Purple Haze
Literally Stimulated
- Joined
- Sep 19, 2000
- Posts
- 19,290
The Mutt said:
This is the truth that's been told over and over on this board for years now,
and the blind still cannot see...
This is the truth that's been told over and over on this board for years now,
and the blind still cannot see...
crawling crab
Really Experienced
- Joined
- Nov 17, 2005
- Posts
- 130
Not me.
BlueEyesInLevis
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Dec 10, 2003
- Posts
- 11,404
The unsaid purpose of this "Bush Lied" mantra by the DNC is to reconcille the party with its looney left which now controls the purse strings of the party.
While the fact remains that all of the power players, Clinton(s), Kerry, Gore, Byrd, Levin, Albright, Berger, et al (the list goes on and on and on) all agreed that Iraq was an imminent threat and needed to be dealt with MILITARILY, it is the American military and it applications that is an anathema to the modern American Looney Left that now controls the purse strings of the DNC (Dean, Hollywood, moveon.org, etc.) With DNC fundraising in the duldrums it is necessary to invigorate this anti-military faction now controlling those purse strings.
And it really doesnt matter to this anti-military faction that it was THEIR Democrats that were once beating the drums of war, just so long as that prodigal son has now faithfully returned to the reservation.
Voila' "Bush Lied"!
While the fact remains that all of the power players, Clinton(s), Kerry, Gore, Byrd, Levin, Albright, Berger, et al (the list goes on and on and on) all agreed that Iraq was an imminent threat and needed to be dealt with MILITARILY, it is the American military and it applications that is an anathema to the modern American Looney Left that now controls the purse strings of the DNC (Dean, Hollywood, moveon.org, etc.) With DNC fundraising in the duldrums it is necessary to invigorate this anti-military faction now controlling those purse strings.
And it really doesnt matter to this anti-military faction that it was THEIR Democrats that were once beating the drums of war, just so long as that prodigal son has now faithfully returned to the reservation.
Voila' "Bush Lied"!
Last edited:
BlueEyesInLevis
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Dec 10, 2003
- Posts
- 11,404
Its logic like this that makes you a liberal, Cupcake. HAHAHAHAHAHAPookie said:
BlueEyesInLevis
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Dec 10, 2003
- Posts
- 11,404
Pookie said:
Check into Abu Grab is one suggestion.
Purple Haze
Literally Stimulated
- Joined
- Sep 19, 2000
- Posts
- 19,290
BlueEyesInLevis said:
BlueEyesInLevis, what branch of the service did you belong?
Just asking...
Purple Haze
Literally Stimulated
- Joined
- Sep 19, 2000
- Posts
- 19,290
"Our intelligence officials estimate that Saddam Hussein had the materials to produce as much as 500 tons of sarin, mustard and VX nerve agent.”
State of the Union Address – 1/28/2003
“U.S. intelligence indicates that Saddam Hussein
had upwards of 30,000 munitions capable
of delivering chemical agents.”
State of the Union Address – 1/28/2003
“We have also discovered through intelligence
that Iraq has a growing fleet of manned and unmanned aerial vehicles that could be used to disperse chemical or biological weapons across broad areas."
State of the Union Address – 1/28/2003
"Evidence from intelligence sources, secret communications and statements by people
now in custody reveal that
Saddam Hussein aids and protects terrorists, including members of Al Qaida."
State of the Union Address – 1/28/2003
"Our intelligence sources tell us that he (Saddam) has attempted to purchase high-strength aluminum tubes suitable for nuclear weapons production."
State of the Union Address – 1/28/2003
"Satellite photographs reveal that Iraq is rebuilding facilities at [past nuclear] sites."
Bush speech to the nation – 10/7/2002
Iraq is rebuilding nuclear facilities at former sites.
Not True
Two months of inspections at these former Iraqi nuclear sites found zero evidence of prohibited nuclear activities there
IAEA report to UN Security Council – 1/27/2003
"The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa."
State of the Union Address – 1/28/2003
"We know he's been absolutely devoted to trying to acquire nuclear weapons, and we believe he has, in fact, reconstituted nuclear weapons."
VP Dick Cheney – “Meet the Press” 3/16/2003
"We gave him a chance to allow the inspectors in, and he wouldn't let them in."
Bush Press Conference 7/14/2003
State of the Union Address – 1/28/2003
“U.S. intelligence indicates that Saddam Hussein
had upwards of 30,000 munitions capable
of delivering chemical agents.”
State of the Union Address – 1/28/2003
“We have also discovered through intelligence
that Iraq has a growing fleet of manned and unmanned aerial vehicles that could be used to disperse chemical or biological weapons across broad areas."
State of the Union Address – 1/28/2003
"Evidence from intelligence sources, secret communications and statements by people
now in custody reveal that
Saddam Hussein aids and protects terrorists, including members of Al Qaida."
State of the Union Address – 1/28/2003
"Our intelligence sources tell us that he (Saddam) has attempted to purchase high-strength aluminum tubes suitable for nuclear weapons production."
State of the Union Address – 1/28/2003
"Satellite photographs reveal that Iraq is rebuilding facilities at [past nuclear] sites."
Bush speech to the nation – 10/7/2002
Iraq is rebuilding nuclear facilities at former sites.
Not True
Two months of inspections at these former Iraqi nuclear sites found zero evidence of prohibited nuclear activities there
IAEA report to UN Security Council – 1/27/2003
"The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa."
State of the Union Address – 1/28/2003
"We know he's been absolutely devoted to trying to acquire nuclear weapons, and we believe he has, in fact, reconstituted nuclear weapons."
VP Dick Cheney – “Meet the Press” 3/16/2003
"We gave him a chance to allow the inspectors in, and he wouldn't let them in."
Bush Press Conference 7/14/2003
Purple Haze
Literally Stimulated
- Joined
- Sep 19, 2000
- Posts
- 19,290
Who Is Lying About Iraq?
Glad to help you out there, buddy...
Glad to help you out there, buddy...
BlueEyesInLevis
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Dec 10, 2003
- Posts
- 11,404
Purple Haze said:
IRAQ & WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION:
WHAT THE DEMOCRATS SAID
AND WHEN THEY SAID IT
Executive Summary:
Democrats Consistently Warned The Nation Of The
Threat Posed By Iraq’s Weapons Of Mass Destruction
Democrats, Circa 1998
President Bill Clinton: “[M]ark my words, [Saddam] will develop weapons of mass destruction.
He will deploy them, and he will use them.”
Vice President Al Gore: “Saddam’s ability to produce and deliver weapons of mass destruction
poses a grave threat … to the security of the world.”
Secretary Of State Madeleine Albright: “[W]e are concerned … about [Saddam’s] ability in
the long run … to threaten all of us with weapons of mass destruction.”
National Security Adviser Sandy Berger: “[Saddam] will rebuild his arsenal of weapons of
mass destruction, and someday, some way, I am certain, he will use that arsenal again.”
