My Photo

January 2009

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
        1 2 3
4 5 6 7 8 9 10
11 12 13 14 15 16 17
18 19 20 21 22 23 24
25 26 27 28 29 30 31

From the Mystery Lovers Book of Quotations


  • Liberal principles are all very fine as long as they leave you with something to have principles about. -- Jack Higgins

  • Sweep everything under the rug for long enough, and you have to move right out of the house. -- Rachel Ingalls

  • It's hard to live a reputation down. Especially when your actions live up to it. -- Michael Z. Lewin

  • A prompt man is a lonely man. - Elmore Leonard

  • You know who casts the first stone? The guiltiest bastard in the crowd. -- William McIlvanney

  • Life is the process of finding out, too late, everything that should have been obvious to you at the time. -- John D. MacDonald, "The Only Girl in the Game"

  • We gave her everything. But it wasn't what she wanted. -- Ross MacDonald, "The Underground Man"

  • Sanity is sometimes a matter of going on, outwardly, as if everything is all right. -- Mary McMullen, "Prudence Be Damned"

  • People without brains are always dangerous. -- A.E.W. Mason, "The House of the Arrow"

  • Everybody needs a little improbability in their life. -- Reginal Hill, "Deadheads"

Read This

Visiting Kids

  • 98henrygeorge
    Pictures from our trip to East Texas to see our twin sons, our new daughter in law, and the grand-critters, Frog, Henry & George W.

« Sunday in the Park with the Democrats | Main | Update on Cindy Sheehan »

Cindy Sheehan - An Examination

You may be seeing stories about a woman named Cindy Sheehan who has camped out on a road that leads to the Prairie Chapel Ranch in Crawford, Texas, vowing to stay there until President Bush meets with her (although the real reason for this is unclear since she was extremely dissatisfied with her first meeting with President Bush).

Cindy Sheehan is a 48-year-old longtime anti-Bush person from Vacaville, California, who has made a name for herself and become a star in the anti-war movement after her son Casey was killed in Iraq in 2004. Casey, who was not a fresh recruit but who had voluntarily re-enlisted, went to Iraq despite his mother's plea to either let her send him to Canada or let her run over him with her car.

Here is her web site. Here is a sample of Cindy Sheehan's rhetoric:

"We have no Constitution. We’re the only country with no checks and balances. We want our country back if we have to impeach George Bush down to the person who picks up the dog sh-t in Washington! Let George Bush send his two little party animals to die in Iraq. It’s OK for Israel to have nuclear weapons but we are waging nuclear war in Iraq, we have contaminated the entire country. It’s not OK for Syria to be in Lebanon. Hypocrites! But Israel can occupy Palestine? Stop the slaughter!We have no Constitution. We’re the only country with no checks and balances. We want our country back if we have to impeach George Bush down to the person who picks up the dog sh-t in Washington! Let George Bush send his two little party animals to die in Iraq. It’s OK for Israel to have nuclear weapons but we are waging nuclear war in Iraq, we have contaminated the entire country. It’s not OK for Syria to be in Lebanon. Hypocrites! But Israel can occupy Palestine? Stop the slaughter!"

Okay. What about Casey? Front Page Magazine looked into the record of Casey Sheehan, and there is another article about Cindy Sheehan here. About Casey:

"While one might dismiss some of Sheehan’s hyperbole due to grief over her son’s death, a little research about Casey Sheehan revealed that contrary to being tricked by military recruiters, Casey Sheehan had re-enlisted in the U.S. Army voluntarily when he was 24-years-old, after serving his first hitch successfully. Casey Sheehan was in fact a hero who received a Bronze Star. He was attached as a mechanic to the artillery division of the 1st U.S. Cavalry in Iraq. When a convoy of soldiers from Casey’s unit was attacked in Sadr City by insurgents, Casey volunteered to join a rapid rescue force to get them out. His commanding sergeant told him he did not have to go into combat, because he was a mechanic and not an infantryman. Casey was quoted telling his officer, “I go where my chief goes.” He was tragically killed during the rescue attempt. The source for this story? Cindy Sheehan herself."

