- Sep 6, 2000
- 25,383
- 1,013
- 126
Hillary Clinton backs Bush on WMD claims
- Thread starter glenn1
- Start date
LunarRay
Diamond Member
- Mar 2, 2003
- 9,993
- 1
- 76
She has something cooking with this. First, she didn't have to say it but, did. Second, it contradicts other presidential contenders comments. And Third, she is despised by the right but, feeds them credible support.
Only possible reason to say this is to show... someone... that regardless of what the truth is she will stand with it. To tell it is the outward manifestation of the inner honor she wishes to have accorded to her..
Sneaky..
Why is it that every reputable person in the upper echelons of the US Government and political, economic, and intellectual individuals stand by the President of the United States while we have sadists, pedophiles, pot-heads, drug addicts, dreamers, and some of their champions in the democratic presidential hopefuls, standing by false proofs and conspiracy theories when it comes to why we went to war?
Could someone please answer that question?
Could someone please answer that question?
LunarRay
Diamond Member
- Mar 2, 2003
- 9,993
- 1
- 76
Well now... Hillary, by definition, has climbed into the upper echelons.. While at least some of the democratic presidential hopefuls have fallen into the pit of the depraved paranoid... interesting..
But, it is simple.. really! When you are attempting to unseat an incumbent president you can't very well run against him proclaiming agreement with his greatest asset for re-election. You must be contra and support that position with what ever is at hand other wise one would not stand a chance. The folks who believe what they are told are sheep if it is false and astute judges of character if it is right.. The folks who don't believe what they're told are ill informed disobedients if it is truthful and insight filled intellectuals if it is not... But, to tell the difference one must know the truth and that is buried in the fog that surrounds reality.
edit to add an 's'
Hayabusa Rider
Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
- Jan 26, 2000
- 50,879
- 4,265
- 126
then tell me this, when did this fog come about? Was it when Bush made the accusations repeated by President Clinton and other world leaders? Was it before 2003? 2002? 2001? 1998? Tell me, when did the fog set in? Why was what Clinton and his crew saying in 1998 all of a sudden became outright lies and "adventurism" when Bush uttered them?
She is betting the public is buying this sham, is going to re-elect G.W., then when she runs in 2008 she won't have standing against what turned out to be a successful issue for both G.W. and her husband biting her in the ass. And I find it fvcking hilarious that anyone, especially ardent G.W. supporters, are now calling her 'reputable.'
Hayabusa Rider
Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
- Jan 26, 2000
- 50,879
- 4,265
- 126
Who knows. Clinton was wrong. Bush was too. CLinton bombed an aspirin factory. Bush either concocted a huge story or was utterly incompetent when he started a war. No third choice for Bush. CLinton was an ass. So there you go.
I am only going by most dems opinions of her... They love her, and most WOULD consider her reputable. It only helps to backup Bush's claims with her saying this.
Dems are less likely to dispute with Hillary..
Miramonti
Lifer
- Aug 26, 2000
- 28,651
- 100
- 91
She's welcome to her opinion, no one can accuse an opinion of lying.
She also added:
Given that there was no credible intelligence to support these two circumstances, it would be a fabrication, based on this article to conclude that she totally agreed and supported Bush and his decisions as well as his process [i.e. lying].
She also added:
Given that there was no credible intelligence to support these two circumstances, it would be a fabrication, based on this article to conclude that she totally agreed and supported Bush and his decisions as well as his process [i.e. lying].
LunarRay
Diamond Member
- Mar 2, 2003
- 9,993
- 1
- 76
Nah... Dari, it ain't that diabolical. It is the fog associated with National Security. You know the means and methods of acquiring information and all that. The secrets that are code worded and all. We little folks can only see what happened not why and at most times not even what happened only what we are told happened. Unless you are an eye witness and understand what you see do you Know that itty bitty piece of the puzzle..
You are told what you are told by whomever told you.. Even the "Free Press" are precluded from telling all they happen upon...
Hillary will back Bush now, to seal her run in 2008. If they seat a Dem. in the house in 2004, her chance of winning in 2008 is slim to none.
It is easy to see why Hillary would defend the notion of Saddam's WMDs.
The Clinton policy towards Iraq was to hold on to the UN embargo at all costs, despite efforts to change it. The net result of which was a humanitarian disaster (500,000 dead children), and Saddam fatter and richer than ever. When it comes to Iraq Hillary has nothing to win by going face to face with the Bushies. On the contrary for her it pays off to sing the company tune loud and clear, since when it comes to Iraq both Bill Clinton and the Bushies are suckers.
