Fund Your Utopia Without Me.™

12 September 2009

Hypocrisy Alert! Clinton, Kerry, Gore & Other Democrats Talk About Saddam's WMD BEFORE AND AFTER Bush Is President and Call for War Against Iraq



Please support your lower jaw. I cannot be responsible for injuries resulting from Democratic hypocrisy.

Clinton, Kerry, Gore call for War against Saddam’s Iraq

Bill Clinton and Al Gore repeatedly condemned President Reagan and President Bush for refusing to go to war with Iraq, for refusing to take sides in the Iran-Iraq War, for attempting to engage constructively with Iraq, and for limiting sanctions against Iraq.

They repeatedly catalogued Saddam’s atrocities, his weapons of mass destruction programmes, his war crimes, and his support for international Muslim terrorists and they repeatedly demanded action to bring about regime change in Iraq.

They accused the Bush administration, which was responsible for ousting Iraqi forces from Kuwait, of being soft on Iraq, soft on WMDs, and soft on terror.

They demanded action.

President Clinton ordered limited and impotent military strikes against Iraq every time he was facing a domestic scandal. Clinton signed the Liberation of Iraq Act and then did virtually nothing to implement Iraq’s liberation.

Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton, Al Gore, John Kerry, Nancy Pelosi and the majority of Democrat politicians repeatably condemned Saddam Hussein as a tyrant, a war-monger, and a supporter of international Muslim terrorism; warned that he was intent on conquering the Middle East and imposing his will on the rest of the world; and did nothing about it!

Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton, Al Gore, John Kerry, Nancy Pelosi and the majority of Democrat politicians supported George W. Bush in finally going to war against Saddam Hussein.

Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton, Al Gore, John Kerry, Nancy Pelosi and the majority of Democrat politicians say that they are complete and utter idiots, who were tricked by a man they claim is a moron, into believing that Saddam Hussein was a tyrant, a war-monger, and a supporter of international Muslim terrorism, and that he was intent on conquering the Middle East and imposing his will on the rest of the world.

Al Gore outlines future Clinton administration’s policy towards Iraq, including support for Iraqi democratic resistance, political and economic freedom, and freedom from tyranny, 29 September 1992:

Al Gore condemns George Bush for not putting an end to Saddam Hussein support for terrorism or his nuclear weapons programme, 29 September 1992:

Al Gore claims 1,400 terrorists in Iraq prior to Gulf War:

Al Gore condemns George Bush for not putting an end to Saddam Hussein’s support for terrorism or his nuclear weapons programme, 1992:

Al Gore condemns George Bush for not putting an end to Saddam Hussein’s support for terrorism or his nuclear weapons programme, [Black & Right TV]:

“Our objectives are limited but clear: To make Saddam pay a price for the latest act of brutality, reducing his ability to threaten his neighbors and America’s interests.”

- President Bill Clinton Orders Missile Attack on Iraq, 3 September 1996


“These actions were directed against the Iraqi government, which was responsible for the assassination plot. Saddam Hussein has demonstrated repeatedly that he will resort to terrorism or aggression if left unchecked. Our intent was to target Iraq’s capacity to support violence against the United States and other nations, and to deter Saddam Hussein from supporting such outlaw behavior in the future. Therefore, we directed our action against the facility associated with Iraq’s support of terrorism, while making every effort to minimise the loss of innocent life.”

- President Bill Clinton Orders Missile Attack on Iraq, 26 June 1993

“You cannot defy the will of the world.  Together, we must confront the new hazards of chemical and biological weapons and the outlaw states, terrorists, and organised criminals seeking to acquire them. Saddam Hussein has spent the better part of this decade and much of his nation’s wealth not on providing for the Iraqi people but on developing nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons and the missiles to deliver them. The United Nations weapons inspectors have done a truly remarkable job finding and destroying more of Iraq’s arsenal than was destroyed during the entire Gulf war. Now, Saddam Hussein wants to stop them from completing their mission.

