Fox News Host Chris Wallace Claims Bush “Never†Linked Saddam and al-Qaeda
Fox News Host Chris Wallace Claims Bush “Never†Linked Saddam and al-Qaeda
In a stunning display of historical revisionism, Fox News Sunday host Chris Wallace argued this morning that President Bush never tried to link al Qaeda and Saddam Hussein:
[T]hat specific quote there where you say he couldn’t distinguish between al Qaeda and Saddam Hussein, he wasn’t saying that they were linked at all. He was saying one was as bad as the other, and when he said in that same answer something about that Saddam Hussein would like to use a terrorist network, he wasn’t saying that they would like to use al Qaeda. So you’re making a link there that the President never made.
Wallace focused on a single statement President Bush made on September 25, 2002. (“[Y]ou can’t distinguish between al Qaeda and Saddam when you talk about the war on terror.â€) But that statement was part of a series of statements that intentionally and explicitly linked Saddam and al Qaeda in the lead up to war. For example, this statement by Bush on February 8, 2003:
Saddam Hussein has longstanding, direct and continuing ties to terrorist networks. Senior members of Iraqi intelligence and al Qaeda have met at least eight times since the early 1990s. Iraq has sent bomb-making and document forgery experts to work with al Qaeda. Iraq has also provided al Qaeda with chemical and biological weapons training. And an al Qaeda operative was sent to Iraq several times in the late 1990s for help in acquiring poisons and gases.
Virtually none of that was true. The administration’s hand picked weapons inspector, David Kay, concluded “We simply did not find any evidence of extensive links with Al Qaeda, or for that matter any real links at all.†But to pretend that President Bush never made an effort to link Saddam and al-Qaeda is incredibly irresponsible, even for Fox.
UPDATE: Crooks and Liars has the video.
UPDATE II: Low on the Hog catalogues all the times Bush linked Saddam and al-Qaeda.
Sort Comments By: Top Rated | Date
Let the rewriting of history begin! Fox News: Propaganda Organ for the White House and Republican Party
November 27th, 2005 at 11:12 amBushCo and his cronies are all LIARS and (most of) the public knows it.
November 27th, 2005 at 11:17 amwwallace will be along in a second to declare that Judd, myself, and anyone else he disagrees with are stupid and/or dishonest.
He will refuse to read or understand the article and claim that it just is not so.
I am willing to bet that he watches Fox news.
Z.
November 27th, 2005 at 11:23 amSay it enough, and the faithful will come! I’m nauseated.
November 27th, 2005 at 11:24 amOf course it would be impossible to connect Saddam and ANY Muslim terrorist group or Islamic thugs. Saddam never killed the Kurds with gas, never invaded Kuwait and looted the country, never murdered tens of thousands of his own people or supported Palestinian bombers by funding their families and never tried to assassinate the President of the United States. Saddam was a nice guy. A real liberal fellow, well respected by the UN and the Euroloser Union and American Leftists who profited greatly by knowing him and doing business with him.
Why would such a fine upstanding gentleman like the Butcher of Baghdad involve himself with such terrible mean and nasty terrorists? Only a real nut case would ever try and form such a connection.
November 27th, 2005 at 11:24 amI don’t even think he said they had WMD’s. When we are done looking at the reasons we went to war we are going to find out it was all becuase of Clinton. He had sex with an Intern for christ sake!
November 27th, 2005 at 11:29 amZ-
November 27th, 2005 at 11:30 amDifferent pinhead,… same tripe…………
Don’t these people get tired?
i-right-i,
You’re pathetic bible thumping pedophile.
November 27th, 2005 at 11:31 amI-RIGHT-I…
Strawman arguments…
The article points out that Saddam was linked with Al Qaeda (explicitly in at least one case) by Bush. To claim otherwise is disingenous at best, and a downright lie at worst.
Nobody (other than you) has claimed that Saddam was not involved in some nasty activities or that he had no connection with terrorists. The question is whether Bush connected Saddam with Al Qaeda (he did) and whether Fox is lying about that now (they are).
BTW I seem to remember photos of Rumsfeld shaking hands with Saddam and I am sure that I heard that Halliburton did business with him. I guess that makes them “American Leftists” in your book.
As you are attempting to change the subject you can now safely be ignored once again.
Z.
November 27th, 2005 at 11:34 amIf this is what we have to offer ,lies and more liars where is the god and the intelligence design that supposedly crafted us all ? At the shoppinfg malls ?
November 27th, 2005 at 11:37 am“A real liberal fellow, well respected by the UN and the Euroloser Union and American Leftists who profited greatly by knowing him and doing business with him.”
IRI,
Please name the “American Leftists” that profited greatly. (In case you forget, France or Russia are not “American Leftists.”)
November 27th, 2005 at 11:44 amMore duplicity. Ho hum…
November 27th, 2005 at 11:46 am2003 State of the Union address…? Where Bush says, “Imagine those 19 terrorists armed with other weapons provided by Saddam Hussein….” ?
W?TF!
November 27th, 2005 at 11:46 amIt warms my heart how much IRI loves oppressed Muslims.
November 27th, 2005 at 11:48 amAnyone ever find nude Coulter pics?
November 27th, 2005 at 11:50 am16 ATV
November 27th, 2005 at 11:57 amEWWWWW.
Thanks for that disgusting Visual image-
Dont think I’ll be able to Eat for a Week Now –Aj =)
#5 “Butcher of Baghdad”
____
Are you referring to former BoB Saddam Hussein, or the current title-holder, George W. Bush?
November 27th, 2005 at 12:03 pmI just want express the full length of my appreciation of her writing skills, that’s all. Her beauty may be in question. My girth of gratitude is not.
November 27th, 2005 at 12:05 pmChris Wallace is making a great imitation of Armstrong Williams , next he will paint his face in Black.
November 27th, 2005 at 12:06 pmWallace is taking a page from Bush&Co. Cherry pick the one sentence you can parse in order to validate your claim; omit the numerous other statements by Bush, Cheney, Rice, Powell, Rumsfeld, et al.
November 27th, 2005 at 12:12 pmRewriting history–distortions–misleads–exaggerations–exploitations–there is no difference between Fox and Bush.
As usual, I-Right-I stops by to take a dump and expects us to wipe his/her ass.
Another Bush apologist without the capacity to experience the slightest bit of cognitive dissonance. Jeebus- isn’t life simple for people like that.
Redleg- Kicking asses and taking names since 1964.
