Yawn. As long as one lib is willing to lie, other libs will swear to it.
"[W]e cannot wait to act until the threat is imminent"
Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz December 6, 2002
Some have said we must not act until the threat is
imminent. Since when have terrorists and tyrants announced
their intentions, politely putting us on notice before
they strike? If this threat is permitted to fully and
suddenly emerge, all actions, all words, and all
recriminations would come too late. Trusting in the sanity
and restraint of Saddam Hussein is not a strategy, and it
is not an option.
President George W Bush, State of the Union speech January 28, 2003
[The President] did not make a persuasive case that the
threat is imminent and that war is the only alternative
Senator Ted Kennedy - Immediately after the State of the Union address
THE STATE OF THE UNION ADDRESS; Bush Calls Iraq Imminent Threat
Los Angeles Times January 29, 2003
Numerous Democrats, including Sens. Kennedy and John
Kerry, originally opposed the resolution authorizing the
use of force precisely because it wasn't hinged on an
imminent threat... Sen. Robert Byrd (D., Va.) even offered
an amendment requiring that imminence become the standard
for war. After a debate, he lost.
In other words, Kennedy & Co. objected to the war because
Bush wouldn't say the threat was imminent and now they're
peeved because Bush "lied" when he said the threat was
imminent.
http://www.philly.com/mld/inquirer/2003/10/20/news/editorial/7045984.htm
A Brief History of The Imminent Threat Canard
Message 19469610
Sorting out the "imminent threat" debate
Message 19508187
[H]ere you have it a nutshell. The administration was
criticized before the war for not making a case that Iraq
was an imminent threat, denied at that time that war was
based on the supposition of an imminent threat, and was
criticized after the war for having lied that Iraq was an
imminent threat.
