we still remember mitch hedberg

A severed foot is the ultimate stocking stuffer.

Jul 29th 2006

steve’s rules on lying

Bushitler and Dumbsfeld have proven they are in no position to lead our military. They got everything wrong and they lied to us Travis. Why can’t you just admit that lying is bad? It’s even worse when it costs human live and enslaves with debt.

if you lie, you are in no position to lead. the same goes for democrats, right steve?

“Every nation has to either be with us, or against us. Those who harbor terrorists, or who finance them, are going to pay a price.”

Senator Hillary Clinton (Democrat, New York)
September 13, 2001

“In the next century, the community of nations may see more and more the very kind of threat Iraq poses now — a rogue state with weapons of mass destruction ready to use them or provide them to terrorists, drug traffickers or organized criminals who travel the world among us unnoticed.

If we fail to respond today, Saddam and all those who would follow in his footsteps will be emboldened tomorrow by the knowledge that they can act with impunity, even in the face of a clear message from the United Nations Security Council and clear evidence of a weapons of mass destruction program.”

President Clinton
Address to Joint Chiefs of Staff and Pentagon staff
February 17, 1998

“It is the duty of any president, in the final analysis, to defend this nation and dispel the security threat. Saddam Hussein has brought military action upon himself by refusing for 12 years to comply with the mandates of the United Nations. The brave and capable men and women of our armed forces and those who are with us will quickly, I know, remove him once and for all as a threat to his neighbors, to the world, and to his own people, and I support their doing so.”

Senator John Kerry (Democrat, Massachusetts)
March 17, 2003

US State Department
November 4, 1998
Bin Laden, Atef Indicted in U.S. Federal Court for African Bombings

New York — Usama bin Laden and Muhammad Atef were indicted November 4 in Manhattan federal court for the August 7 bombings of the US embassies in Nairobi, Kenya, and Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, and for conspiring to kill Americans outside the United States.

Bin Laden’s “al Qaeda” organization functioned both on its own and through other terrorist organizations, including the Al Jihad group based in Egypt, the Islamic Group also known as el Gamaa Islamia led at one time by Sheik Omar Abdel Rahman, and a number of other jihad groups in countries such as Sudan, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, and Somalia.

Bin Laden, the US Attorney charged, engaged in business transactions on behalf of Al Qaeda, including purchasing warehouses for storage of explosives, transporting weapons, and establishing a series of companies in Sudan to provide income to al Qaeda and as a cover for the procurement of explosives, weapons, and chemicals, and for the travel of operatives.

According to the indictment, bin Laden and al Qaeda forged alliances with the National Islamic Front in Sudan and with representatives of the Government of Iran and its associated terrorist group Hezballah with the goal of working together against their common enemies in the West, particularly the United States.

“In addition, al Qaeda reached an understanding with the Government of Iraq that al Qaeda would not work against that government and that on particular projects, specifically including weapons development, al Qaeda would work cooperatively with the Government of Iraq,” the indictment said.

Beginning in 1992, bin Laden allegedly issued through his “fatwah” committees a series of escalating “fatwahs” against the United States, certain military personnel, and, eventually in February 1998, a “fatwah” stating that Muslims should kill Americans — including civilians — anywhere in the world they can be found.

“Those who doubted whether Iraq or the world would be better off without Saddam Hussein, and those who believe today that we are not safer with his capture, don’t have the judgment to be President, or the credibility to be elected President.

No one can doubt or should doubt that we are safer — and Iraq is better — because Saddam Hussein is now behind bars.”

Senator John Kerry (Democrat, Massachusetts)
Speech at Drake University in Iowa
December 16, 2003

John Edwards, while voting YES to the Resolution authorizing US military force against Iraq:
“Others argue that if even our allies support us, we should not support this resolution because confronting Iraq now would undermine the long-term fight against terrorist groups like Al Qaeda. Yet, I believe that this is not an either-or choice. Our national security requires us to do both, and we can.”