November 27th, 2005 at 12:13 pmBush Put It in Writing!
http://www.whitehouse.gov/ news/ releases/ 2003/ 03/ 20030319-1.html
For Immediate Release
Office of the Press Secretary
March 19, 2003
Presidential Letter
Text of a Letter from the President to the Speaker of the House of Representatives and the President Pro Tempore of the Senate
March 18, 2003
Dear Mr. Speaker: (Dear Mr. President:)
Consistent with section 3(b) of the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002 (Public Law 107-243), and based on information available to me, including that in the enclosed document, I determine that:
(1) reliance by the United States on further diplomatic and other peaceful means alone will neither (A) adequately protect the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq nor (B) likely lead to enforcement of all relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq; and
(2) acting pursuant to the Constitution and Public Law 107-243 is consistent with the United States and other countries continuing to take the necessary actions against international terrorists and terrorist organizations, including those nations, organizations, or persons who planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001.
Sincerely,
GEORGE W. BUSH
November 27th, 2005 at 12:16 pmIs this unprecedented? Does the Average Fox TV Viewer not believe in the link between Saddam and Osama? And don’t they believe that in large part because of Fox?
November 27th, 2005 at 12:17 pmHow can they sustain this?
“Anybody who says there is no working relationship between al Qaeda and Iraqi intelligence going back to the early ’90s–they can only say that if they’re illiterate. This is a slam dunk.”
November 27th, 2005 at 12:17 pm– James Woolsey, CIA director under President Bill Clinton, November 2003
“The front in the war on terror is not in Iraq”
-Feingold
November 27th, 2005 at 12:22 pmWWallace,
Woolsey has a financial incentive to lie. Quit cherrypicking your quotes.
http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/archives/000015.html
WALTER F. ROCHE JR. HAS AN ILLUMINATING PIECE TODAY in the Los Angeles Times on the clan Woolsey — exposing some of the Iraq contract connections of Suzanne Woolsey, the former CIA Director’s wife. In January 2004, she became a director of Fluor Corporation, which has $1.6 billion in Iraq related contracts. She also serves as a director of the Institute for Defense Analyses which also has war interests, and received modest compensation for that role according to the article.
James Woolsey serves as Vice President of Booz Allen Hamilton with at least $89 million in Iraq defense contract interests. Roche’s article also points out that Suzanne Woolsey is also affiliated with Paladin Capital Group, a venture capital firm where her husband serves as a principal and director….
November 27th, 2005 at 12:26 pmcris is NO mike wallace, and neither are you wwallace. Those of us AWAKE are now the MAJORITY, twist,spin all you want, the facts still stand. The whitehouse gang lied to us all even fellow republicans.
November 27th, 2005 at 12:26 pmWhich network was Junior gonna bomb again?
November 27th, 2005 at 12:27 pmYou boys & girls down at Fox better look out, ya never know when Junior’s gonna pull another major fvck up!
Woolsey is on board with the Ne-Con artists agenda.
Slam dunk!
-GSD
November 27th, 2005 at 12:30 pmwwallace,
Woolsey is also a discredited neo-con hack. Big whoopee that he worked for Clinton. Since when did you trust anyone from the Clinton admin?
One might as well say that Jeb Bush, as the Governor of Florida, should be held accountable for 9-11 because several of the hijackers took pilot training in Florida. Or that Rummy the Dummy encouraged evil Saddam Hussein to use chem weapons on the Kurds during the Iran-Iraq war. Or that Bush let 9-11 happen on purpose- whoops- that last one IS true. LOL.
November 27th, 2005 at 12:31 pmJust were did Saddam get his chemical weapons in the first place… and who put him in power?
November 27th, 2005 at 12:36 pmRedleg is a discredited neo-nazi hack.
November 27th, 2005 at 12:46 pmIraq and al Qaeda, The Connection:
November 27th, 2005 at 12:47 pmhttp://www.weeklystandard.com/ Content/ Public/ Articles/ 000/ 000/ 004/ 152lndzv.asp
Mack is peddling anti-American conspiracy theories.
November 27th, 2005 at 12:47 pmWell that pretty much ends all debate, wwallace.
November 27th, 2005 at 12:48 pmYou win!
Average, what goes on at this website day to day is not debate, it’s paid anti-American propaganda.
November 27th, 2005 at 12:49 pm“Weakly Standhard”
November 27th, 2005 at 12:49 pmJust taking out the garbage, wwallace. When the Dems come back we’ll clean out their garbage, too. That’s what we’re really fighting for.
November 27th, 2005 at 12:52 pmwwallace,
Go to Redstate as a progressive imposter. Get yourself banned. Learn alittle about controlling the message.
November 27th, 2005 at 12:55 pmPeople people people.
There is a tie between Saddam and Iraq. The republican led government put Saddam Hussein into power in Iraq and the CIA under republican leadership trained Osama bin Laden.
wwallace,
As in the last thread, oh righteous king of stupidity, James Woosley is part of PNAC. A NeoCon workshop. It doesn’t matter that he worked under President Clinton.
That is like saying I am the head of the PR department of my company under President Bush, so therefore I am a republican. I once again bow down to your supierior stupidity. Idiot.
November 27th, 2005 at 12:57 pmI-RIgHT-I wrote, Of course it would be impossible to connect Saddam and ANY Muslim terrorist group or Islamic thugs. Saddam never killed the Kurds with gas,…
I suppose if I pointed out that Saddam and Islamicists don’t exactly see eye-to-eye on a lot of things, you probably wouldn’t understand.
November 27th, 2005 at 12:58 pm#33
I have already told you that this sentence:
“One name stood out: Lieutenant Colonel Ahmed Hikmat Shakir. The name was not spelled exactly as Carney had seen it before, but such discrepancies are common.”
Discredits the entire Weekly Standard “The Connection” story.
November 27th, 2005 at 12:58 pm#42
Don’t waste your fingers. These guys can’t seem to figure out that Saddam, a iron fisted secularist, hated Osama, a strict islamofascist. If Saddam got his hands on Osama, he would have tortured and killed him, just like he did with any extremist. That is how a dictator keeps control. He kills those who oppose him. In Osamas case, it was preaching Jihad.
November 27th, 2005 at 1:03 pmI want some of what Wallace is having … make it a double.
November 27th, 2005 at 1:04 pmA sign your tinfoil hat is on way too tight: when you say things like, “The republican led government put Saddam Hussein into power in Iraq and the CIA under republican leadership trained Osama bin Laden.”
America-haters always blame America for everything.
November 27th, 2005 at 1:06 pmplunger, like many on the left, like Osama bin Ladin, clearly hates Jews.
November 27th, 2005 at 1:07 pmYes, I need a tinfoil hat because I tell the truth that you don’t like to hear.
Sorry oh leader of the stupid people. How would you like for me to talk today. In a positive Nazi way. Or are we going to preach NeoCon talking point today.
As you being the leader of the stupid people, I demand that you tell me which talking point we should be using today. Moron.
November 27th, 2005 at 1:09 pm#48
Let’s see Osama is a religious nut bag and so are the right wingers, so therefore Osama is from the left. Good math. Keep up the good work.
