2
   

Lies About Saddams Weapons of Mass Destruction

 
 
Scrat
 
Reply Wed 18 Feb, 2004 02:02 pm
It has been asserted repeatedly in discussions within A2K's Politics forum that President Bush "lied" to the American people about Saddam's weapons of mass destruction. Since there seems to be no swaying these people from their belief that being wrongly informed on something is the same as lying about it, I figured I may as well adopt their standard, and apply it evenly and fairly. So, here is a partial list of other people who have lied to the American people about Saddam's WMD...

Quote:
"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... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real..." -- Sen. John F. Kerry (D-MA), Jan. 23. 2003

Quote:
"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

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

Quote:
"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

Quote:
"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." -- Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-NY), Oct 10, 2002

Please feel free to comment on these outrageous lies and the despicable liars who told them. Very Happy
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 2 • Views: 1,734 • Replies: 25
No top replies

 
Brand X
 
  1  
Reply Wed 18 Feb, 2004 02:14 pm
If Kerry had been our president the past however many years he's been voting as a senator, we wouldn't have any weapons. I voted no.
0 Replies
 
kickycan
 
  1  
Reply Wed 18 Feb, 2004 02:41 pm
Scrat, this is an excellent idea for a thread. Yes, they lied too, but they didn't have the power that Bush has.
0 Replies
 
SealPoet
 
  1  
Reply Wed 18 Feb, 2004 02:45 pm
Not all of them were liars. Most of them were simply misled.
0 Replies
 
Scrat
 
  1  
Reply Wed 18 Feb, 2004 02:55 pm
SealPoet wrote:
Not all of them were liars. Most of them were simply misled.

How precisely do you tell which lied and which were misinformed?
0 Replies
 
Dartagnan
 
  1  
Reply Wed 18 Feb, 2004 02:55 pm
How pulled the strings in DC that encouraged these "findings"? It certainly wasn't Kerry and Pelosi..
0 Replies
 
Scrat
 
  1  
Reply Wed 18 Feb, 2004 02:56 pm
D'artagnan wrote:
How pulled the strings in DC that encouraged these "findings"? It certainly wasn't Kerry and Pelosi..

Hmmm... well, Pelosi made her comments in 1998. Now, who would have been in a position to "pull strings" back then?
0 Replies
 
SealPoet
 
  1  
Reply Wed 18 Feb, 2004 03:40 pm
(misled implies a misleader...)
0 Replies
 
Scrat
 
  1  
Reply Wed 18 Feb, 2004 04:37 pm
SealPoet wrote:
(misled implies a misleader...)

Fine, so who misled Pelosi in 1998?
0 Replies
 
pistoff
 
  1  
Reply Wed 18 Feb, 2004 05:00 pm
Neo Fascist Logic
The Neo Fascists take what is called logic and twist it like a pretzel that I wish Dubya the Dunce would've chocked and died with. Cheney is the Pres. so it wouldn't have changed anything about the Neo Fascist agenda. It would have made the fraud much clearer though because Cheney can articulate a msg. and isn't muddled about it.

Look up Office of Special Plans and PNAC. The agenda of the Neo Fascists is quite clear.
0 Replies
 
Scrat
 
  1  
Reply Tue 9 Mar, 2004 06:14 pm
I love proving what hypocrites all the Bush-hating liberals are here. They clamor and whine about how Bush "lied" about Saddam/Iraq, but when you show them that their heros were making statements that agreed with Bush's assessment, suddenly they have no opinion.

It illustrates nicely my belief that some people reach their opinions based on facts and integrity, and others simply rely on bias and hate.
0 Replies
 
pistoff
 
  1  
Reply Tue 9 Mar, 2004 06:29 pm
The Facts
Type "The Office of Special Plans" into your fave search engine. The facts are there. Report back ASAP.
0 Replies
 
Scrat
 
  1  
Reply Tue 9 Mar, 2004 07:09 pm
Quote:
In addition to examining public statements, the Senate committee will also review intelligence activities involving the office of Douglas Feith, undersecretary of defense for policy, and intelligence provided by the Iraqi National Congress, the leading exile group.

Democrats have charged that the Office of Special Plans under Feith functioned as a renegade intelligence agency, feeding policy-makers uncorroborated intelligence from the exile group.
Link: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/03/02/iraq/main603501.shtml

If you are suggesting that our country might have gotten bad intelligence from the exiled Iraqi National Congress, that might well be true, but where did France get their flawed intelligence? Where did Russia get theirs? How about the UN? Were they all misled by the INC? Maybe... but how are you going to pin that on Bush?
0 Replies
 
pistoff
 
  1  
Reply Tue 9 Mar, 2004 07:12 pm
The Office of Special Plans
Go do some research.
0 Replies
 
Heywood
 
  1  
Reply Tue 9 Mar, 2004 09:44 pm
fyi: Kerry never said "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."
That was Senator Bob Graham.

But Kerry did say the second part of your quote.

In any case, none of them had access to the up to date CIA info that showed the threat was not nearly what people thought of it or was being insinuated.

I would think all the people you quoted above, had they been in the position of president and with the info Bush had, would most likely NOT have rushed to war as Bush did. Just my $.02
0 Replies
 
IronLionZion
 
  1  
Reply Tue 9 Mar, 2004 09:53 pm
I'd like to point out - for all the conservatives who hound me - that I never claimed Bush intentionally lied about WMD's.
0 Replies
 
Scrat
 
  1  
Reply Tue 9 Mar, 2004 10:06 pm
Re: The Office of Special Plans
pistoff wrote:
Go do some research.

Why, don't I already have enough of an edge on you? Rolling Eyes
0 Replies
 
pistoff
 
  1  
Reply Wed 10 Mar, 2004 03:16 am
Rusty
Your sword is rusty & dull, Fed.

Tenet wants to keep his job so he is scirting around the issues. I listened and watched him this eve on C-Span. However, he did state that there was no immediate threat from Saddam. Shrub decided to invade Iraq and told his people to go get the info that would get the American public on board. That's what The Office of Special Plans did.

Of course, we will never know "What did the President know and when did he know it." The evidence has long been shredded and as stupid as he is, Shrub is probably not so consumed with his every word that he ran a tape recorder like Tricky Dick did.

Anyone ever read the documents that PNAC has on the Net?
0 Replies
 
Scrat
 
  1  
Reply Wed 10 Mar, 2004 09:56 am
Re: Rusty
pistoff wrote:
Shrub decided to invade Iraq and told his people to go get the info that would get the American public on board. That's what The Office of Special Plans did.

And your evidence to support this pet theory is what? That you think it? Oh, well that convinces me... (not). Rolling Eyes

Once again we see an example of the liberal who can not distinguish between what he wishes were true and what can be shown to be true by a rational citation of facts. inference is not fact. Conjecture is not fact. Wishful thinking is not fact. Cite facts, and explain for us how they can only mean what you claim they mean. Otherwise, you're just jerking yourself off... which is fine, but do we really have to watch? :wink:
0 Replies
 
Umbagog
 
  1  
Reply Wed 10 Mar, 2004 04:37 pm
You call that a poll? It's way to vague and grossly generalizing of the situation to have any scientific merit. Anyone participating has no choice but to join you in gross generalization and oversimplication of a complicated issue.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
GAFFNEY: Whose side is Obama on? - Discussion by gungasnake
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Lies About Saddams Weapons of Mass Destruction
Copyright © 2022 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 05/17/2022 at 02:21:01