Democrats: Dishonest on Iraq - a must see for the libs

[-Cp]

A great video:

http://www.gop.com/Default.aspx

 

[Bonnie]

A great video:

http://www.gop.com/Default.aspx

A bit more
DID HILLARY LIE AMERICA INTO WAR??

It was a powerful argument for war made by a politician with long years of experience in the White House.

"(I)ntelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability and his nuclear program," said this national leader.

"(I)f left unchecked," the politician argued, "Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capability to wage biological and chemical warfare and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons. Should he succeed in that endeavor, he could alter the political and security landscape of the Middle East, which as we know all too well, affects American security."

"This much is undisputed," declared this Democrat, as she voted to authorize the war in Iraq.


The question now is: Why did Sen. Hillary Clinton get it so wrong?

Had she -- to use the formulation Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada is now using to attack President Bush -- "manufactured and manipulated intelligence"? Did Hillary lie America into war?

No, she did not.

Sen. Clinton got her bad intelligence the same place President Bush got his: the CIA. Specifically, from George Tenet, the man President Clinton appointed director of central intelligence (DCI).

The entire chain of custody on the intelligence Sen. Clinton used in her Oct. 10, 2002, Senate floor speech ran through Democratic politicians back to a Democrat-appointed DCI.

In 2002, Democrats controlled the Senate, and Democratic Sen. Bob Graham of Florida chaired the intelligence committee. On Sept. 9, 2002, Democratic Sen. Richard Durbin of Illinois, a member of the intelligence committee, wrote Clinton-appointed Tenet asking for a National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) on Iraq's WMD programs.

NIEs, the intelligence committee later said in its unanimous bipartisan investigative report on Iraq intelligence, "are intended to provide policymakers in both the executive and legislative branches with the best, unvarnished and unbiased information."

An NIE, the committee quoted a CIA document as explaining, "is the director's estimate, and its findings are his."

DCI Tenet was no Bush crony or Republican hack. His career was largely propelled by Democrats. In the mid-1980s, Democratic Sen. Patrick Leahy of Vermont made Tenet his intelligence committee aide. Former Intelligence Chairman David Boren, an Oklahoma Democrat, later made Tenet the committee's staff director. President Clinton named him to his National Security Council staff, then deputy DCI, then DCI.

Tenet delivered the NIE requested by Durbin at the beginning of October 2002. Its key judgments included that Iraq "is reconstituting its nuclear program," "had chemical and biological weapons" and was developing unmanned aerial vehicles "probably intended to deliver biological warfare agents," and that "all key aspects -- research and development (R&D), production and weaponization -- of Iraq's offensive biological weapons (BW) program are active and that most elements are larger and more advanced than they were before the Gulf War."

Two months later, according to Bob Woodward's "Plan of Attack," Tenet sat in the Oval Office and twice emphatically told President Bush it was a "slam dunk" Iraq had WMDs.

Did Tenet and his CIA lie to Congress about Iraq to help President Bush deceive Sen. Clinton and other Democrats into voting for war? Did he lie to Bush?

On March 31, the presidential Commission on the Intelligence Capabilities of the United States Regarding Weapons of Mass Destruction, chaired by former Democratic Sen. Charles Robb of Virginia and senior federal appellate court judge Laurence Silberman, published its report. It concluded the judgments about Iraq's WMD programs in the October 2002 NIE were "all wrong." However, it also concluded, after "querying in detail those analysts involved in formulating pre-war judgments about Iraq's WMD programs," that "(t)hese analysts universally assert that in no instance did political pressure cause them to change any of their analytical judgments."

The CIA ombudsman for politicization, the commission reported, "also found no evidence, based on numerous confidential interviews with the analysts involved, that political pressure had caused any analyst to change any judgments."

The intelligence committee's unanimous report likewise concluded: "The committee did not find any evidence that administration officials attempted to coerce, influence or pressure analysts to change their judgments related to Iraq's weapons of mass destruction capabilities."

Reasonable people could and did disagree on whether it was wise to invade Iraq. President Bush and Sen. Clinton, relying on the same intelligence, happened to agree.

But reasonable people can draw only one conclusion now on the argument advanced by some of Sen. Clinton's Democratic colleagues that President Bush lied America into war. It is simply preposterous.

http://www.townhall.com/opinion/columns/terencejeffrey/2005/11/16/175729.html

 

[Palestinian Jew]

First off, those quotes from 1998 have NOTHING to do with today's conflict. Back in 98, Saddam had WMD, but Clinton and fellow dems successfully disarmed him, as can be seen today.

It is not exactly fair to use the Dem's quotes from 02. Because in 2002 this was a Republican country. Bush acted greatly during 9/11 and Repubs launched a mostly successful war against the Taliban. America was in the palm of their hand. In 02, Senators were up for reelection, and as the Bushies were pounding the war drum again, it would have been political suicide to go against it.

Obviously this is as unethical as Bush's bad intelligence because the Dems being the out-party are supposed to be watchdogs.

 

[Annie]

First off, those quotes from 1998 have NOTHING to do with today's conflict. Back in 98, Saddam had WMD, but Clinton and fellow dems successfully disarmed him, as can be seen today.

It is not exactly fair to use the Dem's quotes from 02. Because in 2002 this was a Republican country. Bush acted greatly during 9/11 and Repubs launched a mostly successful war against the Taliban. America was in the palm of their hand. In 02, Senators were up for reelection, and as the Bushies were pounding the war drum again, it would have been political suicide to go against it.

Obviously this is as unethical as Bush's bad intelligence because the Dems being the out-party are supposed to be watchdogs.

Wrong. Many of those quotes were from 2002-2003. Get a life.

 

[Bonnie]

Palestinian Jew....First off, those quotes from 1998 have NOTHING to do with today's conflict. Back in 98, Saddam had WMD, but Clinton and fellow dems successfully disarmed him, as can be seen today.

There is no doubt that ... Saddam Hussein has invigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs
continue a pace 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, December 5, 2001Truth!
The only letter with this quote from December 5, 2001 that we could find did not include the participation of Senator Bob Graham, but it was signed nine other senators including Democrat Joe Lieberman.
It urged President Bush to take quicker action against Iraq.

"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-Truth!
These were remarks from Senator Levin to a Senate committee on that date.

"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country."
Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002-Truth!
This and the quote below was part of prepared remarks for a speech in San Francisco to The Commonwealth Club.

"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-Truth!

"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-Truth!
Part of a speech he gave at Johns Hopkins.

"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-Truth!
On the floor of the Senate during debate over the resolution that would authorize using force against Iraq.
He was urging caution about going to war and commented that even though there was confidence about the weapons in Iraq, there had not been the need to take military action for a number of years and he asked why there would be the need at that point.

"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-Truth!
Senator Kerry's comments were made to the Senate as part of the same debate over the resolution to use force against Saddam Hussein.

"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 Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002-Truth!
Senator Rockefeller's statements were a part of the debate over using force against Saddam Hussein.

"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-Truth!
Senator Waxman's contribution to the Senate debate over going to war.

"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-Truth!
Senator Clinton acknowledged the threat of Saddam Hussein but said she did not feel that using force at that time was a good option.

"Without 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-Truth!
In a speech to Georgetown University.

Last updated 4/16/04

http://www.truthorfiction.com/rumors/b/bushlied.htm


:rotflmao: :rotflmao: