number one. Number two, it is clear that he has residual of chemical weapons and biological weapons, number one.”

Senator Bob Graham >
December 8, 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.”

 

Hillary Clinton > October 10, 2002
“It is clear, however, that if left unchecked Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capability to wage biological and chemical warfare and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons.”

Joe Biden > August 4, 2002
“I think he has anthrax. I have not seen any evidence that he has smallpox, but you hear them say, Tim (Russert), is the last smallpox outbreak in the world was in Iraq; ergo, he may have a strain.”

The other day somebody told me that the Democrats didn’t get to see all of the intelligence that the Bush Administration did. This is what was said during the Clinton Administration.

 

Bill Clinton > February 17, 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.”

Al Gore > December 16, 1998
“[I]f you allow someone like Saddam Hussein to get nuclear weapons, ballistic missiles, chemical weapons, biological weapons, how many people is he going to kill with such weapons? He has already demonstrated a willingness to use such weapons…”

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

Sandy Berger > February 18, 1998
“He’ll use those weapons of mass destruction again as he has 10 times since 1983.”

Madeleine Albright > November 10, 1999
“Hussein has chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies.”

Dick Durbin > September 30, 1999
“One of the most compelling threats we in this country face today is the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. Threat assessments regularly warn us of the possibility that North Korea, Iran, Iraq, or some other nation may acquire or develop nuclear weapons.”

Bill Clinton > February 17, 1998
“We have to defend our future from these predators of the 21st Century…. They will be all the more lethal if we allow them to build arsenals of nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons and the missiles to deliver them. We simply cannot allow that to happen. There is no more clear example of this threat than Saddam Hussein.”

Tom Daschle > February 11, 1998
“The (Clinton) administration has said, ‘Look, we have exhausted virtually our diplomatic effort to get the Iraqis to comply with their own agreements and with international law. Given that, what other option is there but to force them to do so?’ That’s what they’re saying. This is the key question. And the answer is we don’t have another option. We have got to force them to comply, and we are doing so militarily.”

Bill Richardson > May 29, 1998
“The threat of nuclear proliferation is one of the big challenges that we have now, especially by states that have nuclear weapons, outlaw states like Iraq.”

John Kerry > February 23, 1998
“Saddam Hussein has already used these weapons and has made it clear that he has the intent to continue to try, by virtue of his duplicity and secrecy, to continue to do so. That is a threat to the stability of the Middle East. It is a threat with respect to the potential of terrorist activities on a global basis. It is a threat even to regions near but not exactly in the Middle East.”

October 9th, 1999 Letter to President Clinton Signed by Senators Levin, Lieberman, Lautenberg, Dodd, Kerrey, Feinstein, Mikulski, Daschle, Breaux, Johnson, Inouye, Landrieu, Ford and Kerry — all Democrats

“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.”

7 comments:

  1. Rustmeister, 5. June 2008, 19:03

    There ya go, introducing facts into a perfectly good fantasy.

     
  2. tgirsch, 5. June 2008, 20:38

    Cherry-pick often? For example, let’s look at the whole Ted Kennedy quote, shall we?

    We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction. Our intelligence community is also deeply concerned about the acquisition of such weapons by Iran, North Korea, Libya, Syria and other nations. But information from the intelligence community over the past six months does not point to Iraq as an imminent threat to the United States or a major proliferator of weapons of mass destruction.

    The 1998 quotes are pretty much irrelevant, because they were followed by action — air strikes against Iraq — action which we now know was actually quite effective in crippling Saddam’s WMD programs, and did so without US bloodshed.

    I’ve debunked quotes like these before, and almost without fail, they’re yanked out of context like the above one, in order to make it look as though the speaker was actually arguing something other than what he was.

    Further, even if these quotes are taken at face value, it assumes that the speakers knew the intelligence they were giving was wrong, a fact not in evidence about Congress (Democrat or Republican), but which is in evidence concerning the administration.