“I know I speak for everyone in this chamber, Republicans and Democrats, when I say to Saddam Hussein, “You cannot defy the will of the world,” and when I say to him, “You have used weapons of mass destruction before. We are determined to deny you the capacity to use them again.”

- President Bill Clinton to Saddam, 27 January 1998

"Heavy as they are, the costs of action must be weighed against the price of inaction. If Saddam defies the world and we fail to respond, we will face a far greater threat in the future. Saddam will strike again at his neighbors; he will make war on his own people. And mark my words he will develop weapons of mass destruction. He will deploy them, and he will use them."

- President Bill Clinton, 16 December 1998

"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

Democrats for War against Iraq. Compilation:

John Kerry’s statements on War against Iraq:


Saddam’s Support for Muslim Terrorists:

ABC News (14 January 1999) – “Saddam Hussein has a long history of harbouring terrorists. Carlos the Jackal, Abu Nidal, Abu Abbas, the most notorious terrorists of their era, all found shelter and support at one time in Baghdad. Intelligence sources say bin Laden’s long relationship with the Iraqis began as he helped Sudan’s fundamentalist government in their efforts to acquire weapons of mass destruction.”

“ABC News has learned that in December [1998], an Iraqi intelligence chief, named Farouk Hijazi, now Iraq’s ambassador to Turkey, made a secret trip to Afghanistan to meet with bin Laden. Three intelligence agencies tell ABC News they cannot be certain what was discussed, but almost certainly, they say, bin Laden has been told he would be welcome in Baghdad.”

* * * * *

 The Iraq Liberation Act of 1998


31 OCTOBER 1998

Office of the Press Secretary

For Immediate Release


Today I am signing into law H.R. 4655, the “Iraq Liberation Act of 1998.” This Act makes clear that it is the sense of the Congress that the United States should support those elements of the Iraqi opposition that advocate a very different future for Iraq than the bitter reality of internal repression and external aggression that the current regime in Baghdad now offers.

Let me be clear on what the U.S. objectives are: The United States wants Iraq to rejoin the family of nations as a freedom-loving and law-abiding member. This is in our interest and that of our allies within the region.

The United States favors an Iraq that offers its people freedom at home. I categorically reject arguments that this is unattainable due to Iraq’s history or its ethnic or sectarian make-up. Iraqis deserve and desire freedom like everyone else. The United States looks forward to a democratically supported regime that would permit us to enter into a dialogue leading to the reintegration of Iraq into normal international life.

My Administration has pursued, and will continue to pursue, these objectives through active application of all relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions. The evidence is overwhelming that such changes will not happen under the current Iraq leadership.

In the meantime, while the United States continues to look to the Security Council’s efforts to keep the current regime’s behavior in check, we look forward to new leadership in Iraq that has the support of the Iraqi people. The United States is providing support to opposition groups from all sectors of the Iraqi community that could lead to a popularly supported government.

On October 21, 1998, I signed into law the Omnibus Consolidated and Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act, 1999, which made 8 million available for assistance to the Iraqi democratic opposition. This assistance is intended to help the democratic opposition unify, work together more effectively, and articulate the aspirations of the Iraqi people for a pluralistic, participatory political system that will include all of Iraq’s diverse ethnic and religious groups. As required by the Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act for FY 1998 (Public Law 105-174), the Department of State submitted a report to the Congress on plans to establish a program to support the democratic opposition. My Administration, as required by that statute, has also begun to implement a program to compile information regarding allegations of genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes by Iraq’s current leaders as a step towards bringing to justice those directly responsible for such acts.

The Iraq Liberation Act of 1998 provides additional, discretionary authorities under which my Administration can act to further the objectives I outlined above. There are, of course, other important elements of U.S. policy. These include the maintenance of U.N. Security Council support efforts to eliminate Iraq’s weapons and missile programs and economic sanctions that continue to deny the regime the means to reconstitute those threats to international peace and security. United States support for the Iraqi opposition will be carried out consistent with those policy objectives as well. Similarly, U.S. support must be attuned to what the opposition can effectively make use of as it develops over time. With those observations, I sign H.R. 4655 into law.