U.N. Ambassador Bill Richardson: “Facts are facts. Iraq has been deceiving the international
community with the weaponization of nerve gas. It’s that simple.”
Sen. Harry Reid (D-Nev.): “[Saddam] is too dangerous of a man to be given carte blanche
with weapons of mass destruction.”
Sen. Richard Durbin (D-Ill.): “[Saddam’s] chemical and biological weapons capabilities are
frightening.”
Democrats, Circa 2002
Former Vice President Al Gore: “We know that [Saddam] has stored away secret supplies of
biological weapons and chemical weapons throughout his country.”
Sen. Edward Kennedy (D-Mass.): “We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is
seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction.”
Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D-W.Va.): “Saddam’s existing biological and chemical weapons
capabilities pose real threats to America today, tomorrow.”
Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.): “These weapons represent an unacceptable threat.”
Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-N.Y.): “Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capability to
wage biological and chemical warfare and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons.”
BlueEyesInLevis
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Dec 10, 2003
- Posts
- 11,404
SEN. EDWARD KENNEDY: “What Was Said Before Does Matter. The
President’s Words Matter. The Vice President’s Words Matter. So Do Those
Of The Secretary Of State And The Secretary Of Defense And Other High
Officials In The Administration.” (Sen. Edward Kennedy, Congressional Record, 11/10/05)
FORMER PRESIDENT BILL CLINTON
President Bill Clinton Called Iraq “A Rogue State With Weapons Of Mass Destruction,
Ready To Use Them Or Provide Them To Terrorists…”
CLINTON: “In the next century, 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, drug traffickers, or organized criminals who travel the world among us unnoticed. If we fail to respond today, Saddam, and all those who would follow in his footsteps, will be emboldened tomorrow by the knowledge that they can act with impunity, even in the face of a clear message from the United Nations Security Council, and clear evidence of a weapons of mass destruction program.” (Bill Clinton, Remarks At The Pentagon, 2/17/98)
Clinton, On Saddam’s WMD:
“Some Day, Some Way, I Guarantee You He’ll Use The Arsenal. And I Think Every One Of You Who Has Really Worked On This For Any Length Of Time, Believes That, Too.”
CLINTON: “[L]et’s imagine the future. What if he fails to comply and we fail to act, or we take some ambiguous third route, which gives him yet more opportunities to develop this program of weapons of mass destruction and continue to press for the release of the sanctions and continue to ignore the solemn commitments that he made? Well, he will conclude that the international community has lost its will. He will then conclude that he can go right on and do more to rebuild an arsenal of devastating destruction. And some day, some way, I guarantee you he’ll use the arsenal. And I think every one of you who has really worked on this for any length of time, believes that, too.” (Bill Clinton, Remarks At The Pentagon, 2/17/98)
Clinton, On Saddam: “[M]ark My Words, He Will Develop Weapons Of Mass Destruction.
He Will Deploy Them, And He Will Use Them.” (Bill Clinton, Remarks At The White House, 12/16/98)
In November 1997, Clinton Directed Then-Secretary Of Defense William Cohen To “Raise
The Profile Of The Biological And Chemical Threat.”
“Cohen, meanwhile, was arguing that a true U.S. vital interest – and one that could easily be explained in public – was Iraqi weapons of mass destruction, often referred to in abbreviated terms as WMD. Clinton directed him on Nov. 13 to raise the profile of the biological and chemical threat. The following day, the former senator from Maine held a five-pound bag of sugar on ABC’s ‘This Week’ Sunday program and said the same quantity of anthrax could kill half the population of Washington.” (Barton Gellman, Dana Priest and Bradley Graham, “Diplomacy And Doubts On The Road To War,” The Washington Post, 3/1/98) Cohen, Following Clinton’s Orders On ABC’s “This Week:” “What Is On The Horizon
Is Anthrax, VX, Sarin, And Other Types Of Weapons Of Mass Destruction.”
COHEN: “All of his neighbors in the region, I think, are fearful of what Saddam Hussein has done in the past and apprehensive of what he might do in the future. We intend to intensify that
apprehension on their part by showing it’s not invasion of Kuwait, it’s not invasion of Saudi
Arabia that’s on the horizon. What is on the horizon is anthrax, VX, sarin, and other types of
weapons of mass destruction.” (ABC’s “This Week,” 11/16/97)
Clinton: “I Have No Doubt Today, That Left Unchecked, Saddam Hussein Will Use These
Terrible Weapons Again.”
CLINTON: “Other countries possess weapons of mass destruction and ballistic missiles. With Saddam, there is one big difference: He has used them, not once, but repeatedly. Unleashing chemical weapons against Iranian troops during a decade-long war. Not only against soldiers, but against civilians, firing Scud missiles at the citizens of Israel, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain and Iran. And not only against a foreign enemy, but even against his own people, gassing Kurdish civilians in Northern Iraq. The international community had little doubt then, and I have no doubt today, that left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will use these terrible weapons again.” (Bill Clinton, Remarks At The White House, 12/16/98)
Clinton Insisted Saddam Sat Atop The List Of “Predators Of The 21st Century.”
CLINTON: “[T]his is not a time free from peril, especially as a result of reckless acts of outlaw nations and an unholy axis of terrorists, drug traffickers and organized international criminals. We have to defend our future from these predators of the 21st century. … [T]hey 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’s Iraq. His regime threatens the safety of his people, the stability of his region and the security of all the rest of us.” (Bill Clinton, Remarks At The Pentagon, 2/17/98)
FORMER VICE PRESIDENT AL GORE
Vice President Al Gore Claimed “Saddam’s Ability To Produce And Deliver Weapons Of
Mass Destruction Poses A Grave Threat … To The Security Of The World.”
GORE: “There should be no doubt, Saddam’s ability to produce and deliver weapons of mass destruction poses a grave threat to the peace of that region and the security of the world. His defiance of the will of the international community to allow UNSCOM to do its job cannot and will not be tolerated.” (Al Gore, Remarks At The Pentagon, 2/17/98)
Gore: “If You Allow Someone Like Saddam Hussein To Get Nuclear Weapons, Ballistic
Missiles, Chemical Weapons, Biological Weapons, How Many People Is He Going To
Kill…?”