    You know, you piss and moan about William copying and pasting talking points, and then you pull this disingenuous shit? You really should know better…

    Face the truth: You’re just not man enough to admit that you bought the Brooklyn Bridge from the administration hook, line, and sinker.

    And before you say I’m letting the Dems off the hook here, I’m not. It’s to their eternal discredit that they were so willing to buy the administration’s crap with so little scrutiny, and vote as they did to authorize the use of force. Everyone knows that most of them were, in fact, against the military action, but were too afraid (cowardly, I’d say) to come out against it in an election year.

     
  3. Jeffraham Prestonian, 5. June 2008, 22:22

    Check out these quotes from prominent republicans when Bill Clinton sent troops to Kosovo.

    “Well, I just think it’s a bad idea. What’s going to happen is they’re going to be over there for 10, 15, maybe 20 years.”
    –Joe Scarborough (R-FL)

    “Explain to the mothers and fathers of American servicemen that may come home in body bags why their son or daughter have to give up their life?”
    –Sean Hannity, Fox News, 4/6/99

    “[The] President . . . is once again releasing American military might on a foreign country with an ill-defined objective and no exit strategy. He has yet to tell the Congress how much this operation will cost. And he has not informed our nation’s armed forces about how long they will be away from home. These strikes do not make for a sound foreign policy.”
    –Sen. Rick Santorum (R-PA)

    “I had doubts about the bombing campaign from the beginning . . I didn’t think we had done enough in the diplomatic area.”
    –Senator Trent Lott (R-MS)

    “Victory means exit strategy, and it’s important for the President to explain to us what the exit strategy is.”
    –Governor George W. Bush (R-TX)
    .

     
  4. william, 6. June 2008, 0:25

    Yes, quotes from Republicans on US involvement in NATO peace keeping force in Kosovo where US troops made up only 15% of the total coalition.

    “the president must define a mission, a goal and an exit strategy for our troops before sending them into another mess.”
    –Rep. Sam Johnson, R-Texas

    Remember Sam Johnson? Remember, he was the GOP war hero vet that argued so persuasively for the Iraq war. Hypocritical bastards

     
  5. Brian, 6. June 2008, 6:14

    I’m sorry, Glen. Could you please re-do your post with bolded red and black fonts, underscores, and end every sentence with a !!!!1!1! The post itself should be mildly modified and re-posted several times in a row for even greater emphasis.

    This is simply illegible.

    Also William is a diseased and hairy fucking cunt. That should be thrown in there somewhere too.

     
  6. nedwilliams, 6. June 2008, 13:26

    Democrats (who opposed the war but voted for it) were certainly cowardly, but some of them weren’t opposed to it and still acted on the available intelligence to authorize war . . . like McCain. And, as you’ve demonstrated with one of Glen’s quotations, context is important for interpreting the meaning of a quotation. Thus, the GOP quotes must take in other factors such as arguably illegitimate objectives or putting American troops under a foreign command.

    But I don’t have a problem admitting I was duped, if I were convinced that I was in fact duped (note: I haven’t read the Senate report yet, but I’m not expecting much frankly). The difference between me an william (one difference) is that I don’t assume every motive/ideal/value of a Republican is nefarious. I don’t need that to motivate me to care about policy or about winning elections or to use in persuading others to side with me on policy or voting in elections. It’s enough for me to just look at the fruit of Liberal policies and the principles of our founding to not vote Lib and to not sit back and let Libs run roughshod over me as a voter.

    That being said, why don’t y’all go ahead and take your “slam dunk” case to trial, william?

     
  7. tgirsch, 9. June 2008, 14:38

    nedwilliams:

    Trust me, you were duped. :) And again, it’s not a partisan thing, because there were plenty of Republicans inside the administration and out who griped internally about how things were being handled. I once again recommend watching the 4.5 hour Frontline special I linked to a while back.

     

Write a comment: