What the Clintons, Kerry, Kennedy, and all Those Democrats Said About WMD
by Bob Parks
Wednesday, October 13, 2004
Eating Thy Words
The left is going off in a demented state of ecstasy over that final report issued by Charles A. Duelfer, whom the Bush administration picked to complete a U.S. investigation of Iraq's weapons programs. Democrats are trying to pound President Bush on the fact that the WMD's weren't found thus the ''rush'' to war was probably illegal. In their minds, this means their ''Bush is a war criminal'' slogan finally has a visible basis in reality.
As usual, liberals believe the majority of the public can't read and are thereby prone to their deception. However, if you read some of the key findings of that report kept off the evening news and first 20 pages of the newspaper, you'd see that the impression now making the rounds is false and some of the mainstream press are intentionally misleading that public.
''Saddam wanted to recreate Iraq's WMD capability--which was essentially destroyed in 1991--after sanctions were removed and Iraq's economy stabilized, but probably with a different mix of capabilities to that which previously existed. Saddam aspired to develop a nuclear capability--in an incremental fashion, irrespective of international pressure and the resulting economic risks-but he intended to focus on ballistic missile and tactical chemical warfare capabilities.''
''The introduction of the Oil-For-Food program (OFF) in late 1996 was a key turning point for the Regime. OFF rescued Baghdad's economy from a terminal decline created by sanctions. The Regime quickly came to see that OFF could be corrupted to acquire foreign exchange both to further undermine sanctions and to provide the means to enhance dual-use infrastructure and potential WMD-related development."
"The Iraq Survey Group judges that events in the 1980s and early 1990s shaped Saddam's belief in the value of WMD. In Saddam's view, WMD helped to save the Regime multiple times. He believed that during the Iran-Iraq war chemical weapons had halted Iranian ground offensives and that ballistic missile attacks on Tehran had broken its political will. Similarly, during Desert Storm, Saddam believed WMD had deterred Coalition Forces from pressing their attack beyond the goal of freeing Kuwait. WMD had even played a role in crushing the Shi'a revolt in the south following the 1991 cease-fire.''
Although weapons weren’t found yet (I still believe they’re in Syria), it’s not like the story is over and all is well. If not for the liberation of Iraq, Hussein would be biding time and waiting for just the right time to continue his behind-the-scenes antics:
''The former Regime had no formal written strategy or plan for the revival of WMD after sanctions. Neither was there an identifiable group of WMD policy makers or planners separate from Saddam. Instead, his lieutenants understood WMD revival was his goal from their long association with Saddam and his infrequent, but firm, verbal comments and directions to them.''
Now, of course, the left is screaming that Bush deliberately deceived the American people while he contends he was given faulty intelligence. Unlike the Clinton administration that was quick to blame any underling for a public gaffe (remember all those bureaucratic snafus?), Bush didn’t distance himself from the many men and women who are crawling around with the roaches, putting their lives on the line to gather intelligence and blame them directly like his predecessor would have. That's called loyalty.
It's true that the CIA, British, Israeli, Russian, and Egyptian Intelligence all got the weapons of mass destruction thing wrong. But before you blame President Bush for not getting it right, I'd like to remind you that he was in good company--company that got it wrong years ago.
On February 4, 1998, President Bill Clinton said, ''One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line.''
Less than two weeks later, Clinton added, ''If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program.''
If you haven’t noticed, Clinton has steered clear of the whole WMD thing, because his assessments were, at the time, indisputable.
His mouthpieces began to chime in and added to the percept.
On February 18, 1998, Secretary of State Madeline Albright stated, ''Iraq is a long way from here, but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks 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.''
Madam Albright has been making negative comments about President Bush for years now, but fails to remember that she was confident in the intelligence she received at that time.
Clinton National Security Adviser Sandy Berger has recently been more restraint, seeing how on February 18, 1998 he said, ''He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983.''
Democrat senators Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John F. Kerry, and others sent a letter to President Clinton on October 9, 1998, that read in part: ''We urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs.''
California Congresswoman, now House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi who has many times called into question the judgment of the president during this time of war, on December 16, 1998 said: ''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.''
Florida Democrat Senator Bob Graham and others sent a letter to President Bush on December 5, 2001, that in part read: ''There is no doubt that Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical, and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies.''
On September 19, 2002, Michigan Senator Carl Levin said: ''We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandate of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them.''
The same Al Gore who now calls President Bush a liar and an incompetent said on September 23, 2002: ''We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country. Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power.''
Kerry campaign bigmouth and Massachusetts Senator Ted Kennedy on September 27, 2002 said: ''We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is developing weapons of mass destruction.''
Anti-war diatribe deliverer West Virginia Senator Robert Byrd on October 3, 2002 said, ''The last U.N. weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons.''
I guess the intelligence was okay two years ago.
Massachusetts Senator, veteran, and eventual Democrat nominee for President John Kerry on October 9, 2002 said: ''I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force--if necessary--to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security.''
Liberal Senator Jay Rockefeller of West Virginia on October 10, 2002 said: ''There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years. We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction.''
Ultra-liberal California Congressman Henry Waxman on October 10, 2002, said of Saddam: ''He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do.''
Not to be left out, New York Senator Hillary Clinton on October 10, 2002 contributed: ''In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons.''
Imagine that: Senator Hillary unequivocally linked Iraq, Saddam Hussein, and al Qaeda. I believe President Bush made the same case.
Lastly, on January 23 of last year, Senator John Kerry said: ''We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction. Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation. And now he has continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction ... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real....''
How John Kerry can now be going around saying the President Bush misled the nation when he basically said the same thing several times before, is another clear example of HIS dishonesty and the selective memory of the press.
All these people received the same pre-war intelligence and came to the same conclusions George Bush did prior to going to war. In some cases, years before he took office.
It's easy to jump on the bandwagon and call someone a liar because it'll make you feel good and help you get your guy elected. It’s just too bad that more of those who are paid to give the public information aren't making all these clowns eat their words…with ketchup on the side. |
