Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(NewsMax)   "I would use the five-letter word: deceit." -- Floriduh Senator Bob Graham   ( divider line
    More: Florida  
•       •       •

5841 clicks; posted to Main » on 19 Jul 2003 at 10:08 PM (14 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»

125 Comments     (+0 »)

Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Newest | Show all

2003-07-19 11:51:42 PM  
So if Clinton were in the same position as Bush right now you'd be Ok with that?
2003-07-19 11:54:30 PM  
livefree42....if your talking to me:

to be completely honest, yes. we still wouldve gotten rid of saddam, and it HAS only been 3-4 months.....proof that WMD could come in many months down the road.
2003-07-20 12:00:01 AM  
"Now, let's imagine the future. What if he [Saddam] 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? 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 someday,
some way, I guarantee you, he will use the arsenal"
- Bill Clinton, Meet the Press, February 17, 1996 .

Transcript: President Clinton explains Iraq strike
CLINTON: "Good evening.

Earlier today, I ordered America's armed forces to strike
military and security targets in Iraq. They are joined by
British forces. Their mission is to attack Iraq's nuclear,
chemical and biological weapons programs and its military
capacity to threaten its neighbors.

Their purpose is to protect the national interest of the
United States, and indeed the interests of people throughout
the Middle East and around the world.

Saddam Hussein must not be allowed to threaten his neighbors
or the world with nuclear arms, poison gas or biological weapons."
Bill Clinton killed lots of innocent people with his lies. I'll never forget watching the footage from a TV camera in the nose of a bomb as hit a train full of civilians crossing a bridge in Serbia. Slobo didn't give up until Klintoon bombed non-military targets in and around Belgrade. Like a chemical facility on the edge of town that belched clouds of chlorine gas and left puddles of mercury in its wake. And nobody ever found any of the ''mass graves'' Klintoon used to justify his penis war. The Sink Emperor claimed tens of thousands, up to a hundred thousand were ethnically cleansed. Five years later and Slobo's death count stands at about 2,500, most of whom were killed after Klintoon started bombing. He only made things worse.

Saddam killed 2,500 folks before breakfast on a regular basis. But they were brown Iraqis, so liberals still don't care about them. Gotta love that!
2003-07-20 12:00:10 AM  
I remember, back in the day, when Clinton was bombing the shiate out of Iraq? Remember how all the lefties were pitching a fit? They don't.
2003-07-20 12:01:29 AM  
So what if there are no WMD. Still Ok?

What about the fact that maybe this is more about an American Empire, which its virtues can be debated, but were not. Because all we heard about is WMD, and how we were in imminant danger. Fear is not the kind of thing that allows people to debate the consequences of putting our troops and our respectability on the line.
2003-07-20 12:02:07 AM  

I was.
2003-07-20 12:03:11 AM  
Remember how even Clinton said that the war with Iraq was justified?

The world is a better place without Saddam in power- wmd or no wmd.
2003-07-20 12:03:32 AM  
Of course I thought clinton was a schmuck too, so, whatever... :)
2003-07-20 12:05:32 AM  
Tinian, GREAT transcript. can ask what the source is? id love to use that on unsuspecting liberals ;)
2003-07-20 12:15:56 AM  
I'm a liberal who was against bombing Kosovo.
2003-07-20 12:25:50 AM  
Transcript: President Clinton explains Iraq strike
Ref at:​html

Let's see if this works -- or click here
2003-07-20 12:28:11 AM  
My atempt at a hot link didn't work so you'll have to cut & paste.
2003-07-20 12:31:24 AM  
thank you kindly....and dont worry about th hotlink, i still cant bold or italicize text lol
2003-07-20 12:35:27 AM  
It seems that there may be a shortage of pigeonholes out there today.

I heard that E-bay has good deals on straw men.
2003-07-20 12:35:52 AM  
SerenityNowInsanityLater wrote:
where is your proof that bush lied? im talking solid PROOF that saddam never had dangeorus weapons. do you think he never had them because we havent found them yet after only 3-4 months?