GORE: “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’s already demonstrated a willingness to use these weapons; he poison gassed his own people. He used poison gas and other weapons of mass destruction against his neighbors. This man has no compunctions about killing lots and lots of people.” (CNN’s “Larry King Live,” 12/16/98)
When Discussing Saddam’s Iraq, Gore Invoked The Specter Of “Ballistic Missiles, Nuclear
Weapons, Chemical And Biological Weapons.” “Remember, Peter, this is a man who has used
poison gas on his own people and on his neighbors repeatedly. He’s trying to get ballistic missiles,
nuclear weapons, chemical and biological weapons. He could be a mass murderer of the first order of magnitude. We are not going to allow that to happen.” (ABC News’ “Special Report,” 12/16/98)
Gore, In 2002: “We Know That [Saddam] Has Stored Away Secret Supplies Of Biological
Weapons And Chemical Weapons Throughout His Country.” (Al Gore, Remarks To The Commonwealth Club Of California, San Francisco, CA, 9/23/02)
FORMER SECRETARY OF STATE MADELEINE ALBRIGHT
Secretary Of State Madeleine Albright Said Saddam “Had The Capability With The VX
Agents To Destroy Every Man, Woman And Child On Earth.” ALBRIGHT: “Weapons of
mass destruction are the threat of the future. I think the president explained very clearly to the
American people that this is the threat of the 21st century. It’s hard to control, hard to get at, that
we need to – you know, Saddam Hussein had the capability with the VX agents to destroy every
man, woman and child on earth. So we have a serious problem here. He is a threat.” (PBS’ “The Newshour With Jim Lehrer,” 12/17/98)
Albright: “[W]e Are Concerned, As The President Said, About [Saddam’s] Ability In The
Long Run To Threaten His Neighbors, And Frankly, To Threaten All Of Us With Weapons
Of Mass Destruction.” (CNN’s “Larry King Live,” 12/16/98)
Albright Accused Saddam Of Pursuing Dual Threats To International Peace: Terrorism
And Weapons Of Mass Destruction.
ALBRIGHT: “Countering terror is one aspect of our struggle to maintain international security and peace. Limiting the dangers posed by weapons of mass destruction is a second. Saddam Hussein’s Iraq encompasses both of these challenges, while posing yet a third. … As we look ahead, we will decide how and when to respond to Iraq’s actions based on the threat they pose to Iraq’s neighbors, to regional security and to U.S. vital interests. Our assessment will include Saddam’s capacity to reconstitute, use or threaten to use weapons of mass destruction.” (Madeleine Albright, Remarks At The American Legion Convention, New Orleans, LA, 9/9/98)
Albright: “[Saddam] Has Chosen To Spend His Money On Building Weapons Of Mass
Destruction And Palaces For His Cronies.” (Madeleine Albright, Remarks To The Chicago Council On Foreign Relations, Chicago, IL, 11/12/99)
Albright Justified A December 1998 Attack On Iraq As A Way To Increase America’s
Security And “Deal With The Threat” Of Saddam’s Weapons.
ALBRIGHT: “President Clinton felt very strongly that it was in our national security interest to deal with the threat that Saddam Hussein’s weapons of mass destruction, their capability, their future capability of threatening us, the neighbors, the regional stability with them, and that we had a responsibility as the United States to deal with a threat of this kind.” (CNN’s “Early Edition,” 12/18/98)
Albright Argued Saddam’s Pursuit Of Weapons Of Mass Destruction And His Insistence
on Lifting Economic Sanctions Was An “Incompatible Position.”
ALBRIGHT: “The purpose of it … is to degrade Saddam Hussein’s ability to develop and deliver weapons of mass destruction, and to degrade his ability to threaten his neighbors. And the targets are related to that. They’re going after weapons of mass destruction facilities, after military facilities, command and control security. … [T]his is because Saddam Hussein has insisted that he wants to keep his weapons of mass destruction and have sanctions lifted, a clearly incompatible position.” (NBC’s “Today,” 12/18/98)
Albright Said The Risk That Rogue State Leaders Like Saddam “Will Use Nuclear,
Chemical Or Biological Weapons Against Us Or Our Allies Is The Greatest Security Threat
We Face.”
ALBRIGHT: “Iraq is a long way from [America], 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 security threat we face. And it is a threat against which we must and will stand firm. In discussing Iraq, we begin by knowing that Saddam Hussein, unlike any other leader, has used weapons of mass destruction even against his own people.” (CNN’s “Showdown With Iraq: International Town Meeting,” 2/18/98)
FORMER NATIONAL SECURITY ADVISER SANDY BERGER
National Security Adviser Sandy Berger Said Saddam “Will Rebuild His Arsenal Of
Weapons Of Mass Destruction, And Someday, Some Way, I Am Certain, He Will Use That
Arsenal Again.”
BERGER: “Some have suggested that we should basically turn away. We should
close our eyes to this effort to create a safe haven for weapons of mass destruction. But imagine the consequences if Saddam fails to comply and we fail to act. Saddam will be emboldened believing the international community has lost its will. He will rebuild his arsenal of weapons of mass destruction, and someday, some way, I am certain, he will use that arsenal again as he has 10 times since 1983.”(CNN’s “Showdown With Iraq: International Town Meeting,” 2/18/98)
Berger: “In The 21st Century, The Community Of Nations May See More And More Of
This Very Kind Of Threat That Iraq Poses Now, A Rogue State With Biological And
Chemical Weapons.” (CNN’s “Showdown With Iraq: International Town Meeting,” 2/18/98)
Berger Claimed It Was “Up To Saddam To Decide Whether He Wants Sanctions Relief By
Giving Up His Weapons Of Mass Destruction.”
BERGER: “n December, Saddam Hussein once again broke his commitment to cooperate with the U.N. inspectors, ignoring our warnings. The United States, together with our British allies, responded with military force. We attacked Iraq’s program to develop and deliver weapons of mass destruction and his capacity to threaten his neighbors, but we have not eliminated the danger and our resolve to curb the threat Saddam poses will not diminish. … It is up to Saddam to decide whether he wants sanctions relief by giving up his weapons of mass destruction.” (Sandy Berger, Remarks To Carnegie Endowment Non-Proliferation Conference, Washington, DC, 1/12/99)
Berger: “I Think The Question Is Whether, Ultimately, Iraq Will Get Rid Of Its Weapons
Of Mass Destruction.” (CBS’ “This Morning,” 11/16/98)
OTHER HIGH OFFICIALS IN THE CLINTON ADMINISTRATION
Former Secretary Of State Warren Christopher Said Saddam Developed And Used WMD
And Sponsored “Countless Acts Of Terrorism.” “The record is, unfortunately, all too clear.
Saddam has threatened and invaded his neighbors, developed and used weapons of mass
destruction, sponsored countless acts of terrorism, and for the last two decades, he has relentlessly persecuted the Kurds and the Shiites. When Saddam tests the will and resolve of the international community, our response must be and will be forceful and immediate.” (Warren Christopher, Remarks In Washington, DC, 9/3/96)
U.N. Ambassador Bill Richardson Linked Saddam To Anthrax, VX And Botulism, Warning
Those Weapons Might “Get In The Hands Of Terrorists That Saddam Is Supporting.”
RICHARDSON: “We’re [sic] what the American people want: contain Saddam Hussein from going after his neighbors, but also, go after these deadly weapons of anthrax, VX, botulisms, some that are very, very big threats to future generations of children, not just in the Persian Gulf and the Middle East, but around the world, if they get in the hands of terrorists that Saddam is supporting.” (CNN’s “Larry King Live,” 2/18/98)
Richardson: “Facts Are Facts. Iraq Has Been Deceiving The International Community
With The Weaponization Of Nerve Gas. It’s That Simple.” (Michel Leclercq, “UN Inspector Says Iraq Equipped Weapons With Lethal Gas,” Agence France Presse, 6/24/98)
State Department Spokesman Jamie Rubin: Saddam Had “Relentlessly Deceived And
Obstructed Efforts … To Identify And Destroy Iraq’s Weapons Of Mass Destruction.”