Over at the Tin Ear blog, there's this:

Cindy Sheehan is pursuing a vendetta of hate against the President that predates the loss of her son. She hates George Bush, not because she believes that he is responsible for her son’s death, but because he “stole the election” in 2000 and again in 2004. She is a willing participant in the campaign of hate that the Left has pursued against President Bush since his victory in 2000. She is currently an active participant in Representative Conyers’ impeachment campaign against the President. This is a woman I watched recite an account of her son's sacrifice without shedding a tear, not a catch in her voice, or even a hesitation; no sign of grief whatsoever. His aunt who was also present was in tears as her sister read her son's story. Did she love her son? Certainly she did, all mothers love their sons; the difference is that most mothers don’t exploit the death of their sons for political purposes. They may, as in the case of MADD, use their tragedy to motivate them to pursue moral crusades to have laws passed, but these women have no political agenda prior to their loss. They are spurred to action by their loss. If Mizzz Sheehan was truly motivated by the loss of her son to pursue the ones who caused his death, she would be out for the head of Muqtada al Sadr, not President Bush, Dick Cheney, and Donald Rumsfeld.

Here is part of a letter from Cindy Sheehan to President Bush. You will note she calls him "George." This is because when he met with her family and the family of other soldiers who had been killed, he referred to her as "Mom," and she took offense at the familiarity, so now she always calls him "George."

“... You feel so proud of yourself for betraying the country again, don’t you? You think you are very clever because you pulled the wool over the eyes of some of the people again. You think that you have some mandate from God…that you can “spend your political capital” any way that you want. George you don’t care or even realize that 56,000,000 plus citizens of this country voted against you and your agenda. Still, you are going to continue your ruthless work of being a divider and not a uniter. George, in 2000 when you stole that election and the Democrats gave up, I gave up too. I had the most ironic thought of my life then: "Oh well, how much damage can he do in four years?" Well, now I know how much you have damaged my family, this country, and this world. If you think I am going to allow you another four years to do even more damage, then you truly are mistaken. I will fight for a true vote count and if that fails, your impeachment. Also, the impeachment of your Vice President...”

“...George, I must confess that I and my family worked very HARD to re-defeat you this time, but you refuse to stay defeated. Well, we are watching you very carefully. We are going to do everything in our power to have you impeached for misleading the American people into a disastrous war and for mis-using and abusing your power as Commander-in-Chief.”

Will Malven at The Tin Ear found this very disturbing, and commented:

This is not a woman consumed by grief at the loss of her son, this is a woman consumed by the objective of bringing down President Bush, a long standing objective, predating the death of her son. His death was just a lucky happenstance, to be used, as the left have used all American soldiers’ deaths, as a tool to aid them in their anti-Bush, anti-war, ultimately anti-American agenda.


...I am proud of Casey Sheehan for his service to his nation. He was a man of honor, a hero who deserves better than to be used as a tool for a hateful political agenda. I honor his sacrifice and am saddened by his loss. He knew the higher calling of his nation, a calling that rises above the petty politics of the moment. Too bad his mother doesn’t hear the same call.

What do I think about it? I think this is something that was bound to happen when the son or daughter of a leftwing Bush-hater volunteered to go to war (and I think we can draw some conclusions about whether or not Casey agreed with his mother's agenda from this) and then did not make it back home.

It's hard, though, because we owe so much to soldiers who are fighting the War on Terror, and we owe much to their families, too. So to despise Cindy Sheehan is antithetical to us.

Read this transcript of an interview she gave to a left wing group. You make up your own mind.

AMY GOODMAN: Your response to President Bush addressing U.S. service men and women and what his message was.

CINDY SHEEHAN: Well, first of all, I think the best way to honor my son's death would be to bring the troops home, and that's what we in Gold Star Families want our children to be remembered for: peace and not war and hatred. For him to use my son's blood to continue the killing, to me, is despicable. I don't want one more drop of blood spilled in my son's name or in my name. We never should have been there in the first place. It was a mistake. It was a mistake when we invaded. It's a mistake now, and I want my son’s sacrifice and the sacrifices of the other brave Americans to stand for peace and to bring peace to the world and not to spread more hate. You know, he said that my son died to spread freedom and democracy in that region. We're spreading imperialism and death and destruction everywhere we go. And, no, not one more drop of blood in my son's name or the names of any other of our brave young people who have made the ultimate sacrifice for basically nothing.

