[It Wasn't me]

The Lie in all it's glory from the White House

Disarm Saddam Hussein

The gravest danger we face in the war on terror is outlaw regimes that seek and possess nuclear, chemical and biological weapons.

Twelve years ago, Saddam Hussein agreed to disarm all weapons of mass destruction. For 12 years, he systematically violated that agreement.
Three months ago, the United Nations Security Council gave Saddam his final chance to disarm. He has shown his utter contempt for the U.N.
The U.N. and U.S. intelligence sources have known for some time that Saddam Hussein has materials to produce chemical and biological weapons, but he has not accounted for them:
26,000 liters of anthrax—enough to kill several million people
38,000 liters of botulinum toxin
500 tons of sarin, mustard and VX nerve agents
Almost 30,000 munitions capable of delivering chemical agents
From three Iraqi defectors, we know that Iraq in the late 1990s had several mobile biological weapons labs. But he has not disclosed them.
The International Atomic Energy Agency confirmed in the 1990s that Saddam Hussein had an advanced nuclear weapons development program, a design for a nuclear weapon, and was working on methods of enriching uranium for a nuclear bomb. He recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa, according to the British Government. He has attempted to purchase high strength aluminum tubes suitable for nuclear weapons, according to our intelligence sources. Yet he has not credibly explained these activities.
Thousands of Iraqi security personnel are at work hiding documents and materials from the UN inspectors.
Iraqi officials accompany all inspectors in order to intimidate witnesses.
Iraq is blocking U-2 surveillance flights requested by the U.N.
Saddam Hussein has ordered that scientists who cooperate with the UN be killed, along with their families.
Saddam Hussein aids and protects terrorists, including al-Qaida members. He could provide hidden weapons to terrorists, or help them develop their own. It would take just one vial, one canister, one crate slipped into this country to bring a day of horror like none we have ever known.
The United States will ask the UN Security Council to convene next week to consider the facts of Iraq’s ongoing defiance of the world. We will consult. But if Saddam Hussein does not disarm, we will act for the safety of our people, and for the peace of the world.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/response/disarm.html

---------------------------------------------------------------------
The One You've Been Waiting For
By William Rivers Pitt
TruthOut.org, 19 February 2004
EXCERPT: Nicole Frye and Bryan Spry are dead because of George W. Bush. Both died in Iraq. Both were 19 years old. William Ramirez was also 19 years old, as was Holly McGeogh. Luis Moreno and Nathan Nakis, Jeffrey Braun and Jason Wright, Joey Whitener and Steven Acosta and Rachel Bosveld, all were 19 years old when they died in Iraq. Ryan Thomas and Michael Mihalakis were 18 when they died in Iraq. They join the 544 American soldiers who have been killed there in less than a year. They were lied to, as were we all, and now they are forever young in death. The lie they, and we, were fed still sits on the White House website. You can find the lie if you go to www.WhiteHouse.gov and do a search for the page titled "Disarm Saddam Hussein." The page is still there, in all its dishonest glory, even today. The page will tell you that Iraq possesses 26,000 liters of anthrax, 38,000 liters of botulinum toxin, and 500 tons of sarin, mustard and VX nerve agent. 500 tons, for those without calculators, equals 1,000,000 pounds. Hide that. This White House page likewise claims Iraq is in possession of 30,000 munitions capable of delivering the 64,000 liters of anthrax and botulinum toxin no one can find, along with the 1,000,000 pounds of sarin, mustard and VX gas no one can find. Better still, the page claims a connection between Saddam Hussein and al Qaeda that never existed and cannot be proven. Best of all, the page claims that Iraq was seeking uranium from Niger for use in a nuclear weapons program. This was the lie that Bush used in his State of the Union address, to the humiliation of us all. This was the lie that motivated Ambassador Joseph Wilson to speak out on the pages of the New York Times. This was the lie that motivated White House staffers to take revenge against Wilson by exposing his CIA wife, Valerie Plame, thus sparking a federal investigation. This was the lie that might bring down the administration. It is still on the White House website.
SEE ALSO: Disarm Saddam Hussein (WhiteHouse.gov)

http://www.bushwhackedusa.com/index....0Waiting%20For

[Chris A]

Perhaps you missed this.

If you really believe that President BUSH lied - - THAT THERE NEVER WERE ANY WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION IN IRAQ AND HE TOOK US TO WAR SOLELY FOR HIS OIL

BUDDIES -- then read this.