31 October 1998

* * * * *

U.S. President Bill Clinton Orders Attack on Iraq, 16 December 1998:

“Heavy as they are, the costs of action must be weighed against the price of inaction. If Saddam defies the world and we fail to respond, we will face a far greater threat in the future. Saddam will strike again at his neighbors. He will make war on his own people.

And mark my words, he will develop weapons of mass destruction. He will deploy them, and he will use them.”

President Bill Clinton, 16 December 1998

U.S. President Clinton on the Iraq Liberation Act of 1998:

The Iraq Liberation Act of 1998 (signed into law by Bill Clinton on 31 October 1998) stated:

“It should be the policy of the United States to support efforts to remove the regime headed by Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq and to promote the emergence of a democratic government to replace that regime.”

The legislation also allocated $97,000,000 to aid Iraqi democratic opposition organisations.

The first part of this video is comments made on 15 November 1998 and the second clip is from a 16 December 1998 speech.

Madeleine Albright, Clinton’s Secretary of State, responds to a question about the Iraq Liberation Act, 1998:

Sandy Berger , Clinton’s National Security Advisor [Convicted Felon who stole and destroyed Clinton's security-related documents from the National Security Archives], responds to a question about the Iraq Liberation Act, 1998:


Democrats talk about Saddams WMD and disarming him of them by force, if necessary:

“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, 4 February 1998, at the Pentagon

“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, 17 February 1998, following a Pentagon briefing

“Iraq is a long way from 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, Clinton’s Secretary of State, 18 February 1998, Ohio State University

“He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983.”

- Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser (and convicted felon), 18 February 1998, Ohio State University

“We urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S.Constitution and Laws, to take necessary actions, (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq’s refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs.”

- Letter to President Clinton, signed by Senators including the following Democrats: Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and Joseph Lieberman, 9 October 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), 16 December 1998, Letter posted on Pelosi’s congressional website.

“There has never been an embargo against food and medicine. It’s just that Hussein has just not chosen to spend his money on that. Instead, he has chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction, and palaces for his cronies.”

- Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, 10 November 1999, Chicago

"Fateful decisions will be made in the days and weeks ahead. At issue is nothing less than the fundamental question of whether or not we can keep the most lethal weapons known to mankind out of the hands of an unreconstructed tyrant and aggressor who is in the same league as the most brutal dictators of this century."

- Sen. Joe Biden, about Saddam Hussein's WMD,  12 February 1998

“We must stop Saddam from ever again jeopardising the stability and security of his neighbors with weapons of mass destruction.”

– Madeline Albright, 1 February 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, 10 November 1999 

"Iraq is not the only nation in the world to possess weapons of mass destruction, but it is the only nation with a leader who has used them against his own people."

- Senator Tom Daschle, 1998

"Even today, Iraq is not nearly disarmed. Based on highly credible intelligence, UNSCOM [the U.N. weapons inspectors] suspects that Iraq still has biological agents like anthrax, botulinum toxin, and clostridium perfringens in sufficient quantity to fill several dozen bombs and ballistic missile warheads, as well as the means to continue manufacturing these deadly agents. Iraq probably retains several tons of the highly toxic VX substance, as well as sarin nerve gas and mustard gas. This agent is stored in artillery shells, bombs, and ballistic missile warheads. And Iraq retains significant dual-use industrial infrastructure that can be used to rapidly reconstitute large-scale chemical weapons production."

—Ex-Un Weapons Inspector Scott Ritter in 1998


"This December will mark three years since United Nations inspectors last visited Iraq. There is no doubt that since that time, Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to refine 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."