Senator John Edwards (Democrat, North Carolina)
US Senate floor statement: “Authorization of the Use of
United States Armed Forces Against Iraq”
October 10, 2002

“I think it was the right decision to disarm Saddam Hussein. And when the president made the decision, I supported him, and I support the fact that we did disarm him.”

Senator John Kerry (Democrat, Massachusetts)
During a Democratic Primary Debate at the University of South Carolina
May 3, 2003

Senator John Edwards, when asked about “Axis of Evil” countries Iran, Iraq, and North Korea:

“I mean, we have three different countries that, while they all present serious problems for the United States — they’re dictatorships, they’re involved in the development and proliferation of weapons of mass destruction — you know, the most imminent, clear and present threat to our country is not the same from those three countries. I think Iraq is the most serious and imminent threat to our country.”

Senator John Edwards (Democrat, North Carolina)
During an interview on CNN’s “Late Edition”
February 24, 2002

“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)
Speech at Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies
September 27, 2002

“In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including Al Qaeda members…

It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons.”

Senator Hillary Clinton (Democrat, New York)
Addressing the US Senate
October 10, 2002

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)
Addressing the US Senate
October 9, 2002

“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)
US Senate floor statement: “Iraqi Dictator Must Go”
September 12, 2002

“Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime. We all know the litany of his offenses. He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation. He miscalculated an eight-year war with Iran. He miscalculated the invasion of Kuwait. He miscalculated America’s response to that act of naked aggression. He miscalculated the result of setting oil rigs on fire. He miscalculated the impact of sending scuds into Israel and trying to assassinate an American President. He miscalculated his own military strength. He miscalculated the Arab world’s response to his misconduct. And now he is miscalculating America’s response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction. That is why the world, through the United Nations Security Council, has spoken with one voice, demanding that Iraq disclose its weapons programs and disarm.

So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real, but it is not new. It has been with us since the end of the Persian Gulf War.

In U.N. Security Council Resolution 1441, the United Nations has now affirmed that Saddam Hussein must disarm or face the most serious consequences. Let me make it clear that the burden is resoundingly on Saddam Hussein to live up to the ceasefire agreement he signed and make clear to the world how he disposed of weapons he previously admitted to possessing.”

Senator John Kerry (Democrat, Massachusetts)
Speech at Georgetown University
January 23, 2003

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.


Well, let me just ask you, do you feel, Congressman, that you were misled?


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)
Interviewed on CBS News “Face the Nation”
November 2, 2003

“We have not reached parity with them. We have the right to kill 4 million Americans — 2 million of them children — and to exile twice as many and wound and cripple hundreds of thousands. Furthermore, it is our right to fight them with chemical and biological weapons, so as to afflict them with the fatal maladies that have afflicted the Muslims because of the [Americans’] chemical and biological weapons.”

Islamic terrorist group “Al Qaeda”
June 12, 2002

“[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)
In a Wall Street Journal editorial Lieberman authored titled: “Why Democrats Should Support the President on Iraq”
October 7, 2002

“Iraq is a long way from Ohio, but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face.”

Madeleine Albright, President Clinton’s Secretary of State
Town Hall Meeting on Iraq at Ohio State University
February 18, 1998

“Imagine the consequences if Saddam fails to comply and we fail to act. Saddam will be emboldened, believing the international community has lost its will. He will rebuild his arsenal of weapons of mass destruction. And some day, some way, I am certain, he will use that arsenal again, as he has ten times since 1983.”

Sandy Berger, President Clinton’s National Security Advisor
Town Hall Meeting on Iraq at Ohio State University
February 18, 1998

“No one has done what Saddam Hussein has done, or is thinking of doing. He is producing weapons of mass destruction, and he is qualitatively and quantitatively different from other dictators.”

Madeleine Albright, President Clinton’s Secretary of State
Town Hall Meeting on Iraq at Ohio State University
February 18, 1998

“Ten years after the Gulf War and Saddam is still there and still continues to stockpile weapons of mass destruction. Now there are suggestions he is working with al Qaeda, which means the very terrorists who attacked the United States last September may now have access to chemical and biological weapons.”