The Clinton policy towards Iraq was to hold on to the UN embargo at all costs, despite efforts to change it. The net result of which was a humanitarian disaster (500,000 dead children), and Saddam fatter and richer than ever. When it comes to Iraq Hillary has nothing to win by going face to face with the Bushies. On the contrary for her it pays off to sing the company tune loud and clear, since when it comes to Iraq both Bill Clinton and the Bushies are suckers.
As far as my vote goes, she has no chance of winning, but there are those that still want their free cheese.
I can offer my opinion here, but you should understand that you're not really interested in the answer, but rather only an opportunity to complain:
Truth is invisible because it is 180 degrees from where we look. One consequence of this is that we are the people of 1984. War is peace, etc. We are upside down in the world. Truth is what we call a lie. We don't like liars and we hate the truth. That's why nobody knows. So the closer to truth people move the more they resemble scum, the more they're seen as sadists, pedophiles, pot-heads, drug addicts, and dreamers, especially dreamers. That is why the mentally ill are healthier than the sane in hidden ways. That is why Jesus ministered and cared for scum. There is less pretension between them and the truth. Those who are beaten can no longer orient 180 degrees from the Path. Those whose egos have been destroyed can sometimes die and be reborn.
Hillary Clinton backs Bush on WMD claims
--------------------------------------------------------
What? She sat on Pinocchio's nose?
--------------------------------------------------------
What? She sat on Pinocchio's nose?
Hillary isn't the only one who backed Bush:
"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. 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." -- From a letter signed by Joe Lieberman, Dianne Feinstein, Barbara A. Milulski, Tom Daschle, & John Kerry among others on October 9, 1998
"This December will mark three years since United Nations inspectors last visited Iraq. There is no doubt that since that time, Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to refine 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." -- From a December 6, 2001 letter signed by Bob Graham, Joe Lieberman, Harold Ford, & Tom Lantos among others
"Saddam's goal ... is to achieve the lifting of U.N. sanctions while retaining and enhancing Iraq's weapons of mass destruction programs. We cannot, we must not and we will not let him succeed." -- Madeline Albright, 1998
"Iraq made commitments after the Gulf War to completely dismantle all weapons of mass destruction, and unfortunately, Iraq has not lived up to its agreement." -- Barbara Boxer, November 8, 2002
"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retained 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 capability. Intelligence reports also indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons, but has not yet achieved nuclear capability." -- Robert Byrd, October 2002
"What is at stake is how to answer the potential threat Iraq represents with the risk of proliferation of WMD. Baghdad's regime did use such weapons in the past. Today, a number of evidences may lead to think that, over the past four years, in the absence of international inspectors, this country has continued armament programs." -- Jacques Chirac, October 16, 2002
"The community of nations may see more and more of the very kind of threat Iraq poses now: a rogue state with weapons of mass destruction, ready to use them or provide them to terrorists. If we fail to respond today, Saddam and all those who would follow in his footsteps will be emboldened tomorrow." -- Bill Clinton in 1998
"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, though there is apparently no evidence of his involvement in the terrible events of September 11, 2001. 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. 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." -- Hillary Clinton, October 10, 2002
"I am absolutely convinced that there are weapons...I saw evidence back in 1998 when we would see the inspectors being barred from gaining entry into a warehouse for three hours with trucks rolling up and then moving those trucks out." -- Clinton's Secretary of Defense William Cohen in April of 2003
"Iraq is not the only nation in the world to possess weapons of mass destruction, but it is the only nation with a leader who has used them against his own people." -- Tom Daschle in 1998
"Saddam Hussein's regime represents a grave threat to America and our allies, including our vital ally, Israel. For more than two decades, Saddam Hussein has sought weapons of mass destruction through every available means. We know that he has chemical and biological weapons. He has already used them against his neighbors and his own people, and is trying to build more. We know that he is doing everything he can to build nuclear weapons, and we know that each day he gets closer to achieving that goal." -- John Edwards, Oct 10, 2002
"I share the administration's goals in dealing with Iraq and its weapons of mass destruction." -- Dick Gephardt in September of 2002
"Iraq does pose a serious threat to the stability of the Persian Gulf and we should organize an international coalition to eliminate his access to weapons of mass destruction. Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to completely deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power." -- Al Gore, 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." -- Bob Graham, December 2002
"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction." -- Ted Kennedy, September 27, 2002
"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." -- John F. Kerry, Oct 2002
"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 mandates of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them." -- Carl Levin, Sept 19, 2002