We don't have to prove that Saddam never had dangerous weapons; indeed he did (at least at one time), as they were provided to him by the United States. You are right, perhaps 3-4 months is not enough time to find them. But what you seem to have trouble understanding is that Bush said he had "PROOF" that Saddam currently had WMDs. Bush didn't just say that he was pretty darn sure, he said he had "PROOF." So we don't need to see the weapons, all we need to see is the proof. Unfortunately this "PROOF" never existed because Bush lied.
2003-07-20 12:37:51 AM  
and just how do you know the proof never existed?
2003-07-20 12:40:26 AM  
So if there was proof, does that mean that there isn't proof now of WMD? Did it disappear?
2003-07-20 12:43:20 AM  
So SerenityNowInsanityLater let me ask you this.

Where were you when Rumsfeld was shaking Saddam's hand in 1983?
Where were you when Saddam as our ally in the 80's was using chemical weapons against the iranians?
Where were you when the Reagan administration was selling biological and chemical weapons to iraq, yet at the same time were selling weapons to the iranians to fund right-wing militas in latin America?

Once you get those answers, I am sure liberals like myself can sleep peacefully that those same people that helped saddam in the reagan administration are back in power with Bush II.

Oh, and Tinian. A bit of history for you.

Did you know that after the Gulf war in 1991, President George H. Bush said that the Iraqi's should overthrough their oppressive dictator? Well he did, but the revolt was brutally crushed because american soldiers were comanded not help at all. They watched from the sidelines as thousands of people were killed and their bodies were put in mass graves.

Just to let you both know, if a president says that a country is an imminent threat with tons of biological and chemical weapons he had better be absouletly correct. And don't be a farking fool to not believe that we were not watching every move that was made by them even if they wanted to transport them to another location. It has been 3 months. We should have found somehting by now but we have found NOTHING!!!
2003-07-20 12:43:36 AM  
well, what do you want bush to do? lay out exactly what kind of top-secret intelligence that he received from the cia and fbi that solidified the fact that saddam had WMD? dont you think that that sort of information is classified? there is SO much stuff that the american public doesnt know about this and wont know about it for many, many years. we may never know all the details
2003-07-20 12:44:15 AM  
Only democrats would care if bush made up an excuse to go to war with saddam. Honestly the whitehouse needed a better excuse to go to war other than that saddam was a brutal killer of his own people. If they needed to fabricate something to get the right job done, then so be it. One soldier or 3 soldiers per day is small potatoes compared to other wars and occupations. The honest truth is that our country is doing the right thing by gettin rid of despotic people. Shame on those who aren't supporting our troops or defending our president. Democrats are just angry cause they didn't come up with something as good as WMD.
If anybody thinks that slobo didn't kill more than 2,500 people then they need to wake up and smell the friggin coffe. He was the butcher of the balkans. He killed a whole lot more.
2003-07-20 12:45:43 AM  
--i was born in 1984. when rumsfeld shook saddam's hand i obvioulsy wanst alive. what were you up to back then?
--again, the 80's, too young to know anything
--AGAIN....reagan era...too young. sorry

hey, you asked me where i was
2003-07-20 12:47:38 AM  
and another thing ich bin whatever.....
id like to see the source you sited about the americans doing nothing to help the rebellion of the iraqi people. and oyu coudlnt relistically have thought this would have taken a matter of 2 or 3 months. if so oyu have no grasp on the reality of military and global politics
2003-07-20 12:54:37 AM  
OK, regular people might not have microphones following them around from day to day, but most of their public actions aren't scripted and we kind of know when not screwing up is important. I mean, if you can't read a farking speech off a teleprompter correctly, you're a dumbshiat. I'm sure that this guy rehearsed the speech.

If the dems lose the next election, they really can't blame anybody but themselves. . . It's not like there isn't enough ammo for them to use against the current administration. . .
2003-07-20 12:54:47 AM
2003-07-20 12:57:17 AM  
Oh excuse me then.


Oh great and wonderful leader let sing songs about you. You who have vanquisged the great evil that is Saddam and the foul Osama bin Laden. He who has made this world a utopia beyond words. I am so happy to exist alongside the great leader that he has the wisdom to lead our nation to victory!!

Is that right? I think that sounded a bit too much like North Korea, but that is a false accustation because North Korea is not a danger to us or anyone. They are absolutely Peaceful! No danger at all,you farking idiot!

Ariontk421 You are naive little fool. "The honest truth is that our country is doing the right thing by gettin rid of despotic people "
Wake up and smell reality. We will not be doing this anytime soon or in a long time. If we really were doing this in the name of "Liberation" We would be going after the following countries and liberating the people:
SAUDI ARABIA, Kuwait, Iran, Qatar, Egypt, Jordan, Syria, Congo, PAKISTAN, Tibet, Baharain, yemen, and the list goes on. None of these countries will be freed because we don't want them to, or because their despotic leaders are our allies.
2003-07-20 12:57:20 AM  
Simply stated, there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons of mass destruction.