AMY GOODMAN: Cindy, what were your feelings when your son Casey went to Iraq? Are they the same as now? And what were Casey's feelings about the invasion and occupation?

CINDY SHEEHAN: Right. Our family was against it from the beginning. Casey was against it, but he felt it was his duty to go because he was in the Army. And he felt that he had to go to protect his buddies, to be there for his buddies, to be support, and they are brainwashed into thinking that even if they don't agree with the mission, they're brainwashed into just blindly following it. I begged Casey not to go. I told him I would take him to Canada. I told him I would run over him with a car, anything to get him not to go to that immoral war. And he said, “Mom, I wish I didn't have to, but I have to go.”

AMY GOODMAN: We're talking to Cindy Sheehan, she lost her son Casey in Iraq. How did Casey die? What was the mission he died on?

CINDY SHEEHAN: We were told that he was going to rescue a group of soldiers that had been ambushed on April 4th in Sadr City, Baghdad. It was when L. Paul Bremer inflamed the Shiite militia into rebellion, first in Fallujah, then it spread to Sadr City, which is a Shiite slum in Baghdad. And so we were told he volunteered to go rescue a group of soldiers that had been ambushed, and on the way there, his convoy was ambushed, and seven soldiers were killed in that ambush.

AMY GOODMAN: Cindy Sheehan, there was no mention last night at the Fort Bragg speech of the Downing Street minutes, the minutes that were taken July 23, 2002, before the invasion, of a meeting of Prime Minister Tony Blair and his top advisors, saying that the U.S. was fixing the facts and intelligence around the policy to go to war. But you were at the hearing on the Hill in the Capitol, even if it was in the basement, that was held by Congressman Conyers. Of the significance of these minutes, can you talk about that?

CINDY SHEEHAN: Well, like I said, we didn't agree with the war, we didn't agree with the invasion of Iraq. It looked like we were rushing into something that was unnecessary. You know, it was not necessary to protect America. And I could see that the sanctions were working. We had years of devastating sanctions against Iraq. The U.N. weapon inspectors were saying there were no weapons of mass destruction. So I believed all along that this invasion was unnecessary and that there was some other agenda behind it besides keeping America safe.

And when the Downing Street memos came out, and I read them, I just thought, “Well, this confirms my suspicion that this invasion was premeditated and prefabricated for a different agenda.” And it looks like my son's murder and the murder of almost 1,800 other Americans and tens of thousands of innocent Iraqis whose only crime is that they were born in Iraq at the wrong time, are dead -- are dead for the agenda of the neo-con war machine.

I really think that somebody in our government needs to be held accountable, and just because George Bush gets up and tells us that things are getting better, they're not getting better, and he needs to present some kind of facts to back up his position, and he needs to answer the Congressmen. I think it’s 128 Congress people have signed John Conyers's letter asking for explanation into this Downing Street memo, and it needs to be investigated. Congress needs to do it's Constitutional duty for once and investigate the memo because we families that have paid the ultimate price, who will be grieving and mourning and in pain for the rest of our lives, we deserve to know the truth.

AMY GOODMAN: Karen Kwiatkowski of the Pentagon, retired Lieutenant Colonel, you have written about how the Pentagon has suppressed information and twisted the truth to drive the country to war. What about the Downing Street memo? Does this fit into the picture? Were you surprised by this particular meeting and the documents that have come out that?

LT. COL. KAREN KWIATKOWSKI: No, not surprised. Very much like Cindy said, it confirmed things that I witnessed that I didn't understand at the time. This intention to go to war, this decision, this very early decision, possibly as early as 2001 or before, this we were unaware of. But seeing that the decision had been made, and I think the Downing Street memoranda show that very clearly, the position of the administration long before the American people were ever notified of any kind of threat or rationale for going into Iraq, knowing that that existed explains a whole lot of what I saw and it makes sense, and even things that I haven't written about, things that I just saw and that folks in the Pentagon like me, probably thousands of them, saw and did not at the time understand. This war plan was engaged and operational long before many people, even insiders, understood, and it was engaged for a reason.