"Over the years, Iraq has worked to develop nuclear, chemical and biological weapons. During 1991 - 1994, despite Iraq's denials, U.N. inspectors discovered and dismantled a large network of nuclear facilities that Iraq was using to develop nuclear weapons. Various reports indicate that Iraq is still actively pursuing nuclear weapons capability. There is no reason to think otherwise. Beyond nuclear weapons, Iraq has actively pursued biological and chemical weapons.U.N. inspectors have said that Iraq's claims about biological weapons is neither credible nor verifiable. In 1986, Iraq used chemical weapons against Iran, and later, against its own Kurdish population. While weapons inspections have been successful in the past, there have been no inspections since the end of 1998. There can be no doubt that Iraq has continued to pursue its goal of obtaining weapons of mass destruction." -- Patty Murray, October 9, 2002
"As a member of the House Intelligence Committee, I am keenly aware that the proliferation of chemical and biological weapons is an issue of grave importance to all nations. 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 16, 1998
"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. And that may happen sooner if he can obtain access to enriched uranium from foreign sources -- something that is not that difficult in the current world. We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction." -- John Rockefeller, Oct 10, 2002
"Saddam?s existing biological and chemical weapons capabilities pose a very real threat to America, now. Saddam has used chemical weapons before, both against Iraq?s enemies and against his own people. He is working to develop delivery systems like missiles and unmanned aerial vehicles that could bring these deadly weapons against U.S. forces and U.S. facilities in the Middle East." -- John Rockefeller, Oct 10, 2002
Politics my friends, pure and simple....call Bush a liar (even though they all agreed with him), call him reckless (even though they authorized his sending troops to iraq). This is all election politics, it is shameless, and yes, it gives comfort and aid to those scum that still support Saddam and harm our troops in the hope that they might POLITICALLY defeat the U.S. efforts in Iraq, which they could not militarily defeat.
let the flames commence...
"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. 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." -- From a letter signed by Joe Lieberman, Dianne Feinstein, Barbara A. Milulski, Tom Daschle, & John Kerry among others on October 9, 1998
"This December will mark three years since United Nations inspectors last visited Iraq. There is no doubt that since that time, Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to refine 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." -- From a December 6, 2001 letter signed by Bob Graham, Joe Lieberman, Harold Ford, & Tom Lantos among others
"Saddam's goal ... is to achieve the lifting of U.N. sanctions while retaining and enhancing Iraq's weapons of mass destruction programs. We cannot, we must not and we will not let him succeed." -- Madeline Albright, 1998
"Iraq made commitments after the Gulf War to completely dismantle all weapons of mass destruction, and unfortunately, Iraq has not lived up to its agreement." -- Barbara Boxer, November 8, 2002
"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retained 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 capability. Intelligence reports also indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons, but has not yet achieved nuclear capability." -- Robert Byrd, October 2002
"What is at stake is how to answer the potential threat Iraq represents with the risk of proliferation of WMD. Baghdad's regime did use such weapons in the past. Today, a number of evidences may lead to think that, over the past four years, in the absence of international inspectors, this country has continued armament programs." -- Jacques Chirac, October 16, 2002
"The community of nations may see more and more of the very kind of threat Iraq poses now: a rogue state with weapons of mass destruction, ready to use them or provide them to terrorists. If we fail to respond today, Saddam and all those who would follow in his footsteps will be emboldened tomorrow." -- Bill Clinton in 1998
"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, though there is apparently no evidence of his involvement in the terrible events of September 11, 2001. 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. 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." -- Hillary Clinton, October 10, 2002
"I am absolutely convinced that there are weapons...I saw evidence back in 1998 when we would see the inspectors being barred from gaining entry into a warehouse for three hours with trucks rolling up and then moving those trucks out." -- Clinton's Secretary of Defense William Cohen in April of 2003
"Iraq is not the only nation in the world to possess weapons of mass destruction, but it is the only nation with a leader who has used them against his own people." -- Tom Daschle in 1998
"Saddam Hussein's regime represents a grave threat to America and our allies, including our vital ally, Israel. For more than two decades, Saddam Hussein has sought weapons of mass destruction through every available means. We know that he has chemical and biological weapons. He has already used them against his neighbors and his own people, and is trying to build more. We know that he is doing everything he can to build nuclear weapons, and we know that each day he gets closer to achieving that goal." -- John Edwards, Oct 10, 2002
"I share the administration's goals in dealing with Iraq and its weapons of mass destruction." -- Dick Gephardt in September of 2002
"Iraq does pose a serious threat to the stability of the Persian Gulf and we should organize an international coalition to eliminate his access to weapons of mass destruction. Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to completely deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power." -- Al Gore, 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." -- Bob Graham, December 2002
"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction." -- Ted Kennedy, September 27, 2002