—From a 6 December 2001 letter signed by Bob Graham, Joe Lieberman, Harold Ford, & Tom Lantos among others

"Whereas Iraq has consistently breached its cease-fire agreement between Iraq and the United States, entered into on March 3, 1991, by failing to dismantle its weapons of mass destruction program, and refusing to permit monitoring and verification by United Nations inspections; Whereas Iraq has developed weapons of mass destruction, including chemical and biological capabilities, and has made positive progress toward developing nuclear weapons capabilities"

—From a joint resolution submitted by Tom Harkin and Arlen Specter on 18 July 2002

“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), 19 September 2002, Remarks to a Senate committee on that date

“We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country.”

- Al Gore, 23 September 2002, The Commonwealth Club, San Francisco

“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, 23 September 2002

"Iraq made commitments after the Gulf War to completely dismantle all weapons of mass destruction, and unfortunately, Iraq has not lived up to its agreement."

— Senator Barbara Boxer, (D-CA) 8November 8 2002

‘We will also stand united behind our President as he and his advisors plan the necessary actions to demonstrate America’s resolve and commitment. Not only to seek out and exact punishment on the perpetrators, but to make very clear that not only those who harbor terrorists, but those who in any way aid or comfort them whatsoever will now face the wrath of our country. And I hope that that message has gotten through to everywhere it needs to be heard. You are either with America in our time of need or you are not.’

- Senator Hillary Clinton, statement in the US Senate in response to the World Trade Center and Pentagon Attacks, 12 September 2001

‘Every nation has to either be with us, or against us. Those who harbor terrorists, or who finance them, are going to pay a price.’

- Senator Hillary Clinton, 13 September 2001

‘I was one who supported giving President Bush the authority, if necessary, to use force against Saddam Hussein. I believe that that was the right vote. I have had many disputes and disagreements with the administration over how that authority has been used, but I stand by the vote to provide the authority because I think it was a necessary step in order to maximize the outcome that did occur in the Security Council with the unanimous vote to send in inspectors.’

- Senator Hillary Clinton, Council on Foreign Relations, 15 December 2003

“We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction.  There is no doubt that Saddam Hussein's regime is a serious danger, that he is a tyrant, and that his pursuit of lethal weapons of mass destruction cannot be tolerated. He must be disarmed."
- Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), 27 September 2002, Johns Hopkins University

“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; and K.K.K.), 3 October 2002, U.S. Senate debate over going to war against Iraq

“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), 9 October 2002, U.S. Senate debate over going to war against Iraq

"The threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real, but as I said, it is not new. It has been with us since the end of that war, and particularly in the last 4 years we know after Operation Desert Fox failed to force him to reaccept them, that he has continued to build those weapons. He has had a free hand for 4 years to reconstitute these weapons, allowing the world, during the interval, to lose the focus we had on weapons of mass destruction and the issue of proliferation."

- Senator John Kerry, 9 October 2002

"(W)e need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime. We all know the litany of his offenses. 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. That is why the world, through the United Nations Security Council, has spoken with one voice, demanding that Iraq disclose its weapons programs and disarm. So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real, but it is not new. It has been with us since the end of the Persian Gulf War."

- Senator John Kerry, 23 January 2003

“[Saddam Hussein is] a long term threat and a short term threat to our national security.  We have no choice but to eliminate the threat. This is a guy who is an extreme danger to the world.  He must be dislodged from his weapons or dislodged from power.”

- Senator Joe Biden, Meet The Press, 26 September 2002

"Every day Saddam remains in power with chemical weapons, biological weapons, and the development of nuclear weapons is a day of danger for the United States."

- Senator Joe Lieberman, August 2002

"Over the years, Iraq has worked to develop nuclear, chemical and biological weapons. During 1991 - 1994, despite Iraq's denials, United Nations inspectors discovered and dismantled a large network of nuclear facilities that Iraq was using to develop nuclear weapons. Various reports indicate that Iraq is still actively pursuing nuclear weapons capability. There is no reason to think otherwise. Beyond nuclear weapons, Iraq has actively pursued biological and chemical weapons. Inspectors have said that Iraq's claims about biological weapons is neither credible nor verifiable. In 1986, Iraq used chemical weapons against Iran, and later, against its own Kurdish population. While weapons inspections have been successful in the past, there have been no inspections since the end of 1998. There can be no doubt that Iraq has continued to pursue its goal of obtaining weapons of mass destruction."