And George Bush, in his latest speech -- every time he gives a speech, in fact, I listen to see if he will explain why we are in Iraq. And every time I hear him give a speech, I'm disappointed. He never explains why we're there. He makes up stories, as he did, you know, in last night's speech, very clearly untrue in many, many ways, and he doesn't address why our young men and women are dying. You know, it's particularly insulting to me to hear him talk about those deaths when this country, and this administration has more than any previous administration and more than any other country in the world that has lost soldiers in Iraq, has refused to show proper respect for those dead soldiers and for those losses. He has attended to date no funerals -- George Bush or Dick Cheney. They refuse to acknowledge the real cost of their decisions. This is particularly insulting for him to use their deaths and to somehow, you know, wave this flag, when he himself by his own actions does not care about these deaths.

AMY GOODMAN: Karen Kwiatkowski is a retired Lieutenant Colonel speaking to us from West Virginia, worked in the Pentagon, the office that oversaw the Office of Special Plans. Douglas Feith ran that. Also, in our Washington D.C. studio, Cindy Sheehan, mother of Casey, who was a U.S. soldier who died in Iraq last year.

[break]

AMY GOODMAN: Our guest on the line with us in Washington is Cindy Sheehan. She is the mother of Casey, who died in Iraq last year. We're also going to go to Baghdad to talk with a mother, with an Iraqi blogger, about the situation there. Cindy I did want to ask you right before the Fort Bragg address of President Bush, he met with family members who lost loved ones in Iraq. Have you been able to meet with Bush administration officials?

CINDY SHEEHAN: Actually, I met with the President in June of 2004, a couple of months after my son was killed. We were summoned up to Fort Irwin, Washington state, to have a sit down with the president. So my entire family went. And I was on CNN last night with Larry King talking about this, and there was another mother who had met with him, and she said that she supports the war and the President, and she said he was so warm and everything and gentle and kind, and when my family and I met with him, I met a man who had no compassion in him. He had no heart. Like Karen said, he cares nothing about us. We tried to show him pictures of Casey. He wouldn't look at them. He wouldn't even acknowledge Casey's name. He called me “Mom” through the entire visit. He acted like we were at a tea party, like it was something fun, that we should just be so pleased that we got to meet with the President who killed our son.

Let me step in here a minute. Having watched President Bush for all these years now, do you really think the man would act "like we were at a tea party, like it was something fun" when he meets with the families of fallen soldiers? I think not. I think this is either fiction or one hell of an attitude on the part of Cindy Sheehan - an attitude that had to have pre-dated the war in Iraq.

AMY GOODMAN: What did you say to him?

CINDY SHEEHAN: The first thing, he came up to me, and he goes, “Mom, I can't imagine your loss. I can't imagine losing a loved one, you know, whether it be a mother, a father, a sister or brother.” And I stopped him, and I said, “You have two children. Try to imagine them being killed in a war. How would that make you feel?” And he got a little bit of -- just a little bit of human flicker in his eye, like he might be connected for a minute, because this is a man that's disconnected from humanity. And he had just got a little flicker in his eye, and I said, “Trust me, you don't want to go there.” And you know what he told me? He goes, “You're right, I don't.” And so I said, “Well, thank you for putting me there.”

And then he moved on to the next person, and then a little while later we were talking, and he went up to my oldest daughter, and he said, “I wish I could bring back your loved one to replace the hole in your heart.” And she goes, “Yeah, so do we.” And he gave her the dirtiest look and turned his back on her and ignored her for the rest of the meeting. And then a little later on in the meeting, I said, “Why were we invited here? We didn't vote for you in 2000, and we're certainly not going to vote for you in 2004.” And he said, “It's not about politics,” which is just bologna, because he went through the campaign trail, and last night he said he meets with families, and we say that we’re praying for him and stuff like that.