November 27th, 2005 at 1:11 pmThe funniest part of the segment was Wallace claiming that, in fact, there were links to Al Qaeda and Iraq. Makes you wonder what the point of the segment was…
November 27th, 2005 at 1:11 pmMore importantly, did you watch the video wwallace? Do you find it disturbing that the MSM is lying and saying that bush never linked Saddam and Al Qaida? I mean, you spent all day yesterday preaching to us how they are linked.
So, are they linked or are they not linked?
We all vote not linked. Do you vote linked. simple question.
November 27th, 2005 at 1:13 pmI should clarify my above post. It doesn’t really make you wonder what the point of the segment was. The point of the show was to lead the American public to the conclusion that Bush did not lie about the reasons for going to war. We all know that there were no substantial links between Al Qaeda and Iraq. However, the Bush cheerleading squad must never admit that Bush said something that might be misleading, or *gasp* factually incorrect. Thus, in the same breath they state that ‘A’ both equals ‘B’ and does not equal ‘B’. It is very Orwellian. I am impressed.
November 27th, 2005 at 1:16 pmIraq and al Qaeda, The Connection:
http://www.weeklystandard.com/ Content/ Public/ Articles/ 000/ 000/ 004/ 152lndzv.asp
Comment by wwallace — November 27, 2005 @ 12:47 pm
This is your proof that Iraq and Al Qaeda were working together?
“In late February 2004, Christopher Carney made an astonishing discovery. Carney, a political science professor from Pennsylvania on leave to work at the Pentagon, was poring over a list of officers in Saddam Hussein’s much-feared security force, the Fedayeen Saddam. One name stood out: Lieutenant Colonel Ahmed Hikmat Shakir.
One name stood out: Lieutenant Colonel Ahmed Hikmat Shakir. The name was not spelled exactly as Carney had seen it before, but such discrepancies are common. Having studied the relationship between Iraq and al Qaeda for 18 months, he immediately recognized the potential significance of his find. According to a report last week in the Wall Street Journal, Shakir appears on three different lists of Fedayeen officers.”
EVEN THE AUTHOR KNOWS IT IS WEAK~!!
“The Shakir story is perhaps the government’s strongest indication that Saddam and al Qaeda may have worked together on September 11. It is far from conclusive; conceivably there were two Ahmed Hikmat Shakirs. And in itself, the evidence does not show that Saddam Hussein personally had foreknowledge of the attacks.”
November 27th, 2005 at 1:18 pm#55
“Israel is a country, not a religion.”
Exactly. Just as people who hate America aren’t anti-Christian. We have more than one religion. Israel has people of other religions. Heck there are Christians in Iraq. They aren’t all Muslim.
November 27th, 2005 at 1:30 pm#53, “We all know that there were no substantial links between Al Qaeda and Iraq. ”
“Anybody who says there is no working relationship between al Qaeda and Iraqi intelligence going back to the early ’90s–they can only say that if they’re illiterate. This is a slam dunk.”
November 27th, 2005 at 1:33 pm– James Woolsey, CIA director under President Bill Clinton, November 2003
Spudge, your anti-Semitic hate-mongering is not welcome in America.
November 27th, 2005 at 1:34 pmplunger hates Jews: “Are you concerned that Mossad seems to have played a role in the events of 9/11?”
November 27th, 2005 at 1:35 pmwwallace,
i’m sorry. i must apologize for making a hasty blanket statement. please allow me to clarify. we all know that there is no evidence to support a substantial connection between al qaeda and iraq especially with regard to the events of september the 11th, 2001. is that better?
November 27th, 2005 at 1:38 pm“Spudge, your anti-Semitic hate-mongering is not welcome in America. ”
What? Are you looney. I haven’t said anything racist against anybody. No hate speech either, except for the stuff directed at you and Bush. Are you and Bush Jews? I am pretty sure Bush is CHristian, so what does that make you?
November 27th, 2005 at 1:39 pmAnswer the question wwallace, stop trying to change the subject.
So, are they linked or are they not linked?
November 27th, 2005 at 1:39 pmwho you gonna believe, murka! Us or your lyin’ ears!
November 27th, 2005 at 1:43 pmI like Jews. I hate Israelis. It’s the old “I like Americans/Hate American foreign policy” paradox. Hmmm..
Did Kristol see the day that real men would balk at the idea of peddling his wares on the streetcorners of a sh*thole? Did he not see the day the barrel of the Democracy Gun would be aimed squarely at him?
For shame
November 27th, 2005 at 1:43 pmAs someone who has done it, let me be the first to say that it’s darn fun to rewrite history. Y’all should try it sometime.
Vote,
November 27th, 2005 at 1:44 pmPresident Gore
Are you aware that
November 27th, 2005 at 1:48 pmGREED+CORRUPTION+GAMBLING+NARCOTICS+SEX+LIES+COVETNESS+BLASEMY+DISHONOUR+DISRESPECT IS CAUSING HATE AROUND THE WORLD?
WAY TO GO FREEDOM LOVERS.
wwallace,
As a follow up to my previous post. If connections between Iraq and Al Qaeda that cannot be verified to have any substance with regard to 9/11 are the President’s basis for starting a war, then I guess Saudi Arabia is the next country on the hit list right? I mean hell, if that is our standard for invading a country then we had better start the draft because there is going to be hell to pay.
Fox’s Wallace inadvertently invalidates his position that there was a *substantial* link between Al Qaeda and Iraq with this stupid segment he did. Why make people believe the president never said there was a link when Wallace himself believes it to be factual (as he revealed at the end of the segment)?
The answer is obvious. They do not want the general public to think that the president claimed a connection when we all know that claim is tenuous at best, and even more likely, completely wrong. Therefore, they get all heated up when they see a democrat connecting the dots. After all, the president did make this connection many many times as did many people in his staff and all of it was just a bigger part of the campaign to gain support for an invasion of Iraq.
BTW, answer Spudgeboy’s question.
November 27th, 2005 at 1:53 pmCome one wwallace. You spent all day preaching, now is your time to make a stand as an individual.
So, are they linked or are they not linked?
November 27th, 2005 at 1:55 pmWhat tune will Kristol sing when his servants become his masters?
November 27th, 2005 at 2:00 pmwwallace,
The most authoritative document regarding any connections between AlQaeda and Saddam Hussein’s regime is the 9/11 Commission report.
I have posted this before, and I will re-post it for everyone’s benefit but yours since you are simply ignoring it:
The Commission’s findings bluntly contradict the central claim in The Weekly Standard article, namely that AlQaeda and Iraq “may have worked together on September 11th”. Let’s not forget the Commission members had access to a lot more information than the magazine staff. This was widely reported shortly after the Senate hearings and the publication of the report.
