Reply #8: Let the bloodbath begin! [View All]

[IndianaGreen]

But if Kerry is going to attack Dean for his opposition to the war in Iraq, then Kerry lied again when he gave what I thought was a good announcement speech over the weekend.

Kerry is the only politician that believes that his vote for the Iraq war resolution was a vote for the UN, not war.

Personally, I don't trust any man with a $75 haircut. For people that live paycheck-to-paycheck and that have to hold more than one job to make ends meet, paying $75 for a haircut is an extravagant luxury reserved for those born into a life of privilege.

Published on Tuesday, August 26, 2003 by CommonDreams.org
Kerry’s Deceptions on Iraq Threaten His Presidential Hopes
by Stephen Zunes

In a speech on the Senate floor immediately prior to the October vote, Senator Kerry categorically stated that Saddam Hussein was “attempting to develop nuclear weapons.” However, there appears to be no evidence to suggest that Iraq had had an active nuclear program for at least eight to ten years prior to the U.S. invasion. Indeed, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) reported in 1998 and subsequently that Iraq's nuclear program appeared to have been completely dismantled.

To justify his claims of an Iraqi nuclear threat, Senator Kerry claimed that “all U.S. intelligence experts agree that Iraq is seeking nuclear weapons.” The reality, of course, was that much of the U.S. intelligence community was highly skeptical of claims that Iraq was attempting to acquire nuclear materials.

Indeed, despite unfettered access by IAEA inspectors to possible Iraqi nuclear facilities between this past November and March and exhaustive searching by U.S. occupation forces since then, no trace has been found of the ongoing Iraqi nuclear program that Senator Kerry claimed existed last fall.

In addition, Senator Kerry stated unequivocally that “Iraq has chemical and biological weapons.” He even claimed that most elements of Iraq’s chemical and biological weapons programs “are larger and more advanced than they were before the Gulf War.” He did not try to explain how this could be possible, given the limited shelf life of such chemical and biological agents and the strict embargo against imports of any additional banned materials that had been in place since 1990.

The Massachusetts senator also asserted that authorizing a U.S. invasion of that oil-rich country was necessary since “These weapons represent an unacceptable threat.”

http://www.commondreams.org/views03/0826-03.htm