James P. Rubin, President Clinton’s State Department spokesman
In a PBS documentary titled “Saddam’s Ultimate Solution”
July 11, 2002

“Dear Mr. President: … We urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraq sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq’s refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs.”


Carl Levin, Joe Lieberman, Frank R. Lautenberg, Dick Lugar, Kit Bond, Jon Kyl, Chris Dodd, John McCain, Kay Bailey Hutchison, Alfonse D’Amato, Bob Kerrey, Pete V. Domenici, Dianne Feinstein, Barbara A. Mikulski, Thomas Daschle, John Breaux, Tim Johnson, Daniel K. Inouye, Arlen Specter, James Inhofe, Strom Thurmond, Mary L. Landrieu, Wendell Ford, John Kerry, Chuck Grassley, Jesse Helms, Rick Santorum.

Letter to President Clinton
Signed by Senators Tom Daschle, John Kerry and others
October 9, 1998,%20reports%20and%20statements/levin-10-9-98.html

“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
Speech to San Francisco Commonwealth Club
September 23, 2002,12271,797999,00.html

“As a member of the House Intelligence Committee, I am keenly aware that the proliferation of chemical and biological weapons is an issue of grave importance to all nations. Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process.”

Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi (Democrat, California)
Statement on US Led Military Strike Against Iraq
December 16, 1998

Al Gore said last night that the time had come for a “final reckoning” with Iraq, describing the country as a “virulent threat in a class by itself” and suggesting that the United States should consider ways to oust Saddam Hussein.

The New York Times
Gore, Championing Bush, Calls For a ‘Final Reckoning’ With Iraq
February 13, 2002

“The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retained some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capability. Intelligence reports also indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons, but has not yet achieved nuclear capability.”

Robert C. Byrd
Former Ku Klux Klan recruiter, currently a US Senator (Democrat, West Virginia)
Addressing the US Senate
October 3, 2002

“Iraq appears not to have come to a genuine acceptance — not even today — of the disarmament, which was demanded of it and which it needs to carry out to win the confidence of the world and to live in peace.”

Dr. Hans Blix, Chief UN Weapons Inspector
Addressing the UN Security Council
January 27, 2003

“The nerve agent VX is one of the most toxic ever developed.

13,000 chemical bombs were dropped by the Iraqi Air Force between 1983 and 1988, while Iraq has declared that 19,500 bombs were consumed during this period. Thus, there is a discrepancy of 6,500 bombs. The amount of chemical agent in these bombs would be in the order of about 1,000 tonnes.”

Dr. Hans Blix, Chief UN Weapons Inspector
Addressing the UN Security Council
January 27, 2003

“The recent inspection find in the private home of a scientist of a box of some 3,000 pages of documents, much of it relating to the laser enrichment of uranium support a concern that has long existed that documents might be distributed to the homes of private individuals. …we cannot help but think that the case might not be isolated and that such placements of documents is deliberate to make discovery difficult and to seek to shield documents by placing them in private homes.”

Dr. Hans Blix, Chief UN Weapons Inspector
Addressing the UN Security Council
January 27, 2003

“I have mentioned the issue of anthrax to the Council on previous occasions and I come back to it as it is an important one.

Iraq has declared that it produced about 8,500 litres of this biological warfare agent, which it states it unilaterally destroyed in the summer of 1991. Iraq has provided little evidence for this production and no convincing evidence for its destruction.

There are strong indications that Iraq produced more anthrax than it declared, and that at least some of this was retained after the declared destruction date. It might still exist. Either it should be found and be destroyed under UNMOVIC supervision or else convincing evidence should be produced to show that it was, indeed, destroyed in 1991.”

Dr. Hans Blix, Chief UN Weapons Inspector
Addressing the UN Security Council
January 27, 2003

“His regime threatens the safety of his people, the stability of his region, and the security of all the rest of us.

What if he fails to comply, and we fail to act, or we take some ambiguous third route which gives him yet more opportunities to develop this program of weapons of mass destruction and continue to press for the release of the sanctions and continue to ignore the solemn commitments that he made?