9/11 panel sees no link between Iraq, al-Qaida
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5223932/
Al Qaeda-Hussein Link Is Dismissed
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ wp-dyn/ articles/ A47812-2004Jun16.html
Read the report from the 9/11 Commission’s web site. http://www.9-11commission.gov/
November 27th, 2005 at 2:03 pmWhat tune will Kristol sing when his masters soften the message? He’ll scream like a smashed cat. The masters will cover their ears until the animal control truck takes him away.
November 27th, 2005 at 2:05 pmwwallace,
I’m confused, so maybe you can help me understand. You appear to be claiming that there IS a link between Saddam and al-Qaeda, which condtradicts what Chris Wallace is now saying that George Bush said. So why do you hate George Bush so much? And therefore why are you such a coward and traitor? Why do you hate America so much?
I’m merely using right wing arguments to reach the conclusions in my last three questions, that is that anyone that disagrees with Bush is a coward, a traitor and hates America.
November 27th, 2005 at 2:10 pmMan, I hope Commedy Central uses this in their next Daily Show. It’s ripe with moments of stupidity.
November 27th, 2005 at 2:12 pmWhy didn’t the senator say something like “It’s embarrassing watching you make an ass out of your self, Mr. Wallace.”
November 27th, 2005 at 2:19 pmEven Bushie, had to admit they could find no connection between Al Qaeda and Hussein — of course that was WAY after we became inextricably involved in Iraq, so it didn’t make any difference — that’s when he started emphasizing the reason-du-jour for invading Iraq. Cheney continues to spew the lies, and Fox/Wallace is fulfilling their mission to herd the sheep and keep them believing in the lying bastard-in-chief.
November 27th, 2005 at 2:22 pmSheep don’t read independently - if Wallace/Fox says something, that’s all they hear.
I find it fascinating that you guys have allowed a troll to hijack the thread so effectively. Don’t get defensive when he calls you an anti-Semite. It is a common conservative tactic to conflate opposition to Likud policies with anti-Semitism. It automatically shuts down debate and puts liberals, who are traditionally much more sensitive to ethnic and racial oppression, into an instantly defensive posture. Additionally, you’ll note that whenever you address and refute one of his silly points, he just reasserts the same point. Point out that Woolsey is a PNAC neo-con and he merely repeats the Woolsey quote. This is another time-honored conservative tactic, borrowed from conservative icon Joseph Goebbels: repeat a lie often enough and it becomes the truth. Wwallace has learned his lessons well. The fact is that wwallace has no interest in winning an argument or persuading anyone. He just wants to distract everyone from the salient points: Bush lied about Hussein and al Qaeda. He is now trying to revise those lies and Fox News is aiding and abetting him.
November 27th, 2005 at 2:25 pmHey #21, cherrypicking sentences and parsing words pisses you off because it’s intruding on the master–Bill Clinton’s territory.
More response to this misguided post here:
http://environmentalrepublican.blogspot.com/ 2005/ 11/ iraq-and-al-qaeda.html
November 27th, 2005 at 2:45 pmOh boy, a new troll.
Your gonna have to be really stupid to beat our champion trolls. We have I-RIGHT-I, master of racist slurs and wwallace, king of copy/paste.
Get to work Scott, you are seriously lagging at the momment.
November 27th, 2005 at 2:53 pmOh brother.
November 27th, 2005 at 2:59 pmIraq and al Qaeda, The Connection:
http://www.weeklystandard.com/ Content/ Public/ Articles/ 000/ 000/ 004/ 152lndzv.asp
Comment by wwallace
Nope, sorry Wally not good enough. We need video of Saddam either at the airport kissing Atta goodbye or George Bush has to admit that he and Saddam were involved in 9-11 together to raise the price of oil.
November 27th, 2005 at 3:03 pmChris Wallace hasn’t learned anything from his father, a true legend and a pioneer in journalism. He’s going to be just like Dubya and Frank Sinatra Jr., someone who just can’t progress in life just because he can’t
November 27th, 2005 at 3:04 pmlearn about life from their father’s.
I-RIgHT-I wrote, Of course it would be impossible to connect Saddam and ANY Muslim terrorist group or Islamic thugs. Saddam never killed the Kurds with gas,…
I suppose if I pointed out that Saddam and Islamicists don’t exactly see eye-to-eye on a lot of things, you probably wouldn’t understand.
Comment by liberal
Neither would what’s his name who posted above understand that although the US and Saddam never totally saw eye to eye we still helped him in his war against Iraq. As the Muslims say, “the enemy of my enemy is my friend”. Kiddo, there’s nothing on your mind or the Left’s agenda I don’t understand.
November 27th, 2005 at 3:07 pmOh, and wwallace,
Spudgeboy specifically made it to you the definition of a troll which happens to be YOU!
If you can’t understand the definition of a specific word, you better go back to bed and get it on with your other Wallace friend, Chris. Maybe in a cage with bears and a new friend named Scooter.
November 27th, 2005 at 3:11 pmYeah, that I-Right-I is a real psychologist. He/she claims to know what we all think.
I-Right-I: since you’re so smart, guess which of my ass-cheeks I want you to kiss.
November 27th, 2005 at 3:13 pmPlunger
As a card carying Liberal , i think you are full of crap when you clam Mossad was behind 9/11 . You playing in the HANDS OF ALL FUNDEMALISTS , WHO ARE NEO FASCISTS and hate themselves above all .
November 27th, 2005 at 3:14 pm“The most authoritative document regarding any connections between AlQaeda and Saddam Hussein’s regime is the 9/11 Commission report.”
What utter nonsense. The 9/11 Commission report is a joke.
“Anybody who says there is no working relationship between al Qaeda and Iraqi intelligence going back to the early ’90s–they can only say that if they’re illiterate. This is a slam dunk.”
– James Woolsey, CIA director under President Bill Clinton, November 2003
“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.”
November 27th, 2005 at 3:14 pm– President Bill Clinton, 1998
It’s obvious to any literate person that Chris Wallace was referrign to that one single quote, not to any and all connections bewtwen Iraq and al Qaeda generally.
So the only remaining question is, is Judd illiterate or is Judd a lying propagandist who will say anything for a buck? I suspect the latter.
November 27th, 2005 at 3:17 pmRedleg,
IRIGHTI is as much of a Psychologist or psychiatrist as Tom Cruise. Same for the trolls such as Mighty Mouth(who hasn’t had the balls to show up, yet)wwallace
or the new troll Scotttissue.
Guess that makes you, me and the rest of us Brooke Shields.
P.S. Loved that closing statement on #90.
November 27th, 2005 at 3:19 pmYeah, that I-Right-I is a real psychologist. He/she claims to know what we all think.