Dick Cheney
Speech to VFW National Convention
August 26, 2002
Right now, Iraq is expanding and improving facilities that were used for the production of biological weapons.

George W. Bush
Speech to UN General Assembly
September 12, 2002
If he declares he has none, then we will know that Saddam Hussein is once again misleading the world.

Ari Fleischer
Press Briefing
December 2, 2002
We know for a fact that there are weapons there.

Ari Fleischer
Press Briefing
January 9, 2003
Our intelligence officials estimate that Saddam Hussein had the materials to produce as much as 500 tons of sarin, mustard and VX nerve agent.

George W. Bush
State of the Union Address
January 28, 2003
We know that Saddam Hussein is determined to keep his weapons of mass destruction, is determined to make more.

Colin Powell
Remarks to UN Security Council
February 5, 2003
We have sources that tell us that Saddam Hussein recently authorized Iraqi field commanders to use chemical weapons -- the very weapons the dictator tells us he does not have.

George W. Bush
Radio Address
February 8, 2003
So has the strategic decision been made to disarm Iraq of its weapons of mass destruction by the leadership in Baghdad? . . . I think our judgment has to be clearly not.

Colin Powell
Remarks to UN Security Council
March 7, 2003
Intelligence gathered by this and other governments leaves no doubt that the Iraq regime continues to possess and conceal some of the most lethal weapons ever devised.

George W. Bush
Address to the Nation
March 17, 2003
Well, there is no question that we have evidence and information that Iraq has weapons of mass destruction, biological and chemical particularly . . . all this will be made clear in the course of the operation, for whatever duration it takes.

Ari Fleisher
Press Briefing
March 21, 2003
There is no doubt that the regime of Saddam Hussein possesses weapons of mass destruction. And . . . as this operation continues, those weapons will be identified, found, along with the people who have produced them and who guard them.

Gen. Tommy Franks
Press Conference
March 22, 2003
I have no doubt we're going to find big stores of weapons of mass destruction.

Defense Policy Board member Kenneth Adelman
Washington Post, p. A27
March 23, 2003
One of our top objectives is to find and destroy the WMD. There are a number of sites.

Pentagon Spokeswoman Victoria Clark
Press Briefing
March 22, 2003
We know where they are. They're in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad and east, west, south and north somewhat.

Donald Rumsfeld
ABC Interview
March 30, 2003
Obviously the administration intends to publicize all the weapons of mass destruction U.S. forces find -- and there will be plenty.

Neocon scholar Robert Kagan
Washington Post op-ed
April 9, 2003
I think you have always heard, and you continue to hear from officials, a measure of high confidence that, indeed, the weapons of mass destruction will be found.

Ari Fleischer
Press Briefing
April 10, 2003
We are learning more as we interrogate or have discussions with Iraqi scientists and people within the Iraqi structure, that perhaps he destroyed some, perhaps he dispersed some. And so we will find them.

George W. Bush
NBC Interview
April 24, 2003
There are people who in large measure have information that we need . . . so that we can track down the weapons of mass destruction in that country.

Donald Rumsfeld
Press Briefing
April 25, 2003
We'll find them. It'll be a matter of time to do so.

George W. Bush
Remarks to Reporters
May 3, 2003
I'm absolutely sure that there are weapons of mass destruction there and the evidence will be forthcoming. We're just getting it just now.

Colin Powell
Remarks to Reporters
May 4, 2003
We never believed that we'd just tumble over weapons of mass destruction in that country.

Donald Rumsfeld
Fox News Interview
May 4, 2003
I'm not surprised if we begin to uncover the weapons program of Saddam Hussein -- because he had a weapons program.

George W. Bush
Remarks to Reporters
May 6, 2003
U.S. officials never expected that "we were going to open garages and find" weapons of mass destruction.

Condoleeza Rice
Reuters Interview
May 12, 2003
I just don't know whether it was all destroyed years ago -- I mean, there's no question that there were chemical weapons years ago -- whether they were destroyed right before the war, (or) whether they're still hidden.