"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."
- President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998

"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."
- President Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998

"Iraq is a long way from [the USA], 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."
- Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998

"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times
since 1983."
- Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998

"[W]e 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."
- Letter to President Clinton, signed by Sens. Carl Levin,
Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others Oct. 9, 1998

"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."
- Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998

"Hussein has ... chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass
destruction and palaces for his cronies."
- Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999

"There is no doubt that ... Saddam Hussein has invigorated 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."
- Letter to President Bush, Signed by Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL,)
and others, December 5, 2001

"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
mandated of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass
destruction and the means of delivering them."
- Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002

"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical
weapons throughout his country."
- Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002

"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."
- Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002

"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and
developing weapons of mass destruction."
- Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002

"The last UN 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..."
- Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002

"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."
- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 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."
- Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002

"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" Rep.
- Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002

"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."
- Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002

"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."
- Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), Dec. 8, 2002

"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 is miscalculating America's response to his
continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction
..... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is
real..."
- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003

SO NOW THE DEMOCRATS SAY PRESIDENT BUSH LIED, THAT THERE NEVER WERE ANY
WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION AND HE TOOK US TO WAR FOR HIS OIL BUDDIES???

[Stoner]

ChrisA,
All your doing with that list is showing a large group that range from liars to incredibly stupid.
IMO, your list, ChrisA, in no way refutes the lies of Bush and Company.



After that sound track was posted here at TSG, I find it it incredible that anyone hearing it could think otherwise of Bush...........his own words!!

Bush lied to us to start a war that was in planning before 911, using 911 as the rationale for war.

I should note, the terrorist that planned 911 still walks the planet a free man.

[Chris A]

Who said Bush lied??

Seems to me that he was just following the line that many others bought.. We were sadly mislead by the world intelligence community.

[AcaCandy]

Man, not another Bush lied thread Sheesh, wait til you guys hear that he actually helped plan 9/11

[Stoner]

What have you heard, Candy

please tell...........

[AcaCandy]

I could tell ya Stoner, but then I'd have to kill ya.......and I've grown to like you of late, so we'll let some other right winged crazy post it

[LANMaster]

I think perception is 9/10th of reality on this topic.

Bush deceived the world, the UN, and America? Lied to us all?
no. But that's the perception. I believe Bush fully believed that Saddam was as great a threat as he said when he sold the US people and the UN on the war.

The war against Iraq was illegal?
no. But that is the perception. UN resolution 1441 granted the US the right to bring to bear the "serious consequences" that were threatened toward Iraq.
In addition, the US Congress voted to give the President the authority to invade and occupy Iraq.

Saddam's regime wasn't a threat to the US?
Yes it was. It just turned out that the thread hadn't fully matured, or recovered completely from 1991. Had this war in Iraq occurred 3-5 years later, It is highly likely that Iraq would have been much more successful defending against the US, thereby causing exponentially more US and Coalition casualties, prolonging the conflict resulting in a greater Irtaqi casualty number as well.

WMD didn't exist?
Yes, they did. The evidence is overwhelming that they existed. Heck, the US has receipts to prove that it did. Pleanty of people here have the pictures of Rummy and Saddam to prove it!
The US armed Iraq with chemical weapons back in the 80's?
Yup, we sure did. HUGE mistake. Our reasons were honorable, but that should be a VERY last resort. I also oppose arming Israel as much as we have. HUGE mistake, and guaranteed to come back and bite us all in the worst way.

Iraq had programs and plans to acquire nuclear weapons?
Yup They sure did. Just not matured to the level that the Int'l community had assumed. No doubt Iraq was headed that way. If you have any doubts about that, just look at Iran. You think Saddam would want Iran to have that kind of superior forepower next door? ... and no way to retaliate? Hell no.
So you can see that the mistaken perception that Saddam was willing to comply with the UN resolutions is utterly rediculous.

So did Bush lie?
I don't think so.

[It Wasn't me]

MORE FROM IDIOT BUSH

Since May 1, when Bush made his carrier landing to announce victory (a stunt that cost the taxpayers $1 million), more American soldiers have been killed in Iraq than during the invasion. In addition, according to the Sept. 1 issue of Newsweek, since May 1 more than 1,000 American troops have been wounded. That issue also reports that our troops are attacked on an average of 15 to 20 times a day. We spend more than a billion dollars a week there, roughly $14 billion since May 1. We'll spend another $14 billion through the end of the year. (The White House hasn't yet told Congress what the invasion cost.) And there's no end in sight. U.S. troops in Iraq number 138,000, with 34,000 in neighboring Kuwait, plus 10,000 in Afghanistan. If another trouble spot flares up, experts doubt our capacity to respond. And after four months of intensive search we've found no weapons of mass destruction. Aug. 28, Los Angeles Times: "The weapons hunters have yet to find proof that any chemical or biological agents were produced after 1991." Just as the UN said.