I-Right-I: since you’re so smart, guess which of my ass-cheeks I want you to kiss.
Comment by Redleg
What are you, ten? Let’s put it this way Jr. I know what your response is going to be before I ax the question or make the statement. That means I’m three jumps ahead of you before I ever sign on. That’s why we win and that’s why we’re better than you.
November 27th, 2005 at 3:21 pmIRIGHTI-
No one on this earth, not even Mighty AphroMouth would want to kiss your asscheeks. They probably haven’t been washed in five years or more.
Condi might want to. That’s basically her job: kissing the ass of any incompetent maniac.
November 27th, 2005 at 3:30 pmWhat utter nonsense. The 9/11 Commission report is a joke.
Comment by wwallace — November 27, 2005 @ 3:14 pm
So maybe you are privy to information that the 9/11 Commission wasn’t, or any of us here is. Would you share that information? Also, point us to authoritative sources that call the 9/11 Commission’s report “a joke”.
And your posting the Clinton quote is rather odd. Haven’t you stated all liberals lie?
November 27th, 2005 at 3:30 pmSo the only remaining question is, is Judd illiterate or is Judd a lying propagandist who will say anything for a buck? I suspect the latter.
Comment by wwallace
Judd is a small time paid political operator without much in the way of imagination or talent. His twists of words and manipulation of “facts” are way too obvious to anyone over the age of 40 or not educated in public schools, but I like him.
As long as he and these other Think Communist editors are able to maintain their illusion of elitist superiority they’ll stay on the job fooling nobody except the teenagers and fringe loons that make up the majority of posters on this site.
Keep that in mind and try not to make them look too bad.
November 27th, 2005 at 3:34 pmAt the time Iraq was invaded 68% of Americans thought Saddam and Osama were the same person. That kind of mistaken impression doesn’t happen by accident.
November 27th, 2005 at 3:36 pmIRIGHTI-
No one on this earth, not even Mighty AphroMouth would want to kiss your asscheeks.
Comment by JIMBO
For the love of Jesus Jim it’s Sunday. Stay off the drugs will ya? I think your reading and comprehension would improve if you’d just learn to get high on life. I said nothing about kissing somebody’s behind.
November 27th, 2005 at 3:38 pmMizzWrong, you quote white supremacist sites, and opus dei whackos, what would you know about ‘facts’, you’re clearly alergic to them. I post facts all the time,
Comment by Ryan “FMFB” Neat
Ryan, what can I say to convince you that to me you are a pimple on the ass of America. The kind of “facts” you constantly try and fool people with have no basis in reality. By the way, I’m not Catholic, have never quoted a white supremacist site and note that all the freaks from places like Stormfront and other neo-Nazi dung heaps tend to agree with you most of the time. It doesn’t surprise me though because a lot of Nazis were homosexual.
November 27th, 2005 at 3:48 pmThe gist of it is this: the White House seldom flatly stated that SH had links to AlQ an 9/11, but they did everything they could the leave that impression (hence the public’s erroneous early take on the matter).
November 27th, 2005 at 3:49 pmWhy the reticense? Well, to allow for deniability later (i.e., now) . The need for that deniability, in turn, stemmed from their gut feeling that the case was very thin from the outset.
I predict poor Ryan will engage in juvenile name-calling. :()
November 27th, 2005 at 3:49 pmGregor, When did I say Clinton lied about Iraq? Please provide evidence. You are far from trustworthy, to say the very least. :()
November 27th, 2005 at 3:50 pmIt’s a classic sign how bankrupt many conservatives are when they yell “anti-semite!” at the first mention of the word “neo-con”. They think that will end the argument.
November 27th, 2005 at 3:54 pmIt’s a classic sign how bankrupt many conservatives are when they yell “anti-semite!†at the first mention of the word “neo-conâ€. They think that will end the argument.
Comment by jason
I just call them Joooooo haters. They really love some semites. You know the ones who wear rags on their heads and tend to explode around groups of Jews.
November 27th, 2005 at 3:56 pmjason, “when they yell “anti-semite!†at the first mention of the word “neo-conâ€.”
Since that did not happen, you are a liar.
November 27th, 2005 at 3:57 pmLike I said, criticism of Israel = hatred of Jews to those of you who insist on playing the racial card. It shows how intellectually dishonest you are.
November 27th, 2005 at 4:01 pmEverything I hear about FOX, i get second hand. I turned off my TV almost 10 years ago and I haven’t missed a thing.
November 27th, 2005 at 4:03 pmHow about his closing statement about Biden not being able to back up that Cheney had oft declared Saddam to be an “imminent threat”?! They are just trying to parse their way out of hell!!
November 27th, 2005 at 4:07 pmSpudge, your anti-Semitic hate-mongering is not welcome in America.
Comment by wwallace — November 27, 2005 @ 1:34 pm
Spudge said nothing anti-semitic, so your attack was classic use of the race-card. That’s all you got.
November 27th, 2005 at 4:07 pm“I predict poor Ryan will engage in juvenile name-calling. :()
Comment by wwallace”
Now why would I do that MonkeyBoyRetard? :()
November 27th, 2005 at 4:09 pmWhackoWallace is anti-semitic, he hates arabs and palestinians, and has said so… He’s just projecting that rascism onto Spudge so he won’t have to own his own evil…
November 27th, 2005 at 4:10 pmWE AS AMERICANS MUST DO OUR UTMOST TO PROTECT THE STATE OF ISRAEL FROM THE MUSLIM HORDES. THIS DOESN’T MEAN WE LIKE JEWS. IN FACT, WE CONSIDER THEM IMMORAL. BUT THE JEWS OF THE WORLD MUST BE PRESENT IN THE PROMISED LAND IN ORDER FOR THE RAPTURE TO COME. THAT’S WHAT THIS WAR IS ABOUT. ANYONE WHO DOESN’T UNDERSTAND THIS IS WEAK AND CONFUSED AT BEST, IMMORAL AT WORST.
WEBSITES LIKE THIS ARE A DISGRACE TO AMERICA. THEY ARE PROVIDING AID AND COMFORT TO THE ENEMY. LIBERAL LEFT-WINGERS SHOULD HANG THEIR HEADS IN SHAME.
November 27th, 2005 at 4:13 pmGregor, When did I say Clinton lied about Iraq? Please provide evidence. You are far from trustworthy, to say the very least. :()
Comment by wwallace — November 27, 2005 @ 3:50 pm
That’s a strawman argument. I asked this question: “Haven’t you stated all liberals lie?” A yes or no answer would have sufficed.
And here is evidence that you have called Democrats/liberals liars -it wasn’t hard to find:
Because an end to the liberal media monopoly is bad for liberals. Truth is the enemy of the left.