- Senator Patty Murray, 9 October 9 2002

"There's no question that Saddam Hussein is a threat… Yes, he has chemical and biological weapons. He's had those for a long time. But the United States right now is on a very much different defensive posture than we were before September 11th of 2001… 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."

- General Wesley Clark , 26 September 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. And that may happen sooner if he can obtain access to enriched uranium from foreign sources—something that is not that difficult in the current world. 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), 10 October 2002, U.S. Senate debate over going to war against Iraq

“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), 10 October 2002, U.S. House debate over going to war against Iraq.

"Saddam's existing biological and chemical weapons capabilities pose a very real threat to America, now. Saddam has used chemical weapons before, both against Iraq's enemies and against his own people. He is working to develop delivery systems like missiles and unmanned aerial vehicles that could bring these deadly weapons against U.S. forces and U.S. facilities in the Middle East."

- Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), 10 October 2002, U.S. Senate debate over going to war against Iraq


"The debate over Iraq is not about politics. It is about national security. It should be clear that our national security requires Congress to send a clear message to Iraq and the world: America is united in its determination to eliminate forever the threat of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction."

- Senator John Edwards, 10 October 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, though there is apparently no evidence of his involvement in the terrible events of September 11, 2001. 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. Should he succeed in that endeavor, he could alter the political and security landscape of the Middle East, which as we know all too well affects American security."

- Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), U.S. Senate debate over going to war against Iraq, 10 October 2002

"I share the administration's goals in dealing with Iraq and its weapons of mass destruction."

- Minority Leader Dick Gephardt, (D-M), September 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, 10 October 2002

"I am absolutely convinced that there are weapons...I saw evidence back in 1998 when we would see the inspectors being barred from gaining entry into a warehouse for three hours with trucks rolling up and then moving those trucks out."

- William Cohen, President Bill Clinton's Secretary of Defence, April 2003

“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), 23 January 2003 

“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), 8 December 2002

 "I come to this debate, Mr. Speaker, as one at the end of 10 years in office on the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, where stopping the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction was one of my top priorities. I applaud the President on focusing on this issue and on taking the lead to disarm Saddam Hussein. ... Others have talked about this threat that is posed by Saddam Hussein. Yes, he has chemical weapons, he has biological weapons, he is trying to get nuclear weapons."

- Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi (D, CA) Addressing the US House of Representatives, 10 October 2002 Congressional Record, p. H7777

"The weapons inspectors said he had them. He catalogued—they catalogued them. This was not some, some Cheney, you know, pipe dream. This was, in fact, catalogued. They looked at them and catalogued. What he did with them, who knows? The real mystery is, if he, if he didn’t have any of them left, why didn’t he say so? Well, a lot of people say if he had said that, he would’ve, you know, emboldened Iran and so on and so forth."

- Senator Joe Biden, Meet The Press, 29 April 2007

 And, it wasn't just American Democrats:

"Right now, our attention has to be focused as a priority on the biological and chemical domains. It is there that our presumptions about Iraq are the most significant. Regarding the chemical domain, we have evidence of its capacity to produce VX and Yperite. In the biological domain, the evidence suggests the possible possession of significant stocks of anthrax and botulism toxin, and possibly a production capability."

-French Foreign Minister Domin­ique de Villepin told the U.N. Security Council on 5 February 2003 

"What is at stake is how to answer the potential threat Iraq represents with the risk of proliferation of WMD. Baghdad's regime did use such weapons in the past. Today, a number of evidences may lead to think that, over the past four years, in the absence of international inspectors, this country has continued armament programs."

- French President Jacques Chirac, 16 October 2002

“I think all of our governments believe that Iraq has produced weapons of mass destruction and that we have to assume that they still have—that they continue to have weapons of mass destruction.”