Maj. Gen. David Petraeus, Commander 101st Airborne
Press Briefing
May 13, 2003
Before the war, there's no doubt in my mind that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction, biological and chemical. I expected them to be found. I still expect them to be found.

Gen. Michael Hagee, Commandant of the Marine Corps
Interview with Reporters
May 21, 2003
Given time, given the number of prisoners now that we're interrogating, I'm confident that we're going to find weapons of mass destruction.

Gen. Richard Myers, Chairman Joint Chiefs of Staff
NBC Today Show interview
May 26, 2003
They may have had time to destroy them, and I don't know the answer.

Donald Rumsfeld
Remarks to Council on Foreign Relations
May 27, 2003
For bureaucratic reasons, we settled on one issue, weapons of mass destruction (as justification for invading Iraq) because it was the one reason everyone could agree on.

Paul Wolfowitz
Vanity Fair interview
May 28, 2003

It was a surprise to me then it remains a surprise to me now that we have not uncovered weapons, as you say, in some of the forward dispersal sites. Believe me, it's not for lack of trying. We've been to virtually every ammunition supply point between the Kuwaiti border and Baghdad, but they're simply not there.

Lt. Gen. James Conway, 1st Marine Expeditionary Force
Press Interview

So, where are all of these WMD? Bush Corp made it sound like they were on every street corner. Spare us the Clinton stuff. Clinton never got any Americans killed. Clinton never wasted lives and tens of billions of taxpayer dollars trying to prop up a fraud of an administration. Where was all this get-Iraq support then, anyway?

I'm no hardcore lefty, but Clinton is superior to Bush in every way possible. Hell, most farkers are superior to Bush in every way possible. Bush is every bit the disaster that many of us told you he would be as President.
2003-07-20 12:58:10 AM  
Here's another article on the shiite rebellion from a source you should trust.,2933,82000,00.html
2003-07-20 12:58:42 AM  
Thanks LiveFree for the link.
2003-07-20 12:58:59 AM  
OK, that cut n' paste didn't space out the best, but you get the idea
2003-07-20 01:05:08 AM  
good link, indeed. i learn something new everyday
2003-07-20 01:11:55 AM  
Proof means the government would know either where the WMD's were or has some other kind of evidence to back up the claim that there was WMD's, whether it be a paper trail or arial photos or whatever. The fact of the matter is Bush has NONE of this. When you say you have proof you better be able to back those words up and so far he hasn't. So yeah... his ass is on the line.

Ariontk421 - The U.S. has known about Saddam and his regime for well over 10 years and nothing was done. Bush Sr. did a fine job stomping on Saddam, but wimped out in the end over political pressure. Bush Jr. doesn't care about the downtrodden Iraqis. He only cared about two things: revenge for a foiled assassination attempt on dad and oil. That's why he was going through a half a dozen reasons to go attack. The end does not justify the means. And BTW have you heard anything about the civilian losses in Iraq? I'm asking seriously because there is a strange silence regarding that in the media. All that "shock and awe" had to have repurcussions.
2003-07-20 01:16:44 AM  
Naive, not hardly. Litte, not at all. Foolish probably. Those other despotic countries will get theirs. Sooner or later its either going to be them or us. North Korea is likely to be next along with Syria and Iran.
2003-07-20 01:19:52 AM  
if this was about oil then why havent gas prices gone down? im still payin $1.89 for premium!

....just trying to add a little light-heartedness to the conversation
2003-07-20 01:23:19 AM  
bashturn: Bill Clinton almost got impeached for that lie

uhm, clinton did get impeached. why can't people grasp that simple fact?
2003-07-20 01:25:59 AM  
you know what else people cant grasp? clinton lied UNDER OATH...bush SUPPOSEDLY lied in a speech, not under oath
2003-07-20 01:27:06 AM  
Chelsea Clinton Is Carrot Top's Lost Twin-

Because most people don't care about the political and constitutional process- hence the low voter turnout (less than 25% of Americans ended up voting for Bush... more voted for Gore, but that's another story). And because it's late at night and I would guess bashturn meant to say "convicted." Or he was drunk. Or misinformed.
2003-07-20 01:27:09 AM  
It's time to get the new iraqi government going and to get out of iraq. I agree that getting rid of saddam was a good thing to do but I seriously wonder if and extended stay in Iraq is really necessary. I agree that Bush has done this as a way to get back at Saddam. I don't feel at least bit sorry for him or the people supporting him. I do feel for the innocent. Shock and Awe happens and then you die. Bush might be doing this all for oil. The proof of that is probably as elusive as WMD. I don't believe it till I see that we are getting $$$$ or oil from Iraq.
2003-07-20 01:29:14 AM  
To all those who would belittle a press company, especially if its views are of the right-leaning variety...