RUBIN: “[W]e have a lot of experience dealing with Saddam Hussein. For over seven years, their
leadership has relentlessly deceived and obstructed efforts by the international community to
identify and destroy Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction. Saddam Hussein has misled fellow Arab
leaders about his intention to invade Kuwait. He lied to UNSCOM when he said that he did not
weaponize VX … Iraq’s leadership has never expressed regret or remorse for his past actions, which include gassing his own people and invading Kuwait. We do not believe he has renounced his aggression or using the most ruthless and barbaric means to achieve it.” (Jamie Rubin, State Department Press Briefing, 11/10/98)
MORE from above...
Rubin: “If We Fail To Act, He Will Feel Emboldened To Threaten The Region Further,
Armed With Weapons Of Mass Destruction.” RUBIN: “Saddam Hussein is not an abstract
threat. He has fired Scuds at his neighbors, attacked Kuwait, used chemical weapons on Iran and
his own people. UNSCOM has shown, through its work, that he developed massive quantities
of chemical and biological weapons and weaponized those weapons for delivery by Scud
missiles. He has still not accounted for all these dangerous weapons. … f he continues to
block UNSCOM and we do not respond, he will be able to reconstitute his weapons of mass
destruction in a matter of months, not years. And if we fail to act, he will feel emboldened to
threaten the region further, armed with weapons of mass destruction.” (Jamie Rubin, State Department Press Briefing, 11/10/98)
Former Clinton Adviser Rahm Emanuel Called It “Insulting” That Anyone Would Question
Clinton’s ‘98 Airstrikes “Given Everything Saddam Has Done.”
EMANUEL: “And I think that if you really look at this, Larry, that it is wrong, and I think it’s insulting to the American people’s intelligence, insulting to the men and women and professional professors [sic?] in our country, and I think it’s detrimental to our foreign policy to really kind of question why we would go, given everything that Saddam Hussein has done over the years. We gave him one last chance.” (CNN’s “Larry King Live,” 12/16/98)
President’s Words Matter. The Vice President’s Words Matter. So Do Those
Of The Secretary Of State And The Secretary Of Defense And Other High
Officials In The Administration.” (Sen. Edward Kennedy, Congressional Record, 11/10/05)
FORMER PRESIDENT BILL CLINTON
President Bill Clinton Called Iraq “A Rogue State With Weapons Of Mass Destruction,
Ready To Use Them Or Provide Them To Terrorists…”
CLINTON: “In the next century, 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, drug traffickers, or organized criminals who travel the world among us unnoticed. If we fail to respond today, Saddam, and all those who would follow in his footsteps, will be emboldened tomorrow by the knowledge that they can act with impunity, even in the face of a clear message from the United Nations Security Council, and clear evidence of a weapons of mass destruction program.” (Bill Clinton, Remarks At The Pentagon, 2/17/98)
Clinton, On Saddam’s WMD:
“Some Day, Some Way, I Guarantee You He’ll Use The Arsenal. And I Think Every One Of You Who Has Really Worked On This For Any Length Of Time, Believes That, Too.”
CLINTON: “[L]et’s imagine the future. What if he fails to comply and we fail to act, or we take some ambiguous third route, which gives him yet more opportunities to develop this program of weapons of mass destruction and continue to press for the release of the sanctions and continue to ignore the solemn commitments that he made? Well, he will conclude that the international community has lost its will. He will then conclude that he can go right on and do more to rebuild an arsenal of devastating destruction. And some day, some way, I guarantee you he’ll use the arsenal. And I think every one of you who has really worked on this for any length of time, believes that, too.” (Bill Clinton, Remarks At The Pentagon, 2/17/98)
Clinton, On Saddam: “[M]ark My Words, He Will Develop Weapons Of Mass Destruction.
He Will Deploy Them, And He Will Use Them.” (Bill Clinton, Remarks At The White House, 12/16/98)
In November 1997, Clinton Directed Then-Secretary Of Defense William Cohen To “Raise
The Profile Of The Biological And Chemical Threat.”
“Cohen, meanwhile, was arguing that a true U.S. vital interest – and one that could easily be explained in public – was Iraqi weapons of mass destruction, often referred to in abbreviated terms as WMD. Clinton directed him on Nov. 13 to raise the profile of the biological and chemical threat. The following day, the former senator from Maine held a five-pound bag of sugar on ABC’s ‘This Week’ Sunday program and said the same quantity of anthrax could kill half the population of Washington.” (Barton Gellman, Dana Priest and Bradley Graham, “Diplomacy And Doubts On The Road To War,” The Washington Post, 3/1/98) Cohen, Following Clinton’s Orders On ABC’s “This Week:” “What Is On The Horizon
Is Anthrax, VX, Sarin, And Other Types Of Weapons Of Mass Destruction.”
COHEN: “All of his neighbors in the region, I think, are fearful of what Saddam Hussein has done in the past and apprehensive of what he might do in the future. We intend to intensify that
apprehension on their part by showing it’s not invasion of Kuwait, it’s not invasion of Saudi
Arabia that’s on the horizon. What is on the horizon is anthrax, VX, sarin, and other types of
weapons of mass destruction.” (ABC’s “This Week,” 11/16/97)
Clinton: “I Have No Doubt Today, That Left Unchecked, Saddam Hussein Will Use These
Terrible Weapons Again.”
CLINTON: “Other countries possess weapons of mass destruction and ballistic missiles. With Saddam, there is one big difference: He has used them, not once, but repeatedly. Unleashing chemical weapons against Iranian troops during a decade-long war. Not only against soldiers, but against civilians, firing Scud missiles at the citizens of Israel, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain and Iran. And not only against a foreign enemy, but even against his own people, gassing Kurdish civilians in Northern Iraq. The international community had little doubt then, and I have no doubt today, that left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will use these terrible weapons again.” (Bill Clinton, Remarks At The White House, 12/16/98)
Clinton Insisted Saddam Sat Atop The List Of “Predators Of The 21st Century.”
CLINTON: “[T]his is not a time free from peril, especially as a result of reckless acts of outlaw nations and an unholy axis of terrorists, drug traffickers and organized international criminals. We have to defend our future from these predators of the 21st century. … [T]hey 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’s Iraq. His regime threatens the safety of his people, the stability of his region and the security of all the rest of us.” (Bill Clinton, Remarks At The Pentagon, 2/17/98)
FORMER VICE PRESIDENT AL GORE
Vice President Al Gore Claimed “Saddam’s Ability To Produce And Deliver Weapons Of
Mass Destruction Poses A Grave Threat … To The Security Of The World.”