Wolfgang Ischinger, German Ambassador to the United States, NBC’s “Today” Show, 26 Feb­ruary 2003 

"After the events of 11 September 2001, and before the start of the military operation in Iraq, Russian special services several times received such information (that Saddam was preparing acts of terror in the US and its facilities worldwide) and passed it on to their American colleagues."

- Russian President Vladimir Putin, 18 June 2004

"I presented the information that we all had from the intelligence community. And when I went to the U.N., it was the assurance of the CIA that the information I had was correct. Mr. Cheney used that same information. The President did. All of our commanders thought it was correct. And we all were saying so. The Congress voted on the basis of that information -- four months earlier. And so I made a choice based on the information I had."

- Colin Powell, The O'Reilly Factor, 30 January 2013

In July 2004, the bipartisan Senate Intelligence Committee issued a report with the following conclusions:
Conclusion 83. The Committee did not find any evidence that Administration officials attempted to coerce, influence or pressure analysts to change their judgments related to Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction capabilities.…

Conclusion 84. The Committee found no evidence that the Vice President’s visits to the Central Intelligence Agency were attempts to pressure analysts, were perceived as intended to pressure analysts by those who participated in the briefings on Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction programs, or did pressure analysts to change their assessments.
In March 2005, the bipartisan Robb–Silverman commission reached the same conclusion:
The Commission found no evidence of political pressure to influence the Intelligence Community’s pre-war assessments of Iraq’s weapons programs. As we discuss in detail in the body of our report, analysts universally asserted that in no instance did political pressure cause them to skew or alter any of their analytical judgments. We conclude that it was the paucity of intelligence and poor analytical tradecraft, rather than political pressure, that produced the inaccurate pre-war intelligence assessments.
The July 2004 Butler Report, issued by a special panel set up by the British Parliament, found that the famous “16 words” in President Bush’s 28 January 2003, State of the Union address were based on fact, contrary to the claims of former ambassador Joseph Wilson, who had alleged that Bush’s asser­tion was a lie. Bush said, “The British Government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa.” The Butler Report called Bush’s 16 words “well founded.” The report also made clear that some forged Italian documents, exposed as fakes after Bush spoke, were not the basis for the British intel­ligence that Bush cited or the CIA’s conclusion that Iraq was seeking to obtain uranium.

Mein Kampf is the Bible of the Right?

These are the demands that Hitler made in Mein Kampf:

We demand that all unearned income, and all income that does not arise from work, be abolished.

We therefore demand the total confiscation of all war profits.

We demand the nationalisation of all trusts.

We demand profit-sharing in large industries.

We demand a generous increase in old-age pensions.

We demand the creation and maintenance of a sound middle-class.

We demand the immediate communalisation of large stores which will be rented cheaply to small tradespeople.

We demand the strongest consideration must be given to ensure that small traders shall deliver the supplies needed by the State, the provinces and municipalities.

We demand an agrarian reform in accordance with our national requirements.

We demand the enactment of a law to expropriate the owners without compensation of any land needed for the common purpose.

We demand the abolition of ground rents.

We demand the prohibition of all speculation in land.

We demand that ruthless war be waged against those who work to the injury of the common welfare.

We demand that traitors, usurers, profiteers, etc., be punished with death, regardless of creed or race.

We demand that Roman law, which serves a materialist ordering of the world, be replaced by German common law.

We demand that the State assume the responsibility of organising thoroughly the entire cultural system of the people to make it possible for every capable and industrious person to obtain higher education and thus the opportunity to reach into positions of leadership.

We demand that specially talented children of poor parents, whatever their station or occupation, be educated at the expense of the State.

We demand that the conception of the State Idea (science of citizenship) must be taught in the schools from the very beginning.

We demand that the curricula of all educational establishments shall be adapted to practical life.

We demand that the State has the duty to help raise the standard of national health by providing maternity welfare centres.

We demand that the State has the duty to help raise the standard of national health by prohibiting juvenile labour.