Comment by wwallace — October 27, 2005 @ 7:40 pm
The ones lying about Iraq are the Democrats.
Comment by wwallace — November 5, 2005 @ 7:55 pm
Granted, Democrats are incessant liars. I just disagree they lied about Iraq.
Comment by wwallace — November 5, 2005 @ 9:37 pm
And I was also able to find your posts where you do actually say Clinton is lying:
Bill Clinton had access to the same type of intel in the 1990s when he said Iraq was a threat to US national security. The ones lying about Iraq are the Democrats.
Comment by wwallace — November 5, 2005 @ 7:55 pm
(…) given identical statements by Clinton and Bush about the threat posed by Iraq, one is lying, the other not.
Comment by wwallace — November 5, 2005 @ 7:38 pm
As for my other question: Provide the information the 9/11 Commission did not have that makes you think their report was “a joke”. Or point us to authoritative sources that call the 9/11 Commission’s report “a joke”.
November 27th, 2005 at 4:13 pmto I-RIgHT-I and wwallace
If you are being paid to interject your slavering nonsense into legitimate blogs, I can understand that. In this republican economy, many of us have to take whatever work we can find.But if you’re doing this on your own? If this is some kind of hobby? Please accept my sincere and heartfelt advice: try to get out of the house more. Honestly, get involved in some physical activity, go out to movie theaters, try to make some friends, seek professional help if necessary. I’m worried about you.
November 27th, 2005 at 4:14 pm“Rags on their heads”. No racial stereotyping there.
November 27th, 2005 at 4:15 pmBleeding heart, they lurk around liberal websites because they are losers and nobody likes them.
November 27th, 2005 at 4:17 pmThe kind of “facts†you constantly try and fool people with have no basis in reality. Comment by I-RIgHT-I
You mean like this?:
“We know for a fact there are weapons there.” - Ari Fleischer, Jan. 9, 2003
November 27th, 2005 at 4:19 pmronald, good satire. You’ve caputered the schizophrenia that is opus dei (MizzWrong) perfectly…
November 27th, 2005 at 4:20 pm#92
“What utter nonsense. The 9/11 Commission report is a joke.”
So, you think the report that was commsioned by the Bush adminstration is a joke. What else about Bush do yo find to be a joke?
November 27th, 2005 at 4:20 pm#93
“It’s obvious to any literate person that Chris Wallace was referrign to that one single quote, not to any and all connections bewtwen Iraq and al Qaeda generally.”
So, from this post we can take it that you believe there are ties between Saddam Hussein and Al Qiada?
“So, are they linked or are they not linked?”
So, your answer to my question is “Yes” I just want you on the record when the right wing spin machine gets in full gear saying there wasn’t a connection.
Which by the way is what we have been saying all along.
November 27th, 2005 at 4:25 pmI love it when the right quotes the 9-11 commission approvingly when it suits their purposes, then call it a “joke” when it doesn’t.
November 27th, 2005 at 4:25 pm#95
“know what your response is going to be before I ax the question or make the statement. That means I’m three jumps ahead of you before I ever sign on. That’s why we win and that’s why we’re better than you.”
And you are asking other people how old they are and callin gthem Jr? I haven’t heard anything like you wrote since I drop off my twelve year old at school.
November 27th, 2005 at 4:27 pmI notice Wallace had no comeback when Levin mentioned Bush’s comments that al-Quada was an “ally” of Hussein (Mission Accomplish speech). I notice he also ignored the Feb. 2002 DIA memo that said al-Shaikh al-Libi was a fabricator.
November 27th, 2005 at 4:28 pm#100
“Judd is a small time paid political operator without much in the way of imagination or talent.”
If Judd is small time, then you must be a pissant, considerin gthe only thing you do is reply to his postigs. Moron.
November 27th, 2005 at 4:29 pmMy guess is Mike Wallace is sick to death of his sons horrific journalism practices. It was evident in the interview they had together recently. Mike Wallace disagrees with his son on almost everything his son reports. Because Chris Wallace has become a propoganda agent for the Neocons and the shamefull lying Bush regime.
Kill you corporate cablevision and get active on the internet.
November 27th, 2005 at 4:30 pmGregor, liberals lie often, but not 100% of the time. Where’s the contradiction in that? :()
November 27th, 2005 at 4:30 pmSpudge, the belief that Iraq was a state sponsor of terrorism was bipartisan, before the Democrats started lying about it. See the bipartisan Iraq war resolution, comment #107.
November 27th, 2005 at 4:32 pm#109
“I predict poor Ryan will engage in juvenile name-calling. :()”
I predict you will copy/paste this in another thread and still nobody will give a shit.
November 27th, 2005 at 4:33 pmWhy do these morons keep quoting the Weekly Standard? A totally discredited GOP tool.
November 27th, 2005 at 4:34 pmC’mon guys, I’m surprised you’re not quoting Powerline and Little Green Footballs. They’re about as legitimate as the Weekly Standard.
#132, cherry-picking a few quotes out of context in no way changes the fact that there was a broad bipartisan consensus that Iraq was a threat, that Iraq had WMD, and that Iraq was a state sponsor of terrorism.
The Democrats are now lying about that consensus because they care more about partisan gain than about US national security.
November 27th, 2005 at 4:35 pm#110
“Gregor, When did I say Clinton lied about Iraq? Please provide evidence. You are far from trustworthy, to say the very least. :()”
You posted a quote of Clinton saying Iraq was evil.
You said Democrats are liars. Clinton was a Democrat.
Therefore, CLinton lied about Iraq.
You are a moron.
November 27th, 2005 at 4:35 pmReally, what part was untrue? No one is saying that Saddam planned the 9/11 attack, but there is a big difference between that, and saying there were no connections with terrorists. See http://donsingleton.blogspot.com/ 2005/ 11/ think-progress-blasts-chris-wallace.html (there is something wrong with your trackback)
November 27th, 2005 at 4:36 pmNo one has less credibility than Piltdown. The Weekly Standard is a great publication.
November 27th, 2005 at 4:36 pm#112
“You know the ones who wear rags on their heads and tend to explode around groups of Jews.”
That would be an anti-Semitic statement aimed at Arabs.
November 27th, 2005 at 4:36 pmIraq was a state sponsor of Palestinian terrorism. Saddam openly admitted that. That’s bad, but has nothing to do with al-Quada or 9-11.
November 27th, 2005 at 4:37 pmWeekly Standard is a hysterical neo-con rag.
November 27th, 2005 at 4:38 pmAnyone ever find nude Coulter pics?
Sorry, I’m not into guys.