"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." -- John F. Kerry, Oct 2002
"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 mandates of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them." -- Carl Levin, Sept 19, 2002
"Over the years, Iraq has worked to develop nuclear, chemical and biological weapons. During 1991 - 1994, despite Iraq's denials, U.N. inspectors discovered and dismantled a large network of nuclear facilities that Iraq was using to develop nuclear weapons. Various reports indicate that Iraq is still actively pursuing nuclear weapons capability. There is no reason to think otherwise. Beyond nuclear weapons, Iraq has actively pursued biological and chemical weapons.U.N. inspectors have said that Iraq's claims about biological weapons is neither credible nor verifiable. In 1986, Iraq used chemical weapons against Iran, and later, against its own Kurdish population. While weapons inspections have been successful in the past, there have been no inspections since the end of 1998. There can be no doubt that Iraq has continued to pursue its goal of obtaining weapons of mass destruction." -- Patty Murray, October 9, 2002
"As a member of the House Intelligence Committee, I am keenly aware that the proliferation of chemical and biological weapons is an issue of grave importance to all nations. 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 16, 1998
"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. And that may happen sooner if he can obtain access to enriched uranium from foreign sources -- something that is not that difficult in the current world. We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction." -- John Rockefeller, Oct 10, 2002
"Saddam?s existing biological and chemical weapons capabilities pose a very real threat to America, now. Saddam has used chemical weapons before, both against Iraq?s enemies and against his own people. He is working to develop delivery systems like missiles and unmanned aerial vehicles that could bring these deadly weapons against U.S. forces and U.S. facilities in the Middle East." -- John Rockefeller, Oct 10, 2002
Politics my friends, pure and simple....call Bush a liar (even though they all agreed with him), call him reckless (even though they authorized his sending troops to iraq). This is all election politics, it is shameless, and yes, it gives comfort and aid to those scum that still support Saddam and harm our troops in the hope that they might POLITICALLY defeat the U.S. efforts in Iraq, which they could not militarily defeat.
let the flames commence...
Hayabusa Rider
Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
- Jan 26, 2000
- 50,879
- 4,265
- 126
So it seems many (not all) believed Bush when he told them about the WMDs. They probably never expected the President to lie or display incompetence to this extreme. Maybe they saw Powell at the UN. Shame on them. Yes shame on them for believing him to begin with. Thanks for clearing that up.
Aid and comfort. Yeah. Pull the other one.
LunarRay
Diamond Member
- Mar 2, 2003
- 9,993
- 1
- 76
HeartSurgeon,
An interesting list of who said what about the WMD and Bush.. I'm sure they and others said that and a lot more. These are political folks and say what is in their best interest to say at the time. The day of standing on the pedestal and debating the greater good ended with Madison, Adams, Jefferson, Washington and their peers.
Most of what the political folks said were self serving statements just like everything else they say. What they say and want to say are usually different.
Consider if I was in an operating theater and observed the events... I'd not know jack about what went on. I'd rely on what you might tell me. If you told me you removed the spleen and inserted a gizmathcie I'd know this and not much more... But, if you actually removed some other organ and inserted something other than a gizmathcie I'd still only know what you told me and If asked, I'd only have the information I had. This is the same for all these political folks. They become edified by what someone tells them or what they read and based on that say what they say. If what they were told or read was false, incomplete or 'massaged' they'd be hard pressed to know more than this. Nor should they be held to know beyond what they are told or presented.
But, even this is self serving because their current motive is to seek the White House and Majority in Congress... What they say now is in the furtherance of this objective and nothing more..
An interesting list of who said what about the WMD and Bush.. I'm sure they and others said that and a lot more. These are political folks and say what is in their best interest to say at the time. The day of standing on the pedestal and debating the greater good ended with Madison, Adams, Jefferson, Washington and their peers.
Most of what the political folks said were self serving statements just like everything else they say. What they say and want to say are usually different.
Consider if I was in an operating theater and observed the events... I'd not know jack about what went on. I'd rely on what you might tell me. If you told me you removed the spleen and inserted a gizmathcie I'd know this and not much more... But, if you actually removed some other organ and inserted something other than a gizmathcie I'd still only know what you told me and If asked, I'd only have the information I had. This is the same for all these political folks. They become edified by what someone tells them or what they read and based on that say what they say. If what they were told or read was false, incomplete or 'massaged' they'd be hard pressed to know more than this. Nor should they be held to know beyond what they are told or presented.
But, even this is self serving because their current motive is to seek the White House and Majority in Congress... What they say now is in the furtherance of this objective and nothing more..
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 9K
-
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 7K
-
Facebook
Twitter