GORE: “There should be no doubt, Saddam’s ability to produce and deliver weapons of mass destruction poses a grave threat to the peace of that region and the security of the world. His defiance of the will of the international community to allow UNSCOM to do its job cannot and will not be tolerated.” (Al Gore, Remarks At The Pentagon, 2/17/98)
Gore: “If You Allow Someone Like Saddam Hussein To Get Nuclear Weapons, Ballistic
Missiles, Chemical Weapons, Biological Weapons, How Many People Is He Going To
Kill…?”
GORE: “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’s already demonstrated a willingness to use these weapons; he poison gassed his own people. He used poison gas and other weapons of mass destruction against his neighbors. This man has no compunctions about killing lots and lots of people.” (CNN’s “Larry King Live,” 12/16/98)
When Discussing Saddam’s Iraq, Gore Invoked The Specter Of “Ballistic Missiles, Nuclear
Weapons, Chemical And Biological Weapons.” “Remember, Peter, this is a man who has used
poison gas on his own people and on his neighbors repeatedly. He’s trying to get ballistic missiles,
nuclear weapons, chemical and biological weapons. He could be a mass murderer of the first order of magnitude. We are not going to allow that to happen.” (ABC News’ “Special Report,” 12/16/98)
Gore, In 2002: “We Know That [Saddam] Has Stored Away Secret Supplies Of Biological
Weapons And Chemical Weapons Throughout His Country.” (Al Gore, Remarks To The Commonwealth Club Of California, San Francisco, CA, 9/23/02)
FORMER SECRETARY OF STATE MADELEINE ALBRIGHT
Secretary Of State Madeleine Albright Said Saddam “Had The Capability With The VX
Agents To Destroy Every Man, Woman And Child On Earth.” ALBRIGHT: “Weapons of
mass destruction are the threat of the future. I think the president explained very clearly to the
American people that this is the threat of the 21st century. It’s hard to control, hard to get at, that
we need to – you know, Saddam Hussein had the capability with the VX agents to destroy every
man, woman and child on earth. So we have a serious problem here. He is a threat.” (PBS’ “The Newshour With Jim Lehrer,” 12/17/98)
Albright: “[W]e Are Concerned, As The President Said, About [Saddam’s] Ability In The
Long Run To Threaten His Neighbors, And Frankly, To Threaten All Of Us With Weapons
Of Mass Destruction.” (CNN’s “Larry King Live,” 12/16/98)
Albright Accused Saddam Of Pursuing Dual Threats To International Peace: Terrorism
And Weapons Of Mass Destruction.
ALBRIGHT: “Countering terror is one aspect of our struggle to maintain international security and peace. Limiting the dangers posed by weapons of mass destruction is a second. Saddam Hussein’s Iraq encompasses both of these challenges, while posing yet a third. … As we look ahead, we will decide how and when to respond to Iraq’s actions based on the threat they pose to Iraq’s neighbors, to regional security and to U.S. vital interests. Our assessment will include Saddam’s capacity to reconstitute, use or threaten to use weapons of mass destruction.” (Madeleine Albright, Remarks At The American Legion Convention, New Orleans, LA, 9/9/98)
Albright: “[Saddam] Has Chosen To Spend His Money On Building Weapons Of Mass
Destruction And Palaces For His Cronies.” (Madeleine Albright, Remarks To The Chicago Council On Foreign Relations, Chicago, IL, 11/12/99)
Albright Justified A December 1998 Attack On Iraq As A Way To Increase America’s
Security And “Deal With The Threat” Of Saddam’s Weapons.
ALBRIGHT: “President Clinton felt very strongly that it was in our national security interest to deal with the threat that Saddam Hussein’s weapons of mass destruction, their capability, their future capability of threatening us, the neighbors, the regional stability with them, and that we had a responsibility as the United States to deal with a threat of this kind.” (CNN’s “Early Edition,” 12/18/98)
Albright Argued Saddam’s Pursuit Of Weapons Of Mass Destruction And His Insistence
on Lifting Economic Sanctions Was An “Incompatible Position.”
ALBRIGHT: “The purpose of it … is to degrade Saddam Hussein’s ability to develop and deliver weapons of mass destruction, and to degrade his ability to threaten his neighbors. And the targets are related to that. They’re going after weapons of mass destruction facilities, after military facilities, command and control security. … [T]his is because Saddam Hussein has insisted that he wants to keep his weapons of mass destruction and have sanctions lifted, a clearly incompatible position.” (NBC’s “Today,” 12/18/98)
Albright Said The Risk That Rogue State Leaders Like Saddam “Will Use Nuclear,
Chemical Or Biological Weapons Against Us Or Our Allies Is The Greatest Security Threat
We Face.”
ALBRIGHT: “Iraq is a long way from [America], 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 security threat we face. And it is a threat against which we must and will stand firm. In discussing Iraq, we begin by knowing that Saddam Hussein, unlike any other leader, has used weapons of mass destruction even against his own people.” (CNN’s “Showdown With Iraq: International Town Meeting,” 2/18/98)
FORMER NATIONAL SECURITY ADVISER SANDY BERGER
National Security Adviser Sandy Berger Said Saddam “Will Rebuild His Arsenal Of
Weapons Of Mass Destruction, And Someday, Some Way, I Am Certain, He Will Use That
Arsenal Again.”
BERGER: “Some have suggested that we should basically turn away. We should
close our eyes to this effort to create a safe haven for weapons of mass destruction. But imagine the consequences if Saddam fails to comply and we fail to act. Saddam will be emboldened believing the international community has lost its will. He will rebuild his arsenal of weapons of mass destruction, and someday, some way, I am certain, he will use that arsenal again as he has 10 times since 1983.”(CNN’s “Showdown With Iraq: International Town Meeting,” 2/18/98)
Berger: “In The 21st Century, The Community Of Nations May See More And More Of
This Very Kind Of Threat That Iraq Poses Now, A Rogue State With Biological And
Chemical Weapons.” (CNN’s “Showdown With Iraq: International Town Meeting,” 2/18/98)
Berger Claimed It Was “Up To Saddam To Decide Whether He Wants Sanctions Relief By
Giving Up His Weapons Of Mass Destruction.”
BERGER: “n December, Saddam Hussein once again broke his commitment to cooperate with the U.N. inspectors, ignoring our warnings. The United States, together with our British allies, responded with military force. We attacked Iraq’s program to develop and deliver weapons of mass destruction and his capacity to threaten his neighbors, but we have not eliminated the danger and our resolve to curb the threat Saddam poses will not diminish. … It is up to Saddam to decide whether he wants sanctions relief by giving up his weapons of mass destruction.” (Sandy Berger, Remarks To Carnegie Endowment Non-Proliferation Conference, Washington, DC, 1/12/99)
Berger: “I Think The Question Is Whether, Ultimately, Iraq Will Get Rid Of Its Weapons
Of Mass Destruction.” (CBS’ “This Morning,” 11/16/98)
OTHER HIGH OFFICIALS IN THE CLINTON ADMINISTRATION
Former Secretary Of State Warren Christopher Said Saddam Developed And Used WMD
And Sponsored “Countless Acts Of Terrorism.” “The record is, unfortunately, all too clear.