We demand that the State has the duty to help raise the standard of national health by increasing physical fitness through the introduction of compulsory games and gymnastics.

We demand that the State has the duty to help raise the standard of national health by the greatest possible encouragement of associations concerned with the physical education of the young.

We demand the abolition of the regular army and the creation of a national (folk) army.

We demand that there be a legal campaign against those who propagate deliberate political lies and disseminate them through the press.

We demand freedom for all religious faiths in the state, insofar as they do not endanger its existence or offend the moral and ethical sense of a special race or class.


In order to carry out this programme we demand: the creation of a strong central authority in the State.

We further demand the unconditional authority by the political central parliament of the whole State and all its organisations.

We further demand the formation of professional committees and of committees representing the several estates of the realm, to ensure that the laws promulgated by the central authority shall be carried out by the federal states.

11 September 2009


September 2001: John Kerry, 2004 Democratic Party Nominee for President of the United States of America, Should Not Raise Taxes In Economic Downturn:

“The first priority is the economy of our nation. And when you have a downturn in the economy, the last thing you do is raise taxes or cut spending. We shouldn’t do either. We need to maintain a course that hopefully will stimulate the economy. . . . No, we should not raise taxes, but we have to put everything on the table to take a look at why we have this structural problem today. . . .[Y]ou don’t want to raise taxes.” 

- NBC’s “Meet The Press,” 9/2/01

We Should “Absolutely Not Raise Taxes":

“Well, I think it’s very clear what I favor because we voted for it early in the spring, which was the Democratic budget alternative that had triggers in it where you didn’t wind up spending money you don’t have. It had a smaller tax cut but more tax cut for a stimulus, which is what we need. So you ask me, what do we need now? Yes, we need additional stimulus. We should absolutely not raise taxes. We should not cut spending. What we need to do is drive the economy of this country. The economy is the number one issue. It is the most important thing we should focus on.” 
- CNN’s “Evans, Novak, Hunt & Shields,” 9/8/01

April 2002: Said He Wanted Larger Tax Cut And Was “Not In Favor Of” Repeal:

CNN’s TUCKER CARLSON: “Senator Kerry . . . [many Democrats] [g]et a lot of political mileage out of criticizing [President Bush’s tax cut], but nobody has the courage to say repeal it. Are you for repealing it?” 

KERRY: “It’s not a question of courage. . . . And it’s not an issue right now. We passed appropriately a tax cut as a stimulus, some $40 billion. Many of us thought it should have even maybe been a little bit larger this last year … [T]he next tax cut doesn’t take effect until 2004. If we can grow the economy enough between now and then, if we have sensible policies in place and make good choices, who knows what our choices will be. So it’s simply not a ripe issue right now. And I’m not in favor of turning around today and repealing it.” 

- CNN’s “Crossfire,” 4/16/02

December 2002: Flip-Flopped, Would Keep Tax Cuts From Taking Effect. 

NBC’s TIM RUSSERT: “Senator . . . should we freeze or roll back the Bush tax cut?” 

KERRY: “Well, I wouldn’t take away from people who’ve already been given their tax cut … What I would not do is give any new Bush tax cuts.” … 

RUSSERT: “So the tax cut that’s scheduled to be implemented in the coming years …” 

KERRY: “No new tax cut under the Bush plan. . . . It doesn’t make economic sense.” … 

RUSSERT: “Now, this is a change …”  

- NBC’s “Meet The Press,” 12/1/02

Called For Freeze Of Bush Tax Cuts In Favor Of Year-Long Suspension Of Payroll Taxes On First $10,000 Of Personal Income.  

“Kerry said Bush’s tax cuts have mainly benefited the rich while doing little for the economy. Kerry is proposing to halt Bush’s additional tax cuts and instead impose a yearlong suspension of payroll taxes on the first $10,000 of income to help the poor and middle class.” 

- Tyler Bridges, “Kerry Visits Miami To Start Raising Funds,” The Miami Herald, 12/7/02