bite me you hosers :P~~~
2003-07-20 01:35:41 AM  

He gave false testimony to Congress in his State of the Union address, in documents filed with Congress, and in formal speeches to Congress not specifically enumerated in the Constitution. That is, indeed, a rightfully impeachable series of offenses, because as the "great inquest of the nation" lying to Congress is roughly equivalent to perjury, legally.

While it is not true that the situation with Bush is the same as the situation with Clinton, the stakes are much higher. For utterly stupid reasons Congress elected not to impeach and convict Johnson for lying to them to get the Gulf of Tonkin resolution, which is a much, *much* better analogy. Johnson should have been removed from office for that, and Bush should be removed from office for lying to us about the weapons of mass destruction.

By the way- I would have supported a war against Iraq had it been expressly for the purpose of liberating the country from a despot. I'm glad Saddam's gone. But you know what? The ends don't justify the means, and the means that Bush used are anathema to the principles of truth, justice, and democracy.
2003-07-20 01:40:04 AM  
The world is a better place without Saddam in power- wmd or no wmd.
Yes, the rabid anti-american fundamentalist Muslim government that replaces him will definitely make the world a better place. It will probably just like John Lennon imagined.
2003-07-20 01:41:00 AM  

There's your proof. Sorry I didn't save the better article I was sent today. In short, Cheney's former oil company and its subsidiaries (which he has a guaranteed seat at after his term is up as VP) stand to make $7 billion- yes, that's right, *billion*- off of their contracts. That's what some Democratic senators were complaining about.

Real proof? Okay, how about this- none of the Halliburton or Kellogg, Brown and Root (subsidiary of Halliburton) contracts were awarded with competitive bidding. It's almost an exact recreation of the Teapot Dome scandal in the early part of the 20th century.
2003-07-20 01:41:11 AM  
I agree we should get out of Iraq. Unfortunately there is way too much validation the military can claim for staying. As for the oil I have links to news articles regarding the company that "won" the contract to clean up the rigs out there. I don't remember the name of the company, but they are VERY buddy buddy with the Bush regime... heh heh... yup.... I said regime...

Don't ask me to get the links now... my HTML mad skills are ... um... none.... and it's late.
2003-07-20 01:42:07 AM  
SRFireside- 'sokay, I got some of them for you. :-)
2003-07-20 02:02:52 AM  
Has anyone ever seen a "News"Max article where they didn't mention Clinton? I can't seem to find one. (Bush lies, but Clinton lied about a blowjob, so it's ok-Well then NewsMax, how about showing the same outrage for Bush's lies then, ,wankers?)
2003-07-20 02:33:19 AM  
SixOfDLoC - Heh heh... so if someone did an article search using the word "Clinton" on NewsMax do you think their servers would blow up trying to pull up EVERYTHING they ever wrote?
2003-07-20 02:43:03 AM  
where is your proof that bush lied? im talking solid PROOF that saddam never had dangeorus weapons. do you think he never had them because we havent found them yet after only 3-4 months?

See, I just don't get how it's taking us so long to find these things. Heck, I saw the press conferences, didn't we have satellite photos of these chemical weapons plants? Kinda hard to move a factory... and wouldn't the mobilization and transportation to conceal every WMD in the country shown up on satellite/surveillance plane photos at least enough to give us a clue what direction they went in?
2003-07-20 03:27:26 AM  
this whole situation reminds me of having a gay guy(s) as a friend.

everyone knows whats going on, but noone wants to ask. in this case, tony blair and george bush are the gay men. discuss.
2003-07-20 03:34:00 AM  
...and "dumbass" is a seven letter word, Senator
2003-07-20 04:04:52 AM  
Good to see newsmax is on the case.

These farkfaces need to get laid and soon. And not jsut by some hatefilled republican witch either, but by the dirtiest liberal-thinking whore who will love their evil worm hearts very deeply, simply for the good lurking inside of them.
2003-07-20 05:44:14 AM  
NoSoul strikes again.
Displayed 50 of 125 comments

Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Newest | Show all

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking

On Twitter

Top Commented
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.