Saddam has threatened and invaded his neighbors, developed and used weapons of mass
destruction, sponsored countless acts of terrorism, and for the last two decades, he has relentlessly persecuted the Kurds and the Shiites. When Saddam tests the will and resolve of the international community, our response must be and will be forceful and immediate.” (Warren Christopher, Remarks In Washington, DC, 9/3/96)
U.N. Ambassador Bill Richardson Linked Saddam To Anthrax, VX And Botulism, Warning
Those Weapons Might “Get In The Hands Of Terrorists That Saddam Is Supporting.”
RICHARDSON: “We’re [sic] what the American people want: contain Saddam Hussein from going after his neighbors, but also, go after these deadly weapons of anthrax, VX, botulisms, some that are very, very big threats to future generations of children, not just in the Persian Gulf and the Middle East, but around the world, if they get in the hands of terrorists that Saddam is supporting.” (CNN’s “Larry King Live,” 2/18/98)
Richardson: “Facts Are Facts. Iraq Has Been Deceiving The International Community
With The Weaponization Of Nerve Gas. It’s That Simple.” (Michel Leclercq, “UN Inspector Says Iraq Equipped Weapons With Lethal Gas,” Agence France Presse, 6/24/98)
State Department Spokesman Jamie Rubin: Saddam Had “Relentlessly Deceived And
Obstructed Efforts … To Identify And Destroy Iraq’s Weapons Of Mass Destruction.”
RUBIN: “[W]e have a lot of experience dealing with Saddam Hussein. For over seven years, their
leadership has relentlessly deceived and obstructed efforts by the international community to
identify and destroy Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction. Saddam Hussein has misled fellow Arab
leaders about his intention to invade Kuwait. He lied to UNSCOM when he said that he did not
weaponize VX … Iraq’s leadership has never expressed regret or remorse for his past actions, which include gassing his own people and invading Kuwait. We do not believe he has renounced his aggression or using the most ruthless and barbaric means to achieve it.” (Jamie Rubin, State Department Press Briefing, 11/10/98)
MORE from above...
Rubin: “If We Fail To Act, He Will Feel Emboldened To Threaten The Region Further,
Armed With Weapons Of Mass Destruction.” RUBIN: “Saddam Hussein is not an abstract
threat. He has fired Scuds at his neighbors, attacked Kuwait, used chemical weapons on Iran and
his own people. UNSCOM has shown, through its work, that he developed massive quantities
of chemical and biological weapons and weaponized those weapons for delivery by Scud
missiles. He has still not accounted for all these dangerous weapons. … f he continues to
block UNSCOM and we do not respond, he will be able to reconstitute his weapons of mass
destruction in a matter of months, not years. And if we fail to act, he will feel emboldened to
threaten the region further, armed with weapons of mass destruction.” (Jamie Rubin, State Department Press Briefing, 11/10/98)
Former Clinton Adviser Rahm Emanuel Called It “Insulting” That Anyone Would Question
Clinton’s ‘98 Airstrikes “Given Everything Saddam Has Done.”
EMANUEL: “And I think that if you really look at this, Larry, that it is wrong, and I think it’s insulting to the American people’s intelligence, insulting to the men and women and professional professors [sic?] in our country, and I think it’s detrimental to our foreign policy to really kind of question why we would go, given everything that Saddam Hussein has done over the years. We gave him one last chance.” (CNN’s “Larry King Live,” 12/16/98)
BlueEyesInLevis
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Dec 10, 2003
- Posts
- 11,404
and MORE....
DURING THE CLINTON ADMINISTRATION, LEADING DEMOCRAT
SENATORS CAUTIONED AMERICANS ABOUT THE THREAT POSED BY
IRAQ’S WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION
In 1998, Sen. Carl Levin And Twenty-Six Other Senators Urged President Clinton “To Take
Necessary Actions” In Response To Iraq’s Weapons Of Mass Destruction Programs.
LEVIN: “Mr. President, today, along with Senators McCain, Lieberman, Hutchison and twentythree other Senators, I am sending a letter to the President to express our concern over Iraq’s actions and urging the President ‘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.’” (Sen. Carl Levin, Congressional Record, 10/9/98)
Fourteen Democrats, Including Then-Senate Democrat Leader Tom Daschle And 2004
Presidential Nominee John Kerry, Signed The Letter To President Clinton: (“Letter To President Clinton,”
As Entered Into The Congressional Record By Sen. Carl Levin, 10/9/98)
Carl Levin (D-Mich.) Joe Lieberman (D-Conn.) Frank Lautenberg (D-N.J.) Chris Dodd (D-Conn.) Bob Kerrey (D-Neb.) Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) Barbara Mikulski (D-Md.) Thomas Daschle (D-S.D.) John Breaux (D-La.) Tim Johnson (D-S.D.) Daniel Inouye (D-Hawaii) Mary Landrieu (D-La.) Wendell Ford (D-Ky.) John Kerry (D-Mass.) Former Senate Democrat Leader
Tom Daschle (D-S.D.) Warned Of The Danger Of Saddam’s Weapons Of Mass Destruction. DASCHLE: “Iraq’s actions pose a serious and continued threat to international peace and security. It is a threat we must address. … 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. It is essential that a dictator like Saddam not be allowed to evade international strictures and wield frightening weapons of mass destruction.” (Sen. Tom Daschle, Congressional Record, 2/12/98)
After The 1998 Bombing Of Iraq, Sen. Harry Reid (D-Nev.) Warned Against “Partisan
Finger-Pointing” And Said Saddam Was “Too Dangerous … To Be Given Carte Blanche
With Weapons Of Mass Destruction.” “We had to attack. [President Clinton] had to do what his military advisors told him he should do,’ said Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev. …
[A]dded Reid, ‘Now is not the time for second-guessing or partisan finger-pointing. National security concerns must come first.’ Saddam Hussein ‘is too dangerous of a man to be given carte blanche with weapons of mass destruction,’ he added.” (Brendan Riley, “Nevada Leaders React To Iraq Bombing,” The Associated Press, 12/26/98)
Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.) Argued That Saddam “Obviously” Was Working, “Secretly And
Otherwise,” On Weapons Of Mass Destruction. KERRY: “Mr. President, over the years, a
consensus has developed within the international community that the production and use of
weapons of mass destruction has to be halted. We and others worked hard to develop arms control regimes toward that end, but obviously Saddam Hussein’s goal is to do otherwise. Iraq and North Korea and others have made it clear that they are still trying, secretly and otherwise, to develop those weapons.” (Sen. John Kerry, Congressional Record, 10/10/98)
Kerry Said Saddam Used Weapons Of Mass Destruction In The Past And Wanted “To
Try … To Continue To Do So.” “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. … It is a threat with respect to the potential of terrorist activities on a global basis.” (Sen. John Kerry, Press Conference, 2/23/98)
DURING THE CLINTON ADMINISTRATION, LEADING DEMOCRAT
SENATORS CAUTIONED AMERICANS ABOUT THE THREAT POSED BY
IRAQ’S WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION
In 1998, Sen. Carl Levin And Twenty-Six Other Senators Urged President Clinton “To Take
Necessary Actions” In Response To Iraq’s Weapons Of Mass Destruction Programs.