Well, he will conclude that the international community has lost its will. He will then conclude that he can go right on and do more to rebuild an arsenal of devastating destruction.

And some day, some way, I guarantee you, he’ll use the arsenal.”

President Clinton
Address to Joint Chiefs of Staff and Pentagon staff
February 17, 1998

CNN: How did Hussein intend to use the weapon, once it was completed?

HAMZA: Saddam has a whole range of weapons of mass destruction, nuclear, biological and chemical. According to German intelligence estimates, we expect him to have three nuclear weapons by 2005. So, the window will close by 2005, and we expect him then to be a lot more aggressive with his neighbors and encouraging terrorism, and using biological weapons. Now he’s using them through surrogates like al Qaeda, but we expect he’ll use them more aggressively then.

Dr. Khidhir Hamza, former Iraqi Nuclear Scientist for 20 years
Interviewed on CNN
October 22, 2001

Regime change in Iraq has been official US policy since 1998:

The Iraq Liberation Act of 1998 (sponsored by Bob Kerrey, John McCain, and Joseph Lieberman, and signed into law by President Clinton) states:

“It should be the policy of the United States to support efforts to remove the regime headed by Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq and to promote the emergence of a democratic government to replace that regime.”

Iraq Liberation Act of 1998
105th Congress, 2nd Session
September 29, 1998

October 10, 2002

House gives Bush authority for war with Iraq

The House voted 296-133 to give Bush the authority to use U.S. military force to make Iraq comply with U.N. resolutions requiring it to give up weapons of mass destruction.

October 11, 2002

Senate approves Iraq war resolution

In a major victory for the White House, the Senate early Friday voted 77-23 to authorize President Bush to attack Iraq if Saddam Hussein refuses to give up weapons of mass destruction as required by U.N. resolutions.

“Some have said we must not act until the threat is imminent. Since when have terrorists and tyrants announced their intentions, politely putting us on notice before they strike? If this threat is permitted to fully and suddenly emerge, all actions, all words, and all recriminations would come too late. Trusting in the sanity and restraint of Saddam Hussein is not a strategy, and it is not an option.”

President Bush
State of the Union address
January 28, 2003

“The global community — in the form of the United Nations — has declared repeatedly, through multiple resolutions, that the frightening prospect of a nuclear-armed Saddam cannot come to pass. But the U.N. has been unable to enforce those resolutions. We must eliminate that threat now, before it is too late.

But this isn’t just a future threat. Saddam’s existing biological and chemical weapons capabilities pose a very real threat to America, now. Saddam has used chemical weapons before, both against Iraq’s enemies and against his own people. He is working to develop delivery systems like missiles and unmanned aerial vehicles that could bring these deadly weapons against U.S. forces and U.S. facilities in the Middle East.

As the attacks of September 11 demonstrated, the immense destructiveness of modern technology means we can no longer afford to wait around for a smoking gun. September 11 demonstrated that the fact that an attack on our homeland has not yet occurred cannot give us any false sense of security that one will not occur in the future. We no longer have that luxury.

September 11 changed America. It made us realize we must deal differently with the very real threat of terrorism, whether it comes from shadowy groups operating in the mountains of Afghanistan or in 70 other countries around the world, including our own.

There has been some debate over how “imminent” a threat Iraq poses. I do believe that Iraq poses an imminent threat, but I also believe that after September 11, that question is increasingly outdated. It is in the nature of these weapons, and the way they are targeted against civilian populations, that documented capability and demonstrated intent may be the only warning we get. To insist on further evidence could put some of our fellow Americans at risk. Can we afford to take that chance? We cannot!

The President has rightly called Saddam Hussein’s efforts to develop weapons of mass destruction a grave and gathering threat to Americans. The global community has tried but failed to address that threat over the past decade. I have come to the inescapable conclusion that the threat posed to America by Saddam’s weapons of mass destruction is so serious that despite the risks — and we should not minimize the risks — we must authorize the President to take the necessary steps to deal with that threat.”