We got into this mess because Bush lied about nearly everything, produced no hard evidence about anything, and most Americans chose to believe him anyway.

The following headlines and quotes are from The New York Times unless otherwise noted.

June 17, 2002 -- "Bush to Formalize Defense Policy of Striking First." With virtually no protest in Congress or on the streets, Bush reversed a foreign policy that dated back to 1776. The public's passivity gave him his green light. Everything followed from that.

May 4, 2002 -- "U.S. Says Iraq Is Developing Banned Arms." "Satellite photos provide evidence of long-range missiles, Washington claims." We know now that was a lie.

July 20, 2002 -- "Pentagon Pursues Leak of Anti-Iraq Plan." As early as last summer -- when Bush, Powell, Rumsfeld, and Rice swore they had no plans to attack Iraq -- some honest soul in the Pentagon leaked the plans. Americans ignored the contradictions, the news media didn't investigate much, and protest was next to nil.

Sept. 4, 2002 -- "Bush to Put Case for Action in Iraq." "Administration officials also declared flatly that even if arms inspectors were given unfettered access to Iraq's nuclear sites, Mr. Bush was still committed to the ouster of Mr. Hussein." Bush was set on invasion, inspections be damned. The public's response: business as usual.

Sept. 6, 2002 -- Bush: "One thing is certain -- I'm not going to change my view. And my view is, we can't let the world's worst leaders blackmail America, threaten America, or hurt America with the world's worst weapons." But Saddam Hussein wasn't threatening America, and, as Bush knew, he did not have "the world's worst weapons." Bush was lying.

Sept. 6, 2002 -- "Congress Now Promises to Hold Weeks of Hearings About Iraq." Do you remember "weeks of hearings"? I don't. Congress abdicated its constitutional power. Why? Because the vast majority of their constituents allowed it.

Sept. 8, 2002 -- "Powell Defends a First Strike as Iraq Option." Colin Powell is somehow still seen as a moderate by the media and the public, but he signed on to naked American aggression though he knew what the public did not: There was no evidence. None.

October 2002, Newsweek. Bush: "The evidence indicates that Iraq is reconstituting its nuclear-weapons program." Satellite photos, Bush claimed, "reveal that Iraq is rebuilding facilities at sites that had been part of its nuclear program." Brazen lies. Unquestioned by most Americans.

Nov. 11, 2002 -- "U.S. Disputes Iraqi Denial That It Has Weapons Banned." Bush (Nov. 21): "Should [Saddam] again deny that this arsenal exists, he will have entered his final stage with a lie." It can't be stated often enough: These grand statements by the White House had zero backup.

Dec. 1, 2002 -- "U.S. Is Preparing Base in Gulf State to Run Iraq War." By this point it was clear that as soon as sufficient preparation was made, there would be war. Bush: "Any act of delay, deception, or defiance will prove that Saddam Hussein has not accepted the path of compliance and has rejected the path of peace." But "compliance" was defined by Bush as "disarmament" -- the disarmament of an arsenal he knew didn't exist.

Dec. 6, 2002 - "A senior administration official tonight said that 'the president of the United States and the secretary of defense would not assert as plainly and bluntly as they have that Iraq has weapons of mass destruction if it was not true and if they did not have a solid basis for saying it.'" Isn't it pretty to think so? But we know now they had no solid basis. They were simply lying.

Dec. 9, 2002 -- "Weapons Inspectors Ask U.S. to Share Secret Iraq Data" The U.S. never did, never could, for it had no such data -- though Bush claimed to, nearly every day.

Dec. 20, 2002 -- "Powell Says Iraq Raises Risk of War by Lying on Arms." But he knew that, as far as weapons of mass destruction were concerned, they weren't lying. He was.

Dec. 31, 2003 -- "White House Cuts Estimate of Cost of War With Iraq -- $50 to $60 Billion -- Earlier Projection Was as Much as $200 Billion." Now the Congressional Budget Office estimates the total cost of the Iraq operation will be $500 billion.

Jan. 1, 2003 -- "U.S. Is Completing Plans to Promote a Democratic Iraq -- 18 Month Occupation." Disinformation, i.e., lies. Now we know they had no plan, and the occupation will go on for years. Chew on that: As events have proved, they had no plan.

Jan. 16, 2003 -- "Administration Suggests War Could Begin Without Full Evidence of Weapons." Well, with troops getting into place, they had to change their position, didn't they? They knew there would be no evidence. They were depending on momentum. People would sanction the war not because they believed in it but because they felt it was inevitable.

