Help Lorie Byrd

Posted on by

Lorie Byrd of the rightie blog PoliPundit writes,

Chris Matthews spent the last few minutes of the program talking about how important it is to find out whether or not the President and Vice President lied about pre-war intelligence and how important it is that the Senate investigate this. He said that the administration promised us that there would be WMD found, that Saddam had a nuclear weapons program, that we would be greeted as liberators, that the war would cost nothing because it would be paid for entirely by Iraqi war revenue and that if we invaded Iraq we would have cheap gas. Then he went on to declare that nothing we were promised was true.

I am sorry but I missed those “promises.”

This is the sort of thing I love to plunge into, but I’ve got a lot of chores scheduled for today and I’m already into the planning phase of another post. But if some of you readers want to help, pick one or more of the promises and find a link that documents where Bush and/or Cheney made the promise. Thanks much!

Update: See “So you want details about who lied” by retired Air Force major James Bruner in today’s Seattle Post-Intelligencer.

Update update: PoliPundit Readers: I know you are all eager to explain to me that Bill Clinton believed Saddam Hussein had WMDs in 1998. Please note that (1) only a flaming idiot starts a war in 2003 based on what somebody thought in 1998; and (2) in February 2003, a month before the invasion, UN weapons inspectors in Iraq were publicly stating that US intelligence on Iraq WMDs was “garbage.”

Yes, they said “garbage.” They said other things too, I understand, that couldn’t be printed. You can read about this here.

15 thoughts on “Help Lorie Byrd”

  1. Thank you very frigging much, Maha, went over there to read the comments to see if anybody from here had posted, and my IQ dropped 40 points from exposure to those righties. I’m trying to be a programmer here, and you just made me too stupid to program! *grumble*

  2. OMG!! What the hell happened to the people on lorie byrd’s blog?Where they all dropped on their heads as babies by their drunken rightie parents?SOMETHING has to be wrong with those people .NORMAL people do not act like that. The reaction to any comment that disagrees with them is not to argue any facts that a person may present, but instead to insult and tell people to leave if they don’t like being insulted ..
    The posters reaction reminds me of exactly what is going so very wrong with our country.The hate from the right towards HALF of their fellow Americans tells me all I need to know.I dispute many rightie facts, and I admit they annoy me but I do not HATE..These people HATE…it’s all they can do .They are unable to dispute any the things Chris matthews said on his show so they just move right on to the hate.
    How can this group claim to “LOVE AMERICA” when in fact they hate(with a passion) half of it?Seems very ANTI AMERICAN to me.I am very concerned about this group of people who puts their party before their country, and even more concerned that this must be what they are learning in church.Praise the Lord and pass the ammo!
    This group is a GRAVE threat to our country..they are folks with a party and without reason.They don’t care who dies as long as it doesn’t affect them.The parties agenda comes first and Amer-
    icans come in about last in their line of logic.
    Lorie says”I AM SORRY BUT I MISSED THOSE PROMISES”

    Wow Lorie, i can’t imagine admitting your not very informed is the topic you choose to blog on….amazing how rightie world works isn’t it? Maybe you should have researched BEFORE you blogged …THAT would have been a story in itself.

  4. Fish in a barrel.

    For cost of war (Remember, Lawrence Lindsay got canned for trying to say this was going to be expensive), here’s the laundry list:
    http://www.house.gov/schakowsky/iraqquotes_web.htm

    For the promise of WMD, Rumsfeld’s statement (“We know where they are. They’re in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad and east, west, south and north somewhat”) is here.

    Others can chime in about being greeted as liberators and Saddam’s nuclear program (just google “mushroom cloud” for that one), but I have to say I do not remember the administration pushing the cheap gas thing, and I wonder if Matthews actually said that. If anything, I recall that point being made by shallow, morally challenged, know-nothing war supporters.

  5. Here’s a link that was posted by Jack in the People of Faith post(below). http://www.carnegieendowment.org/publications/index.cfm?fa=view&id=1435&prog=zgp&proj=znpp

    There are several places in where maybe not promises,but assurances, are given for the need to invade Iraq. One statement by Cheney was..”We now know,with certainty, that Saddam has reconstituted his nuclear program”. Seems It turned out to be a certainty of faith.

    If those righties are willing to read and willing to face the truth, they too can find out how Bush and company scamed the American public.

  12. All your links have documented is that the administration believed very insistently that there were large amounts of WMDs, as did most of the Democrats (even though their quotes were not in there).

    Very few administration officials were ready to go a far as predicting that we would be greeted as liberators. None predicted that the war would cost nothing, or that it would produce cheap oil.

    So Lori Byrd’s criticism of Chris Matthews’ statement stands.

  13. #2
    You want to give any examples of which you speak?
    Any “facts” posted that were ignored perhaps?

  14. “When I left office, there was a substantial amount of biological and chemical material unaccounted for. That is, at the end of the first Gulf War, we knew what he had. We knew what was destroyed in all the inspection processes and that was a lot. And then we bombed with the British for four days in 1998. We might have gotten it all; we might have gotten half of it; we might have gotten none of it. But we didn’t know.”
    -President Bill Clinton, July 27, 2003

    —————————-
    For the last eight years, American policy toward Iraq has been based on the tangible threat Saddam poses to our security. That threat is clear. Saddam’s history of aggression, and his recent record of deception and defiance, leave no doubt that he would resume his drive for regional domination if he had the chance. Year after year, in conflict after conflict, Saddam has proven that he seeks weapons, including weapons of mass destruction, in order to use them.”
    -National Security Advisor Samuel Berger, December 8, 1998.

    ———————
    One “scenario is that he could in fact somehow use his weapons of mass destruction.”

    “Another scenario is that he could kind of become the salesman for weapons of mass destruction — that he could be the place that people come and get more weapons.”
    –Secretary Albright , February 19, 1998

    ——-
    Make sure you add that to the roundup of your “quotes”

  15. I would like to point out to “Ace” that Clinton, Albright, and Berger had the sense not to invade Iraq.

    Fools DO rush in where angels fear to tread, don’t they?

    Regarding what was known about WMDs before the 2003 invasion, and why only extremely stupid people justify a 2003 invasion with 1998 intelligence, see my more recent post, here:

    https://www.mahablog.com/2005/11/15/inspect-this/

Comments are closed.