just Google ‘ 500 tons Uranium ‘

and for this and John Roberts we have a lasting legacy
to thank “W” for

Ken

” I figured the quotes . . . were sufficient to make the point.”

They were, and it was well done and just right as it was.

I just used it to segway into my own attack on their perfidy. Hope you don’t mind.

Regards.

Thanks. I came across quotes by other Democrats, also recognizing that Iraq had WMD’s, but I figured the quotes in 1998 (pre-Bush, during Clinton’s Presidency) were sufficient to make the point.

One of their favorite “proofs” for “Bush lied” is that David Kay allegedly said there were no WMD, even though he not only didn’t say that, but confirmed that there were at least some, though not as many as we thought.

Also important is David Kay’s actual testimony, in which he said about Iraq,…

“I think Baghdad was actually becoming more dangerous in the last two years than even we realized. Saddam was not controlling the society any longer. In the marketplace of terrorism and of WMD, Iraq well could have been that supplier if the war had not intervened.”
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4066462/

(I wonder how Larry Weisenthal thinks he can debunk the “rat facts” of experts like Kay. Maybe by saying, “It’s just not true, so there.”?) Larry, stop reading DailyKos, CommonDreams, and the rest of the loony Left. They’ll rot your brian.

“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

“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

“We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction.” — Ted Kennedy, September 27, 2002

“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’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

“For me, it’s always been simple. I listen carefully to what George W Bush has to say “

Typical Lefty, don’t focus on facts, but instead do something more akin to reading tea leaves. Good one, Larry.

“I’ll need about 4 hours of time that I don’t have right now to address the various arguments made by others on this blog in a prior debate on this issue”

I won’t be holding my breath, but I am now looking forward to a very good laugh. If you do actually put something together, I doubt that I will dissappointed. (of course, I doubt you will put it together, so if you don’t mind, I’ll do my laughing now.)

Oh, and remember, Larry, the Al Qaeda connection and the WMD were only a couple of the MANY reasons we needed to take him out.

The only difference between Zawahiri then, and Zawahiri now is that he merged his EIJ into AQ a few years later.

Larry, if all you want to depend upon is Bush’s PR mouthpieces, you are unqualified to comment on reality. Sorry guy. Genuinely like you, but that don’t fly in the face of reality.

In terms of regime ties to Al Queda, I’m sorry. I truly and honestly am sorry, but I can’t recall Bush or his admin stepping back from that claim. If you’ve got some examples, I’d love to see em. In the end, however, you and other FA readers will recall that my claim re regime ties is predominately INdirect, and that this indirect blowback reborn Al Queda in 1992, forced its alliance with Egyptian Islamic Jihad in 1996 (of which 2/3 of AQ leaders were co-members in EIJ), and led directly to AQ attacks against the US including 911. Interestingly enough, the 911 Commission agrees with me.

In the end, does it matter if AQ groups were in Iraq working w Saddam before the invasion-does it matter any more than German forces in Morocco in 1942, or Japanese forces in New Zealand in 41? You go where the fight is, and when possible…you choose your fight. Given the choice of focusing the fighting in the Graveyard of Empires or in Iraq where ties had been reported in the msm since 1996….I gotta say Iraq was the easier nut. Today’s generals in Afghanistan agree.

For me, it’s always been simple. I listen carefully to what George W Bush has to say about both WMD and Saddam/Al Qaeda link. He had every motive to try and reinforce these ideas, instead, he essentially repudiated both of these ideas.

There’s nothing but nothing which would have totally changed American and World opinion of the Bush war effort than substantiating the claims that Saddam had WMD after all and that Saddam had substantive Al Qaeda ties after all. Instead, as his administration took more and more heat, Bush moved further and further away from these concepts and, in essence, ultimately repudiated them himself.

I’ll need about 4 hours of time that I don’t have right now to address the various arguments made by others on this blog in a prior debate on this issue. I don’t yet have this time. But it’s about stuff which have been argued for years; so the topic will still be there when I’ve got the time and energy to tackle it.

- Larry Weisenthal/Huntington Beach, CA

Yep, they’re wrong on that one, too, and scared to death they’ll be found out.

Picking the rottenest cherries….
http://pierrelegrand.net/2009/04/24/democrats-refuse-to-allow-skeptic-to-testify-alongside-gore-at-congressional-hearing-change-you-can-believe-in.htm

‘Cause your pocket’s worth the pickins.

nuff said

PROOF OF “WILLFUL IGNORANCE.” You know, the kind were they stick their fingers in their ears and scream “LA LA LA LA, I CAN’T HEAR YOU!”

@John ryan:

LOOK WHO’S SPEAKING FOR AMERICANS!

Give it a rest, John, informed Americans don’t believe your nonsense, and those Americans who do only do so because of people like you and Landay who perpetuate the baseless lies you are now defending in order to keep them ignorant of the facts.

Some Americans still believe Joe Wilson was telling the truth
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2005/12/012365.php

Why is everything they know so wrong?
http://gatewaypundit.blogspot.com/2009/04/terrific-obama-to-release-uighur-gitmo.html

Aren’t they capable of seeing the harm they do? Or is their obsessive hatred of the Right really that much more important to them than their own security?

[then ignore the second half which almost always says, "because no evidence was collected"]

Really, I can point to literally more than a dozen cases where quotes like this are presented, and each and every time you get alleged news media claiming that no evidence means no ties. How could there be any conclusion of no ties if no one looked into it, and when people DO…the evidence is blown off as similar to aliens at Area 51, the Tooth Fairy, and so forth.

Cop gets a call about a crime
journalist asks the cop if there’s evidence of the crime
cop says, nope, no evidence. I haven’t left the station or even made a call
quasi journalist writes newspaper story saying phone caller was crying wolf because no evidence was found

Who is believing in fairy tales, and who is reading the entire quote?