You know, that’s not -- that wasn't our experience. And everybody else I’ve talked to who have met with him have about the same experiences I do. He comes in, says I want to extend the gratitude of the nation and express my condolences, but he says it, and his eyes don't convey that, his heart doesn't convey that. We felt – we left our meeting with him feeling worse than when we walked in, feeling more determined to stop the madness in Iraq than before.

I think it's important to bottom line this and point this out: Cindy Sheehan thinks it's not necessary to protect America. There may be some grieving mothers from 9/11 who may have a difference of opinion with her there.

At a memorial site for soldiers, one person had this comment, and I agree with him.


"I wonder if Casey would support your use of his death as an opportunity to forward his mother's own private political beliefs. He accepted the job and the training. He was doing that job when he was sadly taken from us. Millions of Iraqis are free today, and thousands of insurgents don't want that because religious oppression is important to them. Casey fought for those free Iraqis. His mother, it seems to me, is offering support for those insurgents. Mourn your son privately, madam. Don't exploit his death for your own selfish beliefs. You're wrong when you say that President Bush said, or believed, or did anything that President Clinton wouldn't have done. Clinton threatened to do all of those things, because it was right. Honor your son." --Mike Chamberlain of Duluth, GA

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d83454716769e200d8345212e753ef

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Cindy Sheehan - An Examination:

Comments

Thanks for this excellent information. I had thought we had a mother's painful grief on display. It's instructive to see we have a cold-blooded, pre-existing political agenda on display instead.

Casey Sheehan died in a great cause. 25 years from now, when Iraqis are living far better lives than they were in 2002, Mrs. Sheehan can see the contribution her son made to his fellow human beings in Iraq. After her own death, when all myteries are revealed, Mrs. Sheehan may discover that her son also saved his fellow Americans from horrific terror attacks.

God Bless Casey Sheehan, and his compatriots.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Working...
Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

Working...

Post a comment

Thinking of Breeding Your Pet?

The Harp Is a Beautiful Instrument of Torture

  • Pajamas Media BlogRoll Member
  • Mcpalin_2



  • Finger_1 

  • Libadv



  • Churchilljack




Favorite Quotes


  • ...Western hand-wringers, the great progressive liberals of the Western world, would rather wring their hands, or like Darfur, hold some ... interpretive dance event to save Darfur every week for the next thirty years. The uselessness of liberal outrage is one of the great constants of the modern world. --Mark Steyn

  • President2

  • 061908_2 



  • "Since the Second World War and the beginning of the atomic age, the consciousness of the creative writer, however detached, has been confronted with the specter of the totalitarian state, the growing poverty and helplessness of Western Europe, and the threat of an inconceivably destructive war which may annihilate civilization and mankind itself. Clearly, when the future of civilization is no longer assured, a criticism if American life in terms of a contrast between avowed ideals and present actuality cannot be a primary preoccupation and source of inspiration. For America, not Europe, is now the sanctuary of culture; civilization's very existence depends upon America, upon the actuality of American life, and not the ideals of the American Dream. To criticize the actuality upon which all hope depends thus becomes a criticism of hope itself." -- Delmore Schwartz, 1958

  • "I've got nothing to do and I'm doing it tomorrow." --Elaine Stritch

  • "...He is, like all great funny men, inconsolable." --John Lahr describing a famous comedian

  • In taking our self-examining ethos to these extremes, we have lost a kind of wisdom, wisdom that acknowledges the complexity of human life but can move through it to find the simple truth again. While assessing the intricate failings of our moral history, many of us have lost sight of the simple truth that the system that shapes us is, in fact, a great one, that it has moved us inexorably to do better and that it's well worth defending against every aggressor and certainly against as shabby and vicious an aggressor as we face today. -- Andrew Klavan

  • The elites in Washington, D.C., New York City and the United Nations seem to have plotted a journey to lead America into the New World Order where a cosmopolitan global citizen is no more connected to his country than a sociopath to his fellow man. -- Dimitri Vassilaros

  • "Obviously if you are reading this then I have died in Iraq. I kind of predicted this, that is why I'm writing this in November. A third time just seemed like I'm pushing my chances. I don't regret going, everybody dies but few get to do it for something as important as freedom. It may seem confusing why we are in Iraq, it's not to me. I'm here helping these people, so that they can live the way we live. Not have to worry about tyrants or vicious dictators. To do what they want with their lives. To me that is why I died. Others have died for my freedom, now this is my mark." --Cpl. Jeffrey B. Starr, 1983-2005