November 27th, 2005 at 4:38 pmSpudge, no one claimed that Clinton lied 100% of the time. Noting the fact he assaulted many women doesn’t imply he assaulted every woman on Earth, you nitwit. :()
November 27th, 2005 at 4:39 pm#120
“WE AS AMERICANS MUST DO OUR UTMOST TO PROTECT THE STATE OF ISRAEL FROM THE MUSLIM HORDES. THIS DOESN’T MEAN WE LIKE JEWS. IN FACT, WE CONSIDER THEM IMMORAL. BUT THE JEWS OF THE WORLD MUST BE PRESENT IN THE PROMISED LAND IN ORDER FOR THE RAPTURE TO COME. THAT’S WHAT THIS WAR IS ABOUT. ANYONE WHO DOESN’T UNDERSTAND THIS IS WEAK AND CONFUSED AT BEST, IMMORAL AT WORST.
WEBSITES LIKE THIS ARE A DISGRACE TO AMERICA. THEY ARE PROVIDING AID AND COMFORT TO THE ENEMY. LIBERAL LEFT-WINGERS SHOULD HANG THEIR HEADS IN SHAME.”
Man, that’s some crazy shit there. Heh, he said Rapture.
November 27th, 2005 at 4:39 pmjason is a hysterical neo-nazi dufus.
November 27th, 2005 at 4:40 pmwwallace, there you go again with your race baiting. Once again, you equate criticism of Israel or the term “neo-con” with hatred of Jews. Not at all the same thing. Your mind is too small to realize that I guess, you poor thing.
November 27th, 2005 at 4:42 pm#134
“Gregor, liberals lie often, but not 100% of the time. Where’s the contradiction in that? :()”
Yes, we know, they only lie when it benifits you. Retard.
November 27th, 2005 at 4:43 pmThere jason goes again with his race-baiting.
November 27th, 2005 at 4:44 pmNo, I’m only baiting fools, such as yourself. Call it fool-baiting.
November 27th, 2005 at 4:46 pmSpudge, calling me names will never change any of the facts I’ve posted.
Did you get a chance to read the bipartisan Iraq war resolution above, with all its many references to terrorism?
November 27th, 2005 at 4:46 pm#135
“Spudge, the belief that Iraq was a state sponsor of terrorism was bipartisan, before the Democrats started lying about it.”
What does that have to do with Iraq and Al Qaida being connected?
I could higher a Japanese hitman to kill you.
Does that tied George Bush to the Yakuza?
So, I ask again is Saddam Hussein linked to Osama bin Laden?
November 27th, 2005 at 4:46 pmjason is obviously a racist.
November 27th, 2005 at 4:47 pm#138
“#132, cherry-picking a few quotes out of context in no way changes the fact that there was a broad bipartisan consensus that Iraq was a threat, that Iraq had WMD, and that Iraq was a state sponsor of terrorism.
The Democrats are now lying about that consensus because they care more about partisan gain than about US national security.”
The only reason people believed there were any connections or WMDs is because THEY WERE LIED TO.
November 27th, 2005 at 4:47 pmwwallace, have you read the Iraq war resolution? You might notice that it says nothing about invading Iraq, indefinitely occupying it, or even overthrowing Saddam Hussein.
November 27th, 2005 at 4:49 pmLooks like poor wwallace has been caught with a case of the “The Kramdens,” if you know what we mean.LOL
November 27th, 2005 at 4:49 pmSpudge, I’ll quote again from the Iraq war resolution, since you’re obviously a slow learner:
Whereas members of al Qaida, an organization bearing responsibility for attacks on the United States, its citizens, and interests, including the attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, are known to be in Iraq;
It is interesting that you have no problem with terrorists other than al Qaeda. Are you a member of one of those organizations, or just a sympathizer?
November 27th, 2005 at 4:49 pm#146
“Spudge, no one claimed that Clinton lied 100% of the time. Noting the fact he assaulted many women doesn’t imply he assaulted every woman on Earth, you nitwit. :()”
Yes, we know, as I have already stated Clinton only lies when it benifits you.
November 27th, 2005 at 4:49 pmSpudge,
“The only reason people believed there were any connections or WMDs is because THEY WERE LIED TO.”
“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, Sec. of State under President Bill Clinton, 1998
“(Saddam) will rebuild his arsenal of weapons of mass destruction and some day, some way, I am certain he will use that arsenal again, as he has 10 times since 1983″
— Clinton National Security Adviser Sandy Berger, Feb 18, 1998
“Those who doubted whether Iraq or the world would be better off without Saddam Hussein, and those who believe today that we are not safer with his capture, don’t have the judgment to be president or the credibility to be elected president.”
— Senator John Kerry, December 16, 2001
“in the post-Sept. 11 world, the unrestrained threat of weapons of mass destruction in the hands of Saddam Hussein is unacceptable and that his refusal to allow in inspectors is in blatant violation of the United Nations 1991 cease-fire agreement that left him in power.”
— Senator John Kerry, Sept. 6, 2002
“There is also no question that Saddam Hussein continues to pursue weapons of mass destruction, and his success can threaten both our interests in the region and our security at home.”
— Senator John Kerry, Sept. 6, 2002
“If Saddam Hussein is unwilling to bend to the international community’s already existing order, then he will have invited enforcement, even if that enforcement is mostly at the hands of the United States, a right we retain even if the Security Council fails to act.”
— Senator John Kerry, Sept. 6, 2002
“In 1991, the world collectively made a judgment that this man [Saddam Hussein] should not have weapons of mass destruction. And we are here today in the year 2002 with an uninspected 4-year interval during which time we know through intelligence he not only has kept them, but he continues to grow them.”
“I believe the record of Saddam Hussein’s ruthless, reckless breach of international values and standards of behavior which is at the core of the cease-fire agreement, with no reach, no stretch, is cause enough for the world community to hold him accountable by use of force, if necessary. The threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real, but as I said, it is not new.”
— Senator John Kerry, October 9, 2002
“Saddam Hussein’s regime represents a grave threat to America and our allies, including our vital ally, Israel. For more than two decades, Saddam Hussein has sought weapons of mass destruction through every available means. We know that he has chemical and biological weapons. He has already used them against his neighbors and his own people, and is trying to build more. We know that he is doing everything he can to build nuclear weapons, and we know that each day he gets closer to achieving that goal.”
— Senator John Edwards, Oct 10, 2002
“Iraq’s search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to completely deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power. We know he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country.”
— Former Vice President Al Gore, September 2002
“There is no doubt that Saddam Hussein’s regime poses a threat to his people, his neighbours and the world at large because of his biological and chemical weapons and his nuclear programme. They admitted to vast stores of biological and chemical stocks in 1995. In 1998, as the Prime Minister’s speech a few days ago made clear, even more were documented.”
— Former President Bill Clinton, October 2002
“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.”
— President Bill Clinton, 1998
“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. 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”
— Senator Hillary Clinton, October 10, 2002
“Now, I believe the facts that have brought us to this fateful vote are not in doubt,” Hillary Clinton told the Senate the day she announced her support for the war.