LEVIN: “Mr. President, today, along with Senators McCain, Lieberman, Hutchison and twentythree other Senators, I am sending a letter to the President to express our concern over Iraq’s actions and urging the President ‘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.’” (Sen. Carl Levin, Congressional Record, 10/9/98)
Fourteen Democrats, Including Then-Senate Democrat Leader Tom Daschle And 2004
Presidential Nominee John Kerry, Signed The Letter To President Clinton: (“Letter To President Clinton,”
As Entered Into The Congressional Record By Sen. Carl Levin, 10/9/98)
Carl Levin (D-Mich.) Joe Lieberman (D-Conn.) Frank Lautenberg (D-N.J.) Chris Dodd (D-Conn.) Bob Kerrey (D-Neb.) Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) Barbara Mikulski (D-Md.) Thomas Daschle (D-S.D.) John Breaux (D-La.) Tim Johnson (D-S.D.) Daniel Inouye (D-Hawaii) Mary Landrieu (D-La.) Wendell Ford (D-Ky.) John Kerry (D-Mass.) Former Senate Democrat Leader
Tom Daschle (D-S.D.) Warned Of The Danger Of Saddam’s Weapons Of Mass Destruction. DASCHLE: “Iraq’s actions pose a serious and continued threat to international peace and security. It is a threat we must address. … 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. It is essential that a dictator like Saddam not be allowed to evade international strictures and wield frightening weapons of mass destruction.” (Sen. Tom Daschle, Congressional Record, 2/12/98)
After The 1998 Bombing Of Iraq, Sen. Harry Reid (D-Nev.) Warned Against “Partisan
Finger-Pointing” And Said Saddam Was “Too Dangerous … To Be Given Carte Blanche
With Weapons Of Mass Destruction.” “We had to attack. [President Clinton] had to do what his military advisors told him he should do,’ said Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev. …
[A]dded Reid, ‘Now is not the time for second-guessing or partisan finger-pointing. National security concerns must come first.’ Saddam Hussein ‘is too dangerous of a man to be given carte blanche with weapons of mass destruction,’ he added.” (Brendan Riley, “Nevada Leaders React To Iraq Bombing,” The Associated Press, 12/26/98)
Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.) Argued That Saddam “Obviously” Was Working, “Secretly And
Otherwise,” On Weapons Of Mass Destruction. KERRY: “Mr. President, over the years, a
consensus has developed within the international community that the production and use of
weapons of mass destruction has to be halted. We and others worked hard to develop arms control regimes toward that end, but obviously Saddam Hussein’s goal is to do otherwise. Iraq and North Korea and others have made it clear that they are still trying, secretly and otherwise, to develop those weapons.” (Sen. John Kerry, Congressional Record, 10/10/98)
Kerry Said Saddam Used Weapons Of Mass Destruction In The Past And Wanted “To
Try … To Continue To Do So.” “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. … It is a threat with respect to the potential of terrorist activities on a global basis.” (Sen. John Kerry, Press Conference, 2/23/98)
Purple Haze
Literally Stimulated
- Joined
- Sep 19, 2000
- Posts
- 19,290
Too bad Bush didn't know he was lying...
Pookie
Chop!! Chop!!
- Joined
- Aug 25, 2002
- Posts
- 58,778
BlueEyesInLevis said:
Well, you are the expert at pointing out liberals and conservatives ...
https://forum.literotica.com/showthread.php?t=383013&page=9&pp=25
Purple Haze
Literally Stimulated
- Joined
- Sep 19, 2000
- Posts
- 19,290
I'm guessing BlueEyesInLevis is reluctant to talk about his days in the Brownies...
BlueEyesInLevis
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Dec 10, 2003
- Posts
- 11,404
Dont tell you you're gonna deny being a liberal!Pookie said:Well, you are the expert at pointing out liberals and conservatives ...
https://forum.literotica.com/showthread.php?t=383013&page=9&pp=25
Pookie
Chop!! Chop!!
- Joined
- Aug 25, 2002
- Posts
- 58,778
Purple Haze said:
I'm gonna continue to give him the benefit of the doubt and just call him a fool for believing such sloppy intelligence. I'll give him style points for wrapping it up into a really nice package for the Congress though. It's a shame that so many waited to open it and take a close look at their present, and now want to return it for a refund.
Purple Haze
Literally Stimulated
- Joined
- Sep 19, 2000
- Posts
- 19,290
Do you think we can take Bush back?
He is defective...
He is defective...
busybody..
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Jul 28, 2002
- Posts
- 149,503
Remember — please remember — ‘Boogie to Baghdad’
I have to admit that I have failed miserably in my small effort to make the words “Boogie to Baghdad” part of the national conversation on ties between al Qaeda and Saddam Hussein’s Iraq.
In case you don’t remember, “Boogie to Baghdad” is the phrase that Richard Clarke, when he was the top White House counterterrorism official during the Clinton administration, used to express his fear that if American forces pushed Osama bin Laden too hard at his hideout in Afghanistan, bin Laden might move to Iraq, where he could stay in the protection of Saddam Hussein.
Clarke’s opinion was based on intelligence indicating a number of contacts between al Qaeda and Iraq, including word that Saddam had offered bin Laden safe haven.
It’s all laid out in the Sept. 11 commission report. “Boogie to Baghdad” is on Page 134.
Now, given the intensity of the current debate over prewar intelligence and the role of al Qaeda and Iraq, you might think that would have attracted some notice — if only because “Boogie to Baghdad” is a nice, catchy phrase that editors would find irresistible for headlines.
But, no. A search of the LexisNexis database reveals only about a dozen instances in which the phrase has appeared. A significant number of them were in articles by me, either in this newspaper or in National Review. Most of the others were in The Weekly Standard.
According to the database, the phrase has never appeared in The Washington Post, The New York Times, the Los Angeles Times, Newsweek, Time or similar publications. It’s as if those words — and the Sept. 11 commission report that revealed them — never existed.
If you’ve forgotten, here’s the short version of the story behind “Boogie to Baghdad,” taken from the Sept. 11 report:
In 1996, after bin Laden moved from Sudan to Afghanistan, he wasn’t sure if he would be able to get along with his new Taliban hosts. So he made inquiries about moving to Iraq.
Saddam wasn’t interested. At the time, he was trying to have better relations with his neighbors — and bin Laden’s enemy — the Saudis.
But a bit later, Saddam apparently changed his mind. According to the report:
“In March 1998, after bin Laden’s public fatwa against the United States, two al Qaeda members reportedly went to Iraq to meet with Iraqi intelligence. In July, an Iraqi delegation traveled to Afghanistan to meet first with the Taliban and then with bin Laden.”