  • Politics guides much of the media's portrayal of our soldiers. There have been thousands of American heroes in Iraq, but instead the most discussed soldier in the public eye is still Army Pfc. Lynndie England, convicted of abusing inmates at Abu Ghraib. Likewise, there are almost 2,000 mothers of fallen Americans, yet the public recognizes the name only of Cindy Sheehan ("We are waging nuclear war in Iraq").--Victor Davis Hanson

Adopt a Pet!


Listen To This

  • : Perfectly Frank

    Perfectly Frank



  • www.flickr.com
    This is a Flickr badge showing public photos from The Accidental Harpist. Make you own badge here.
Blog powered by TypePad

In Their Own Words: Democrats on W.M.D.

  • Al Gore, frequent critic of President Bush's handling of the War on Terror and Iraq, was asked whether the facts in his new scary global warming movie are correct: "Nobody is interested in solutions if they don't think there's a problem. Given that starting point, I believe it is appropriate to have an over-representation of factual presentations on how dangerous it is, as a predicate for opening up the audience to listen to what the solutions are, and how hopeful it is that we are going to solve this crisis."
  • en. John Rockefeller, D-W.Va., ranking minority Intelligence Committee member, October 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."
  • Rep. Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., December 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."
  • Sen. Bob Graham, D-Fla., and others, in a letter to President Bush, December 2001: "There is no doubt that . . . Saddam Hussein has invigorated his weapons programs. . . . 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."
  • Robert Einhorn, Clinton assistant secretary of state for nonproliferation, March 2002: "How close is the peril of Iraqi WMD? Today, or at most within a few months, Iraq could launch missile attacks with chemical or biological weapons against its neighbors (albeit attacks that would be ragged, inaccurate and limited in size). Within four or five years it could have the capability to threaten most of the Middle East and parts of Europe with missiles armed with nuclear weapons containing fissile material produced indigenously -- and to threaten U.S. territory with such weapons delivered by nonconventional means, such as commercial shipping containers. If it managed to get its hands on sufficient quantities of already produced fissile material, these threats could arrive much sooner."
  • Howard Dean, March 2003: "[Iraq] is automatically an imminent threat to the countries that surround it because of the possession of these weapons."
  • Dean, February 2003: "I agree with President Bush -- he has said that Saddam Hussein is evil. And he is. [Hussein] is a vicious dictator and a documented deceiver. He has invaded his neighbors, used chemical arms, and failed to account for all the chemical and biological weapons he had before the Gulf War. He has murdered dissidents and refused to comply with his obligations under UN Security Council Resolutions. And he has tried to build a nuclear bomb. Anyone who believes in the importance of limiting the spread of weapons of mass killing, the value of democracy and the centrality of human rights must agree that Saddam Hussein is a menace. The world would be a better place if he were in a different place other than the seat of power in Baghdad or any other country."
  • Gen. Wesley Clark, September 2002, testimony before the House Armed Services Committee: "There's no question that Saddam Hussein is a threat. . . . Yes, he has chemical and biological weapons. . . . He is, as far as we know, actively pursuing nuclear capabilities, though he doesn't have nuclear warheads yet. If he were to acquire nuclear weapons, I think our friends in the region would face greatly increased risks, as would we."
  • Clinton, July 2003: " . . . [I]t is incontestable that on the day I left office, there were unaccounted for stocks of biological and chemical weapons. We might have destroyed them in '98. We tried to, but we sure as heck didn't know it because we never got to go back there."
  • President Bill Clinton, December 1998: "Other countries possess weapons of mass destruction and ballistic missiles. With Saddam, there is one big difference: He has used them, not once, but repeatedly -- unleashing chemical weapons against Iranian troops during a decade-long war, not only against soldiers, but against civilians; firing Scud missiles at the citizens of Israel, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain and Iran. Not only against a foreign enemy, but even against his own people, gassing Kurdish civilians in Northern Iraq. . . . I have no doubt today that, left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will use these terrible weapons again. . . . "
  • French President Jacques Chirac, February 2003: "There is a problem -- the probable possession of weapons of mass destruction by an uncontrollable country, Iraq. The international community is right . . . in having decided Iraq should be disarmed."