Jan. 23, 2003 -- "U.S. Set to Demand That Allies Agree Iraq Is Defying UN." Yet the inspectors insisted there was no defiance.

Jan. 24, 2003 -- Powell: "The question isn't how much longer do you need for inspections to work. Inspections will not work." Inspections would not and could not yield the answers Bush demanded, because there were no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, as the White House knew.

Jan. 28, 2003 -- Powell: "We have seen contacts and connections between the Iraqi regime and terrorist organizations, including al Qaeda." Lies, thoroughly discredited by investigators from all over the world. Remember that Powell said, "We have seen." His credibility is shot.

Jan. 28, 2003 -- Bush, in his State of the Union: "Iraqi intelligence officials are passing as scientists [that UN] inspectors are supposed to interview." The White House had to back off on that within days. It was a complete fabrication. A big whopping lie.

Jan. 30, 2003 -- "Bush Officials Debate Release of Iraq Secrets." More disinformation. There was no debate because there were no "secrets." The White House released that story to give a gullible public (and a gullible media) the impression that such secrets existed.

Feb. 12, 2003 -- "Top U.S. Officials Tell Lawmakers of Iraq-Qaeda Ties." Lies. To this day there is no indication of any "Iraq-Qaeda ties."

There would be many more lies until, on March 20, Bush announced his war: "The people of the United States and their allies will not live at the mercy of an outlaw regime that threatens the peace with weapons of mass murder." Cheney said our troops would be "greeted as liberators." Rumsfeld made this incredible statement (March 28): "I don't believe the United States has responsibility for reconstruction [of postwar Iraq]." Deputy Defense Secretary Wolfowitz said, "Iraq would be able to pick up the tab for post-war rebuilding. We're dealing with a country that can really finance its own reconstruction relatively soon." Now we learn Iraq's oil production won't function for at least another year, and only if tens of billions of our dollars are spent to do it.

Bush, Powell, Rumsfeld, Rice, Cheney, Wolfowitz -- their statements and predictions were flat-out lies or dead wrong. Who's paying the price? An Iraq in chaos, more than 150 Americans dead, and more than 1,000 Americans wounded, since May 1 -- not to mention hundreds of billions not spent on our education, medical system, infrastructure, and environment. But America has yet to hold the Bush junta accountable. They're still calling the shots. Still lying.


http://www.austinchronicle.com/issue...s_ventura.html

[Cédric]

I like this the title of this thread : "Bush lied". As if we didn"t know it!! OF COURSE the monkey lied! Hope the Americans make up their mind and choose a proper president next time...
Bush lied. My God, THIS is a bloody piece of news.

[coulterp]

A politican, French, American whatever, that didn't lie - that would be NEWS.

[bassetman]

Another one bites the dust!

Bush Adviser Leaves Defense Policy Board

By Bradley Graham
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, February 26, 2004; Page A07


Richard Perle, a prominent adviser to the Bush administration known for his hawkish views on Iraq and other national security matters, has resigned from the Defense Policy Board, saying he wanted to avoid being a lightning rod for criticism of the administration during a presidential election year.




Perle submitted his resignation from the board -- a bipartisan advisory group with no decision-making power -- in a Feb. 18 letter to Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld. ...

For more on the story of another Admin fleeing th coop...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...2004Feb26.html

[bassetman]

Hey I have an idea! As long as he wants a Constitutional Amendment against Gay marriage, how about one against lying!

[Servant of Eru]

Originally posted by AcaCandy:
Man, not another Bush lied thread Sheesh, wait til you guys hear that he actually helped plan 9/11

Actually Candy, He did, I can prove it, I have the proof on my hard drive....Shoot, where'd it go?!! I had it I swear!!! I do think that there probably is an Illuminati out there, somewhere, much the same as it's portrayed in Deus Ex II. After all, it's a video game, and we know all video games and movies are based on real life. I believe that it's there, that they operate in secrecy, behind the scenes, manipulating politics, and [supposedly] keeping humanity safe. Except, IMO if there really is an Illuminati (which I really can't prove, but they're really there), I believe that they'll have a strong part to play in the End Times, and will quite likely put the Antichrist into power, and we'll all be doomed, and will have to get the Mark of the beast imprinted on out butts, and we'll all be in servitude to satan, and we'll all die.

[Servant of Eru]

*X Files Music*

Seriously though, if there really is an Illuminati, and I wouldn't be at all surprised if there was, then the whole reason they're allowed to operate like they do according to my friend the conspiracy theorist, is because of the blind faith many of the people have in their government.

THE TRUTH IS OUT THERE