So What!!!!!

[1IDVET]

By Tom Barrett
Editor@ConservativeTruth.org

Terry McAuliffe, who inherited the title of Deceiver-in-Chief of the Democrat Party from Bill Clinton, recently made a fascinating statement. "I cannot remember a time in recent history that an American President has deliberately misled the American people." After rolling on the floor in laughter for a few minutes, I started to wonder if this guy is so deluded that he actually believes his own lies.

Surely he must realize that the American people are not that stupid. He must realize that we know his friend and mentor, Slick Willie Clinton, not only lied to the American people on numerous occasions. He also lied to a Grand Jury under oath, and later admitted that he had done so. He also convinced members of his Cabinet to lie for him in the Monica Lewinsky affair. So which is it, Terry? Are you delusional or do you just have amnesia? Whichever it is, you are doing your Party no favors by making such an obviously false remark.

He was trying to make it appear that George W. Bush lied to us during his 2003 State of the Union address. His pathetic attempt at impugning the President's integrity revolves around a sixteen-word statement in the speech. Although the statement was true, one of the pieces of support for the statement was found to have been fabricated. To which I say, "So what!!!!!"

The statement, 16 words of the 5,338 words in the speech, was "The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa." The statement, then and now, is absolutely true. US intelligence services, including the intelligence arm of the State Department, confirmed it. The Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, composed equally of Democrats and Republicans, was made aware of this intelligence in October of 2002. Jay Rockefeller (one of the few Democrats not running for President), the Vice-Chairman of the Committee, admitted this on FOX News this week. Most important, Prime Minster Tony Blair of Great Britain, from whom we received the information, said today, "The information is genuine. We stand by our intelligence."

So why are McAuliffe and Rockefeller whining about a true statement? They are facing an impossible situation. George Bush is undefeatable in 2004 unless they can figure out some underhanded way to convince America that he is a liar. The Nine Dwarfs who are vying for the Democrat Party nomination have absolutely nothing positive to say. They are all running on a platform of, "George Bush is bad!" They have nothing to offer, so they spend most of their time Bush-bashing. The rest of the time they bash each other. So McAuliffe has orchestrated this vicious campaign out of sheer desperation. They have no one of substance to put up against Bush, so they are trying to bring him down to their level.

They have tried everything else. They have attacked him on his tax cut. Guess what? Americans like lower taxes. They have attacked him on the economy. (In fact, the liberals are hoping the economy will worsen, no matter who it hurts, so they can blame Bush.) Americans know Bush inherited this economy from Clinton, and that he is doing a great job of correcting Clinton's mistakes. They have attacked him for being a born-again Christian, and for having the courage to proclaim his faith publicly. Like all their other attacks, this has backfired because even Americans who are not Christians appreciate him for having the courage of his convictions. In despair, they have made a dumb mistake. They have tried to accuse the most honest man to occupy the White House in many years of lying. And it is backfiring on them. Americans know George Bush is an honorable man, and they see through the lies of McAuliffe and his stooges.

Let's look at a few facts (something Bush's attackers would prefer we not do):

**It has been well documented that Saddam Hussein has purchased yellow cake uranium from African nations in the past. This is far more significant than the President's innocuous remark about Iraq attempting to purchase it recently.

**The International Atomic Energy Commission has verified that, "Iraq has continued its nuclear weapons programs." This has been further verified by the intelligence services of many nations, and none other than Bill Clinton has stated categorically on several occasions that Iraq was building nuclear weapons.

**A unanimous vote of the United Nations Security Council declared that Saddam had weapons of mass destruction and was developing a nuclear capability, for which he would obviously need uranium.

**The information from the document that was later found to be forged (which specified that Iraq was attempting to purchase yellow cake uranium from Niger) was not used in the speech. In any case, there was considerable evidence that Iraq had already purchased uranium from African nations and was attempting to purchase more, which was completely independent of the forged document. In fact, the intelligence services of several nations concurred in that conclusion.

On FOX News Tony Snow asked Jay Rockefeller if the Democrats were not using this insignificant issue for political gain in an attempt to discredit the President. Rockefeller evaded the question, instead complaining that he is not sure we should have gotten into this war, because the reasons given in the State of the Union Address might be false. If I had been Tony I would have asked him why he didn't question the intelligence when it came before his committee nine months ago. Why did he wait to complain until the presidential election season was under way?

When Snow asked Rockefeller about the weapons inspectors currently in Iraq who have stated that they are sure they will soon have a "treasure trove" of proof of Saddam's WMD's, Rockefeller said, "Let me get technical here." He then went on to try to make a distinction between discovering the actual weapons and discovering that Saddam had programs to produce the weapons. So what!!!!! If he had programs to produce them, does Rockefeller think he would have just thrown away the plans once they were perfected? The only reason he had the programs was to produce the weapons so that he could kill more people.
Intelligence gathering is not a simple matter, particularly since Bill Clinton gutted the CIA by removing almost all of our human intelligence in favor of technology. Satellites and phone taps can never be a substitute for having a human spy on the ground. Unfortunately Bill was not smart enough to understand this simple concept. The intelligence services of all nations have always had to make do with incomplete information, because bad guys do not publish their plans to rule the world on the Internet. But, as Tom Adkins says, "The last time we did not move on scattered intelligence, 3000 Americans died."

As far as I am concerned, the only mistake Bush has made in all of this was to intimate that the sixteen word should not have been uttered, even though they were accurate, just because a small piece of supporting evidence was inaccurate. In response to intense liberal media pressure, the White House issued a statement that the sixteen words, "did not rise to the standards of a Presidential speech." So what!!!!! We do not pay you to be perfect, Mr. President. We pay you to lead, and lead you did! You acted on the best information you had available, and you made the right decision! The world is a better place without Saddam Hussein in power.

We did no go to war because Saddam might have had weapons of mass destruction. We went to war because Saddam himself is a Weapon of Mass Destruction. The mass graves we have discovered in Iraq prove that. Three hundred thousand bodies have been discovered in these graves - so far. It is a long-established fact that not only has Saddam produced and possessed WMD's, he has used them on other nations and on his own people.

Let me close with Tony Blair's words to the US Congress earlier this week. "If we are wrong, we will have destroyed a threat that at its least is responsible for inhuman carnage and suffering. That is something I am confident history will forgive. If our critics are wrong, if we are right as I believe with every fiber of instinct and conviction I have that we are, and we had not acted, then we would have hesitated in the face of this menace when we should have given leadership; that is something history will not forgive."

[sfc_darrel]

All Sexed Up and No Place to Go--II
OK, it's yesterday's news, but here's an interesting report called "Saddam's Bomb":

In the wake of the US and British bombing of Iraq, investigative film maker Gwynne Roberts finds evidence that suggests that Iraq may already have developed its own nuclear weapons.

Pretty scary report, isn't it? And can you guess where it aired? On the BBC, on March 3, 2001.

[MORTARDUDE]

The Democratic / Liberal party is slowly self-destructing...there will
be very little left after the election of November 2004..

Larry

DEO VINDICE