Redfish
Diamond Member
Neither quote has anything to do with anything I'm saying. Time to give the kneepads back to redfish.Nope, but he did claim Hussein wouldn't let the inspectors in and that is most certainly a lie. Try to change the current topic with someone interested in playing your silly deflection games.Do me a favor and don't kaz me, ok? The context of these inspections was in regard to my claim that Bush said he invaded Iraq because Hussein wouldn't let the inspectors in. I was clearly talking about late 2002 through early 2003, the timeframe Bush was talking about.First you said "so now let's see your evidence of occasions where that the inspectors were not allowed to do their job." Let's call this goal post location number 1.
Then you said "there is nothing in your link even suggesting that once the inspectors went back into Iraq in November, 2002, they were denied access to any sites." This is goal post location number 2. Note the red text highlighted to show the location of the goal post being, figuratively, moved.
I assume that you moved the goal post because the link I provided, actually did talk about "evidence of occasions where that the inspectors were not allowed to do their job." Yes?
I moved no goal posts.
Now to bring this debate back on the rails ... was Bush lying when he said, "the larger point is, and the fundamental question is, did Saddam Hussein have a weapons program? And the answer is, absolutely. And we gave him a chance to allow the inspectors in, and he wouldn't let them in. And, therefore, after a reasonable request, we decided to remove him from power..."
Since I have quotes from the lead inspector saying they had no problems inspecting wherever they wanted and since you still have nothing in your hand to counter that and your bluff has been called ........ seems you can't formulate an argument to show he wasn't lying.
Was it Bush That said .....
"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."
or did he say ...
"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."
Perhaps it's a tad too advanced for you little fella but the statement
"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."
as well as ...
"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."
Are both highly relevant , they are among many that libtards such as yourself have been trying to sweep under the carpet for the past decade - One is from Slick Willy Clinton the other from Nancy Pelosi.- but they weren't lying right ---- only Bush --- you clowns are a fking pisser little fella
you are as dumb as a sack of frog feet. As to kneepads, I am sure you wore yours out kneeling in front of your kenyan messiah and plugs biden.