  • Portuguese Prime Minister Jose Manuel Durao Barroso, October 2003: "When [former President Bill] Clinton was here recently he told me was absolutely convinced, given his years in the White House and the access to privileged information which he had, that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction until the end of the Saddam regime."
  • Clinton National Security Adviser Sandy Berger, February 1998: "He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has 10 times since 1983."
  • Clinton Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, February 1998: "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."
  • The report on [Wilson’s] trip to Niger . . . did not change any analysts’ assessments of the Iraq-Niger uranium deal. For most analysts, the information in the report lent more credibility to the original CIA reports on the uranium deal.--Joe Wilson's report on his trip to Niger
  • He [the CIA reports officer] said he judged that the most important fact in the report [by Wilson] was that Niger officials admitted that the Iraqi delegation had traveled there in 1999, and that the Niger prime minister believed the Iraqis were interested in purchasing uranium.--Joe Wilson reporting to the Senate Intelligence Committee
  • [o]f all the booby traps left behind by the Clinton administration, none is more dangerous—or more urgent—than the situation in Iraq. Over the last year, Mr. Clinton and his team quietly avoided dealing with, or calling attention to, the almost complete unraveling of a decade’s efforts to isolate the regime of Saddam Hussein and prevent it from rebuilding its weapons of mass destruction. That leaves President Bush to confront a dismaying panorama in the Persian Gulf [where] intelligence photos . . . show the reconstruction of factories long suspected of producing chemical and biological weapons.--Washington Post Editorial Board, during 2001 Inaugural
  • ...without further outside intervention, Iraq should be able to rebuild weapons and missile plants within a year [and] future military attacks may be required to diminish the arsenal again... [It's} hard to negotiate with a tyrant who has no intention of honoring his commitments and who sees nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons as his country’s salvation.--New York Times Editorial Board
  • Kennedy: We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction. Byrd: 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.--Ted Kennedy & Robert Byrd in 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.--John Kerry in 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 in 2002
  • We know that [Saddam] has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country.--Al Gore in 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
  • 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.--Sen. Hillary Clinton
  • 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.--Sen. Carl Levin
  • 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.--Bob Graham
  • Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons-of-mass-destruction technology, which is a threat to countries in the region, and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process.--Nancy Pelosi
  • He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983.--Sandy Berger
  • Iraq is a long way from [the USA], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risk 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
  • 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.--Bill Clinton
  • I participated in a Washington meeting about Iraqi WMD. Those present included nearly twenty former inspectors from the United Nations Special Commission (UNSCOM), the force established in 1991 to oversee the elimination of WMD in Iraq. One of the senior people put a question to the group: did anyone in the room doubt that Iraq was currently operating a secret centrifuge plant? No one did. Three people added that they believed Iraq was also operating a secret calutron plant (a facility for separating uranium isotopes). --Bill Clinton's NSC Staff, Kenneth Pollack
  • I can’t tell you why the French, the Germans, the Brits, and us thought that most of the material, if not all of it, that we presented at the UN on 5 February 2003 was the truth. I can’t. I’ve wrestled with it. [But] when you see a satellite photograph of all the signs of the chemical-weapons ASP—Ammunition Supply Point—with chemical weapons, and you match all those signs with your matrix on what should show a chemical ASP, and they’re there, you have to conclude that it’s a chemical ASP, especially when you see the next satellite photograph which shows the UN inspectors wheeling in their white vehicles with black markings on them to that same ASP, and everything is changed, everything is clean. . . . But George [Tenet] was convinced, John McLaughlin [Tenet’s deputy] was convinced, that what we were presented [for Powell’s UN speech] was accurate...People say, well, INR dissented. That’s a bunch of bull. INR dissented that the nuclear program was up and running. That’s all INR dissented on. They were right there with the chems and the bios.-- Lawrence Wilson, Dept of State

Blogs for Bush