Still nothing happened. But later:
“Similar meetings between Iraqi officials and bin Laden or his aides may have occurred in 1999 during a period of some reported strains with the Taliban. According to the [intelligence] reporting, Iraqi officials offered bin Laden a safe haven in Iraq. Bin Laden declined, apparently judging that his circumstances in Afghanistan remained more favorable than the Iraqi alternative.”
It was in that context that Clarke believed that if the United States made bin Laden’s situation too hot in Afghanistan, then, in Clarke’s non-famous words, “old wily Osama will likely boogie to Baghdad.”
Now, that doesn’t at all suggest that Iraq had a role in Sept. 11, but it certainly does suggest a relationship between Saddam and al Qaeda.
That’s important, because these days Democrats are poring through old statements by Bush administration officials, looking for evidence to support their claim that the president “lied” us into war in Iraq.
One such statement that has been kicked around recently comes from an appearance by Vice President Dick Cheney on NBC’s “Meet the Press” on Sept. 8, 2002, in the run-up to the war.
Moderator Tim Russert played a clip from the vice president’s appearance a year earlier — just days after the Sept. 11 attacks — in which Russert asked, “Do you have any evidence linking Saddam Hussein or Iraq to this operation?”
“No,” Cheney said.
In 2002, Russert asked, “Has anything changed, in your mind?”
“I’m not here today to make a specific allegation that Iraq was somehow responsible for 9/11,” Cheney said. “I can’t say that. On the other hand, since we did that [2001] interview, new information has come to light. And we spent time looking at that relationship between Iraq, on the one hand, and the al Qaeda organization on the other. And there has been reporting that suggests that there have been a number of contacts over the years.”
Cheney mentioned the still-disputed/alleged/possible/discredited/maybe meeting between lead hijacker Mohamed Atta and Iraqi agents in Prague. It was the subject of some dispute, he added. “The debates about, you know, was he there or wasn’t he there, again, it’s the intelligence business,” Cheney said.
Was there anything else? Russert asked.
“I want to separate out 9/11 from the other relationships between Iraq and the al Qaeda organization,” Cheney said. “But there is a pattern of relationships going back many years.”
Which leaves just one question. In light of the Sept. 11 commission’s report — and no matter what Democrats say — what was wrong with that?
I have to admit that I have failed miserably in my small effort to make the words “Boogie to Baghdad” part of the national conversation on ties between al Qaeda and Saddam Hussein’s Iraq.
In case you don’t remember, “Boogie to Baghdad” is the phrase that Richard Clarke, when he was the top White House counterterrorism official during the Clinton administration, used to express his fear that if American forces pushed Osama bin Laden too hard at his hideout in Afghanistan, bin Laden might move to Iraq, where he could stay in the protection of Saddam Hussein.
Clarke’s opinion was based on intelligence indicating a number of contacts between al Qaeda and Iraq, including word that Saddam had offered bin Laden safe haven.
It’s all laid out in the Sept. 11 commission report. “Boogie to Baghdad” is on Page 134.
Now, given the intensity of the current debate over prewar intelligence and the role of al Qaeda and Iraq, you might think that would have attracted some notice — if only because “Boogie to Baghdad” is a nice, catchy phrase that editors would find irresistible for headlines.
But, no. A search of the LexisNexis database reveals only about a dozen instances in which the phrase has appeared. A significant number of them were in articles by me, either in this newspaper or in National Review. Most of the others were in The Weekly Standard.
According to the database, the phrase has never appeared in The Washington Post, The New York Times, the Los Angeles Times, Newsweek, Time or similar publications. It’s as if those words — and the Sept. 11 commission report that revealed them — never existed.
If you’ve forgotten, here’s the short version of the story behind “Boogie to Baghdad,” taken from the Sept. 11 report:
In 1996, after bin Laden moved from Sudan to Afghanistan, he wasn’t sure if he would be able to get along with his new Taliban hosts. So he made inquiries about moving to Iraq.
Saddam wasn’t interested. At the time, he was trying to have better relations with his neighbors — and bin Laden’s enemy — the Saudis.
But a bit later, Saddam apparently changed his mind. According to the report:
“In March 1998, after bin Laden’s public fatwa against the United States, two al Qaeda members reportedly went to Iraq to meet with Iraqi intelligence. In July, an Iraqi delegation traveled to Afghanistan to meet first with the Taliban and then with bin Laden.”
Still nothing happened. But later:
“Similar meetings between Iraqi officials and bin Laden or his aides may have occurred in 1999 during a period of some reported strains with the Taliban. According to the [intelligence] reporting, Iraqi officials offered bin Laden a safe haven in Iraq. Bin Laden declined, apparently judging that his circumstances in Afghanistan remained more favorable than the Iraqi alternative.”
It was in that context that Clarke believed that if the United States made bin Laden’s situation too hot in Afghanistan, then, in Clarke’s non-famous words, “old wily Osama will likely boogie to Baghdad.”
Now, that doesn’t at all suggest that Iraq had a role in Sept. 11, but it certainly does suggest a relationship between Saddam and al Qaeda.
That’s important, because these days Democrats are poring through old statements by Bush administration officials, looking for evidence to support their claim that the president “lied” us into war in Iraq.
One such statement that has been kicked around recently comes from an appearance by Vice President Dick Cheney on NBC’s “Meet the Press” on Sept. 8, 2002, in the run-up to the war.
Moderator Tim Russert played a clip from the vice president’s appearance a year earlier — just days after the Sept. 11 attacks — in which Russert asked, “Do you have any evidence linking Saddam Hussein or Iraq to this operation?”
“No,” Cheney said.
In 2002, Russert asked, “Has anything changed, in your mind?”
“I’m not here today to make a specific allegation that Iraq was somehow responsible for 9/11,” Cheney said. “I can’t say that. On the other hand, since we did that [2001] interview, new information has come to light. And we spent time looking at that relationship between Iraq, on the one hand, and the al Qaeda organization on the other. And there has been reporting that suggests that there have been a number of contacts over the years.”
Cheney mentioned the still-disputed/alleged/possible/discredited/maybe meeting between lead hijacker Mohamed Atta and Iraqi agents in Prague. It was the subject of some dispute, he added. “The debates about, you know, was he there or wasn’t he there, again, it’s the intelligence business,” Cheney said.
Was there anything else? Russert asked.
“I want to separate out 9/11 from the other relationships between Iraq and the al Qaeda organization,” Cheney said. “But there is a pattern of relationships going back many years.”
Which leaves just one question. In light of the Sept. 11 commission’s report — and no matter what Democrats say — what was wrong with that?
Purple Haze
Literally Stimulated
- Joined
- Sep 19, 2000
- Posts
- 19,290
Weevil said:
Of course he does, he'd just rather not think about it too hard...
Purple Haze
Literally Stimulated
- Joined
- Sep 19, 2000
- Posts
- 19,290
Pookie said:
I'm too cynical, Bush's stupidity has gotten him off too many times before.
Enough pockets have been filled, he doesn't have to sell it anymore...
Similar threads
