Here’s an example posted by one blogger;
That the Bush Administration lied on the road to Iraq is an established fact.
The database, available at www.publicintegrity.org/WarCard is fully searchable.
Let me start out by giving some “facts” about this report and the Center for Public Integrity.
- The “fully searchable” database does not contain any quotes made by Democrats.
- The Center is funded by the likes of George Soros, Bill Moyers and the Schumann Foundation.
- The Center has been criticized for being biased by watchdog groups like Accuracy in Media.
The Hidden Soros Agenda: Drugs, Money, the Media, and Political Power
Journalists carefully conceal their own conflicts of interest. On the Public Broadcasting Service (PBS) NOW With Bill Moyers program on January 9 of this year, Moyers interviewed Charles Lewis of the Center for Public Integrity about the big money supporting the presidential candidates. But little time and attention was paid to how Soros was trying to buy the White House and pouring millions of dollars into groups such as MoveOn.org to bring this about. Moyers, former press secretary to President Lyndon Johnson, failed to tell his viewers that he is on the board of Soros’ Open Society Institute and that it has funneled $1.7 million into Lewis and his Center for Public Integrity.
Here are some “truths” in their database that you’ll find when searching on “Clinton”, since we know he made statements about Iraq, however, you won’t find any quotes made by him.
Mr. Fleischer: Can I continue? And if you recall, Helen, the Congress passed last year—or in a previous administration—legislation that made regime change the official policy of the government. And that was signed into law by President Clinton. So President Bush is continuing—
Question: What law was that?
Mr. Fleischer: It’s called the Iraqi Liberation Act, signed, passed by—
Question: Did it say we were going to overturn—
Mr. Fleischer: —passed by the House and the Senate, signed into law by President Clinton. Regime change, in whatever form it takes, is the policy of the United States government, under President Clinton, continued under President Bush.
Secretary Powell: It was the previous administration, President Clinton’s administration, and the American Congress in 1998 that made it an American position that regime change seemed to be the only way to get rid of the weapons of mass destruction and to get Saddam Hussein out of the place so that the Iraqi people would no longer suffer under that kind of leadership.
Secretary Powell: At the end of the first Gulf War in ’91, we found weapons of mass destruction and destroyed those we found. As late as 1998, there was no question in anyone’s mind. President Clinton spoke out forcefully. His intelligence leaders, his director of Central Intelligence said that there were weapons. Other intelligence organizations in other countries have said so, so this isn’t a figment of somebody’s imagination.
Here are some quotes made by Democrats that The Center for Public Lack-Of-Integrity conveniently left out of their report.
|“People can quarrel with whether we should have more troops in Afghanistan or internationalize Iraq or whatever, but it is incontestable that on the day I left office, there were unaccounted for stocks of biological and chemical weapons.”
Former President Clinton
Hillary Clinton on Saddam’s WMD, UN Impotence
|“There is a very easy way to prevent anyone from being put into harm’s way, and that is for Saddam Hussein to disarm, and I have absolutely no belief that he will. I have to say that this is something I have followed for more than a decade.For now nearly 20 years, the principal reason why women and children in Iraq have suffered, is because of Saddam’s leadership.The very difficult question for all of us, is how does one bring about the disarmament of someone with such a proven trackrecord of a commitment, if not an obsession, with weapons of mass destruction.I ended up voting for the Resolution after carefully reviewing the information and intelligence I had available, talking with people whose opinions I trusted, trying to discount political or other factors that I didn’t believe should be in any way a part of this decision, and it is unfortunate that we are at the point of a potential military action to enforce the resolution. That is not my preference, it would be far preferable if we had legitimate cooperation from Saddam Hussein, and a willingness on his part to disarm, and to account for his chemical and biological storehouses.
With respect to whose responsibility it is to disarm Saddam Hussein, I do not believe that given the attitudes of many people in the world community today that there would be a willingness to take on very difficult problems were it not for United States leadership. And I am talking specifically about what had to be done in Bosnia and Kosovo, where my husband could not get a Security Council resolution to save the Kosovar Albanians from ethnic cleansing. And we did it alone as the United States, and we had to do it alone. It would have been far preferable if the Russians and others had agreed to do it through the United Nations — they would not. I’m happy that, in the face of such horrible suffering, we did act.”
