Uh-oh. Look who's defending Dubya in his 'Saddam had wmd's' charge.


Posted by run n gun ® , Sep 28,2003,01:18   MetroBlab
(Jess, what in the world are you going to do now?? You're going to have to fall out of love with Hillary now that she backs Dubya on the reasons for war!!)

Hillary Gets Tough
The junior senator from New York may be surprising some people with what she has to say about Saddam and weapons of mass destruction.
by Fred Barnes
09/24/2003 2:30:00 PM


PRESIDENT BUSH has a surprising defender of his contention that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction--Democratic Sen. Hillary Clinton of New York. "The intelligence from Bush 1 to Clinton to Bush 2 was consistent" in concluding Saddam had chemical and biological weapons and was trying to develop a nuclear capability, Clinton said this morning. And Saddam's expulsion of weapons inspectors and "the behavior" of his regime "pointed to a continuing effort" to produce WMD, she added.

The senator said she did her own "due diligence" by attending classified briefings on Capitol Hill and at the White House and Pentagon and also by consulting national security officials from the Clinton administration whom she trusts. "To a person, they all agreed with the consensus of the intelligence" that Saddam had WMD.
http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/003/157wjmhn.asp?ZoomFont=YES
(Please, please, please post the rest of this article as you are wont to do, 'fluff.' It goes on to say how Hillary wouldn't defend Ted (I murdered someone) Kennedy's charge that the reason for the war was a "fraud." Instead, she says he has a right to free speech and his opinion. Cite the rest of the article if you have any guts.)

Followups


 Can't sleep; been drunk all night

Re: Uh-oh. Look who's defending Dubya in his 'Saddam had wmd's' charge. -- run n gun
Posted by David Lettermans lost child ® , Sep 28,2003,11:41   MetroBlab
I went into the world and I came back in
oh I loss my virginity
oh I got back again
driving home tonight is like I found a long lost friend
This is where I first got drunk
This is where I found my weiner
This is where I wrecked my first brain
tore it all to pieces
Uh-oh. Look who's defending Dubya in his 'Saddam had wmd's' charge.

Re: Uh-oh. Look who's defending Dubya in his 'Saddam had wmd's' charge. -- run n gun
Posted by fluffy ® , Sep 28,2003,09:48   MetroBlab
yeah, and? whats your point? so she think saddam had or tired to make WMD's. lots of dems do. oh thats right, you think we're supposed to get all wiggidy-whack because shes a democrat. i see. i forgot you think in repub OR dem terms. as ive said before hillary is an opportunist, plain and simple. some dems i like, some i dont. some repubs i like, some i dont. sad you tow the party line till the end, even to the point it blocks your own rationale. i take this means you LIKE hillary now? and Clark since he has said in the past that he supported the war?

i did read the rest of the article. while its true she wont back kennedy's thought about the war being a fraud, she does go on to say, "I respect Senator Kennedy as much as any one of my colleagues. I respect his opinion . . . He has every right to express his opinion". well duh. dont we all?

the article also quotes her as saying "If WMD are not found in Iraq, she said this would suggest a huge intelligence problem. And a probe would be needed to find what sources were being relied on and why the United States was 'so misled, so wrong'". funny, if she claims that intelligence consistently showed he had WMD's from Bush 1 on, then why is she worried about a probe? if you know for sure he had them that long ago, as she claims, then why would there be a need for a probe about false intelligence? doesnt sound like she definitely believes that intelligence(as Jester pointed out in his response), or at least is not completely confident in the evidence that has been presented to her. shes kind of side-peddling as it were.



Uh-oh. Look who's defending Dubya in his 'Saddam had wmd's' charge.

Re: Uh-oh. Look who's defending Dubya in his 'Saddam had wmd's' charge. -- run n gun
Posted by Scott ® , Sep 28,2003,04:21   MetroBlab
Do you realy think that Bush is a good president?
Uh-oh. Look who's defending Dubya in his 'Saddam had wmd's' charge.

Re: Uh-oh. Look who's defending Dubya in his 'Saddam had wmd's' charge. -- run n gun
Posted by Jester_Fermaggio ® , Sep 28,2003,01:37   MetroBlab
It's obvious these statements are damage control for what she said back in October 2002. However, if you could read worth a shit, she makes it clear she is RELYING on the intelligence she was given. BUT if WMD is not found, (And WMD has to be devices that could harm thousands, if not millions of people), SHE AND BUSH have relied on or believed faulty intelligence.

'If WMD are not found in Iraq, she said this would suggest a huge intelligence problem. And a probe would be needed to find what sources were being relied on and why the United States was "so misled, so wrong.'

Regardless, the administration that began this stupid war will be held accountable. What Hillary or any other Democrat doesn't mean much right now, because they aren't running the show. Your boy GW is.

And BTW, you are an ignorant piece of shit. That's to make up for the few days I wasn't replying to the cow manure you post here.


Incredibly intelligent post, fromagio. Actually one of your smarter ones.

Re: Uh-oh. Look who's defending Dubya in his 'Saddam had wmd's' charge. -- Jester_Fermaggio
Posted by run n gun ® , Sep 28,2003,01:47   MetroBlab
Considering the sewage you like to suck up from the liberals you worship like Hillary, that was one of your better-researched posts, which is to say, it was shit like everything else you post.

Isn't that convenient? When the people you love and champion happen to agree with Dubya, you and Jess fall back on the old chestnut: "but MY heroes aren't running the government! So what if they AGREE with everything Dubya says!"
Typical.
By the way, I thought your thing was downing Metropulse and Jagstar! When did you segue into acting like you knew anything about politics?
(Oh, you're going to love some of my other posts from today! hee-hee)

Incredibly intelligent post, fromagio. Actually one of your smarter ones.

Re: Incredibly intelligent post, fromagio. Actually one of your smarter ones. -- run n gun
Posted by Jester_Fermaggio ® , Sep 28,2003,02:08   MetroBlab
Those that I had issues with at MP are gone, thankfully. They know who they are. There is a renewed focus on local music. It has been that way for the last couple of years.

I have very few qualms with who's at the helm at MP, with the exception of some that were discharged from the art/creative department.

As far as Jagstar goes, I'm sorry, they stink. Hell, everybody thinks they are a hillbilly act from Nashville.

I don't pretend to know about politics. I follow it daily because Bush has done a lot of damage to our country. Why you choose to support this moron is astonishing. If you possess an ounce of intelligence, why would you align yourself with someone who can't use words properly, was a drunk until his 40's, has an arrest record and a DWI.

Not to mention, aww let's mention it, Laura Bush killed someone in her youth. If one Bush is a drunk how come I can't assume his wife wasn't one too? His neice and daughters seem to have problems with drugs and alcohol too.

If you respond with YOUR OWN THOUGHTS I'll debate you every time. However, if you choose to copy and paste others' views, you aren't doing anything for whatever your argument is.