“There’s a very clear history and intention of not only building stockpiles and adding to what they already have of biological and chemical weaponry, but attempting to obtain nuclear capacity”
— Senator Hillary Clinton, October 10, 2002
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.
November 27th, 2005 at 4:50 pm— Senator Jay Rockefeller, October 10, 2002
Iraq probably did have some chemical weapons in 1998. They were likely destroyed in Operation Desert Fox. To claim that Bush was using the same intelligence that Clinton had is disingenous, and frankly irrelevent. It was no longer applicable in 2002-2003. Pluse, Bush was getting intelligence, FALSE intellegence, from Chalabi and the INC in 2001-2003.
November 27th, 2005 at 4:52 pm#153
“Spudge, calling me names will never change any of the facts I’ve posted.
Did you get a chance to read the bipartisan Iraq war resolution above, with all its many references to terrorism?”
But since you don’t ever post facts, I will continue to call you dick lickin’ asshole.
Did you get a chance to figure out that you shouldn’t post the same retarded shit over and over?
There WAS a bipartisan resolution. I don’t need to read it as I already have. It is filled with the lies brought on by the Bush administartion.
November 27th, 2005 at 4:52 pmjason, right, the war resolution - “This joint resolution may be cited as the “Authorization for the Use of Military Force Against Iraq”" - was not at all about using military force against Iraq.
ROFL
November 27th, 2005 at 4:53 pm#159
“Whereas members of al Qaida, an organization bearing responsibility for attacks on the United States, its citizens, and interests, including the attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, are known to be in Iraq;”
This is based on lies. LIES LIES LIES LIES LIES LIES LIES LIES LIES LIES LIES LIES LIES LIES LIES LIES LIES LIES LIES LIES LIES LIES LIES LIES LIES LIES LIES LIES LIES LIES LIES LIES LIES LIES LIES LIES LIES LIES LIES LIES LIES LIES LIES LIES LIES LIES LIES LIES LIES LIES LIES LIES LIES LIES LIES LIES LIES LIES LIES LIES LIES LIES LIES LIES LIES LIES LIES LIES LIES LIES LIES LIES LIES LIES LIES LIES LIES LIES LIES LIES LIES LIES LIES LIES
November 27th, 2005 at 4:54 pm…http://www.whitehouse.gov/ask/20031010.html
Welcome to “Ask the White House” —
an online interactive forum where you can submit questions to Administration Officials and friends of the White House. Visit the “Ask the White House” archives to read other discussions with White House officials.
…nice pictures…
November 27th, 2005 at 4:54 pm#161
Your copy/paste of those quotes does not impress anyone here. You could post those at a right wing site and get a cheer. But it ain’t gonna happen here.
November 27th, 2005 at 4:55 pmSpudge is having an emotional outburst, much like a spoiled toddler. That will not change the fact that there were members of al Qaeda and other terrorist organizations in Iraq before the war.
November 27th, 2005 at 4:56 pmMe think there are agents provocateurs among you , setting one against the other for the benefit of this manipualitive admistration ,May be it’s karl rove and co.
November 27th, 2005 at 4:56 pm#166
Now tell me those e-mail/questions aren’t hand selected to be of the finest quality bullshit.
November 27th, 2005 at 4:57 pmjason, Bill Clinton and Al Gore didn’t think Desert Fox ended the threat from Iraq:
“Iraq’s search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to completely deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power. We know he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country.”
— Former Vice President Al Gore, September 2002
“There is no doubt that Saddam Hussein’s regime poses a threat to his people, his neighbours and the world at large because of his biological and chemical weapons and his nuclear programme. They admitted to vast stores of biological and chemical stocks in 1995. In 1998, as the Prime Minister’s speech a few days ago made clear, even more were documented.”
— Former President Bill Clinton, October 2002
Are you calling Bill Clinton a liar? ROFL
November 27th, 2005 at 4:58 pm#168
“Spudge is having an emotional outburst, much like a spoiled toddler. That will not change the fact that there were members of al Qaeda and other terrorist organizations in Iraq before the war.”
ACtually, I am having a great time making you look like a retard in real time.
As for the other part of your drivel. Give us some proof. The international community is looking for it right now. You can help save Bush’s ass. You can show the world that the Democrats are wrong and you are right. Now is your chance. Stick a pencil in your ear.
November 27th, 2005 at 5:00 pmjason, right, the war resolution - “This joint resolution may be cited as the “Authorization for the Use of Military Force Against Iraq— - was not at all about using military force against Iraq.
ROFL
Comment by wwallace — November 27, 2005 @ 4:53 pm
You are really a dishonest idiot, wwallace. I never said it didn’t authorize force against Iraq. We used force against Iraq in 1991 and 1998 but did not invade and occupy the country and overthrow Saddam. The resolution merely authorizes the use of force to compel Saddam to obey UN resolutions, and let weapons inspectors into his country. Bush himself said before the war that this resolution does not mean that war is “inevitable”. You are really getting into Joe McCarthy-levels of dishonesty here, wallace.
November 27th, 2005 at 5:00 pmDear God, if Chris Wallace was any stupider, he’d be able to donate organs.
November 27th, 2005 at 5:02 pmAnd, of course, Clinton and Gore never made the phony claims that Saddam had link to al-Quada.
What about al-Libi, wallace? Or curveball?
November 27th, 2005 at 5:03 pm…one does begin to understand in all this how the Germans, another educated and highly civilized people, were driven in the 1930s by a campaign of fear and lies, into supporting a policy of aggression, religious hatred and racism.. .
November 27th, 2005 at 5:05 pmInteresting how Bush and the neo-cons blame the CIA exclusively for the horribly bad intelligence, and then Bush goes and gives former head of the CIA Tenet a medal!!! That’s Bush logic for you.
November 27th, 2005 at 5:08 pmYes, rewarding incompetence ala Brownie.
November 27th, 2005 at 5:09 pm“You did a heckuva job Tenny.”
November 27th, 2005 at 5:11 pmVery good point jason.
November 27th, 2005 at 5:11 pmWell, I’m going to get offline now. Unlike wwallace I have a rewarding and productive life that doesn’t consist of getting kicks by trolling websites that I don’t agree with. Everyone have fun!
November 27th, 2005 at 5:12 pmjason has to get to his Aryan Brotherhood meeting.
November 27th, 2005 at 5:50 pm#182
You are so funny and stupid all at the same time.
November 27th, 2005 at 5:51 pmThe Clinton administration did in fact tie Iraq to al Qaeda when they bombed the al shifa pharmaceutical plant in Sudan.
jason seems incapable of basic honesty. But what can one expect from a racist?
November 27th, 2005 at 5:52 pm