Senator Hillary Clinton (Democrat, New York)
|“There is now no incentive for Hussein to comply with the inspectors or to refrain from using weapons of mass destruction to defend himself if the United States comes after him. And he will use them; we should be under no illusion about that.”
Joseph Wilson, Advisor to John Kerry 2004 Presidential Campaign
|“Saddam Hussein certainly has chemical and biological weapons. There’s no question about that.”
Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi (Democrat, California)
|“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 (Democrat, California)
|“We stopped the fighting [in 1991] on an agreement that Iraq would take steps to assure the world that it would not engage in further aggression and that it would destroy its weapons of mass destruction. It has refused to take those steps. That refusal constitutes a breach of the armistice which renders it void and justifies resumption of the armed conflict.”
Senator Harry Reid (Democrat, Nevada)
|Wesley Clark, 2004 Democratic presidential candidate, discusses Saddam’s WMD:
WESLEY CLARK: He does have weapons of mass destruction.
MILES O’BRIEN: And you could say that categorically?
WESLEY CLARK: Absolutely.
MILES O’BRIEN: All right, well, where are, where is, they’ve been there a long time and thus far we’ve got 12 empty casings. Where are all these weapons?
WESLEY CLARK: There’s a lot of stuff hidden in a lot of different places, Miles, and I’m not sure that we know where it all is. People in Iraq do. The scientists know some of it. Some of the military, the low ranking military; some of Saddam Hussein’s security organizations. There’s a big organization in place to cover and deceive and prevent anyone from knowing about this.
Wesley Clark, Democratic Presidential Candidate
|“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.”
Senator Edward Kennedy (Democrat, Massachusetts)
|John Kerry, while voting YES to the Resolution authorizing US military force 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.”
Senator John Kerry (Democrat, Massachusetts)
|“As a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, I firmly believe that the issue of Iraq is not about politics. It’s about national security. We know that for at least 20 years, Saddam Hussein has obsessively sought weapons of mass destruction through every means available. We know that he has chemical and biological weapons today. He has used them in the past, and he is doing everything he can to build more. Each day he inches closer to his longtime goal of nuclear capability — a capability that could be less than a year away.
The path of confronting Saddam is full of hazards. But the path of inaction is far more dangerous. This week, a week where we remember the sacrifice of thousands of innocent Americans made on 9-11, the choice could not be starker. Had we known that such attacks were imminent, we surely would have used every means at our disposal to prevent them and take out the plotters. We cannot wait for such a terrible event — or, if weapons of mass destruction are used, one far worse — to address the clear and present danger posed by Saddam Hussein’s Iraq.”
Senator John Edwards (Democrat, North Carolina)
|Congressman Gephardt links Saddam with the threat of terrorists nuking US cities:
BOB SCHIEFFER, Chief Washington Correspondent: And with us now is the Democratic presidential candidate Dick Gephardt. Congressman, you supported taking military action in Iraq. Do you think now it was the right thing to do?
REP. RICHARD GEPHARDT, D-MO, Democratic Presidential Candidate: I do. I base my determination on what I heard from the CIA. I went out there a couple of times and talked to everybody, including George Tenet. I talked to people in the Clinton administration.
SCHIEFFER: Well, let me just ask you, do you feel, Congressman, that you were misled?
GEPHARDT: I don’t. I asked very direct questions of the top people in the CIA and people who’d served in the Clinton administration. And they said they believed that Saddam Hussein either had weapons or had the components of weapons or the ability to quickly make weapons of mass destruction. What we’re worried about is an A-bomb in a Ryder truck in New York, in Washington and St. Louis. It cannot happen. We have to prevent it from happening. And it was on that basis that I voted to do this.
Congressman Richard Gephardt (Democrat, Montana)
|“[W]e have evidence of meetings between Iraqi officials and leaders of al Qaeda, and testimony that Iraqi agents helped train al Qaeda operatives to use chemical and biological weapons. We also know that al Qaeda leaders have been, and are now, harbored in Iraq.Having reached the conclusion I have about the clear and present danger Saddam represents to the U.S., I want to give the president a limited but strong mandate to act against Saddam.”
Senator Joseph Lieberman (Democrat, Connecticut)
|“Iraq’s search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to completely deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power.We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country.“
Al Gore, Former Clinton Vice-President
There are dozens more examples of Democrat “lies” at http://www.freedomagenda.com/iraq/wmd_quotes.html. I know, this has nothing to do with Global Warming… but it’s the same people. Joel