Senator John D. Rockefeller (Democrat, West Virginia)
Also a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee
Addressing the US Senate
October 10, 2002

UN weapons inspectors were forced to leave Iraq in 1998:

November 5, 1998

U.N. Security Council votes to condemn Iraq

The United Nations Security Council late Thursday voted unanimously to condemn Iraq and to demand that Baghdad immediately resume cooperation with U.N. weapons inspectors. Baghdad has already said it will not comply.

The resolution called Iraq’s decision last week to halt cooperation with the U.N. Special Commission a “flagrant violation” of the 1991 resolution on Iraqi disarmament. It is the 45th U.N. resolution involving Iraq since the country invaded Kuwait in 1990.

America is threatened by an “unholy axis”:

“We must exercise responsibility not just at home, but around the world. On the eve of a new century, we have the power and the duty to build a new era of peace and security.

We must combat an unholy axis of new threats from terrorists, international criminals, and drug traffickers. These 21st century predators feed on technology and the free flow of information… And they will be all the more lethal if weapons of mass destruction fall into their hands.

Together, we must confront the new hazards of chemical and biological weapons and the outlaw states, terrorists, and organized criminals seeking to acquire them. Saddam Hussein has spent the better part of this decade and much of his nation’s wealth not on providing for the Iraqi people but on developing nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons and the missiles to deliver them.”

President Clinton
State of the Union address
January 27, 1998

“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.

I believe that Saddam Hussein’s Iraqi regime represents a clear threat to the United States, to our allies, to our interests around the world, and to the values of freedom and democracy we hold dear.

What’s more, the terrorist threat against America is all too clear. Thousands of terrorist operatives around the world would pay anything to get their hands on Saddam’s arsenal, and there is every possibility that he could turn his weapons over to these terrorists. No one can doubt that if the terrorists of September 11th had weapons of mass destruction, they would have used them. On September 12, 2002, we can hardly ignore the terrorist threat, and the serious danger that Saddam would allow his arsenal to be used in aid of terror.

The time has come for decisive action. With our allies, we must do whatever is necessary to guard against the threat posed by an Iraq armed with weapons of mass destruction, and under the thumb of Saddam Hussein.

The United States must lead an international effort to remove the regime of Saddam Hussein — and to assure that Iraq fulfills its obligations to the international community.

This is not an easy decision, and it carries many risks. It will also carry costs, certainly in resources, and almost certainly in lives. After careful consideration, I believe that the risk of inaction is far greater than the risk of action.

We must address the most insidious threat posed by weapons of mass destruction — the threat that comes from the ability of terrorists to obtain them.

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)
Addressing the US Senate
September 12, 2002

“Dear Mr. President:

The events of September 11 have highlighted the vulnerability of the United States to determined terrorists. As we work to clean up Afghanistan and destroy al Qaeda, it is imperative that we plan to eliminate the threat from Iraq.

This December will mark three years since United Nations inspectors last visited Iraq. There is no doubt that since that time, Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs.

The threat from Iraq is real, and it cannot be permanently contained. For as long as Saddam Hussein is in power in Baghdad, he will seek to acquire weapons of mass destruction and the means to deliver them. We have no doubt that these deadly weapons are intended for use against the United States and its allies. Consequently, we believe we must directly confront Saddam, sooner rather than later.

Mr. President, all indications are that in the interest of our own national security, Saddam Hussein must be removed from power.”


Congressman Harold Ford (Democrat, Tennessee)
Senator Bob Graham (Democrat, Florida)
Congressman Tom Lantos (Democrat, California)
Senator Joseph Lieberman (Democrat, Connecticut)

Senator Sam Brownback (Republican, Kansas)
Senator Jesse Helms (Republican, North Carolina)
Congressman Henry Hyde (Republican, Illinois)
Senator Trent Lott (Republican, Mississippi)
Senator John McCain (Republican, Arizona)
Senator Richard Shelby (Republican, Alabama)

Letter to President Bush
December 5, 2001

“He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do. He lies and cheats; he snubs the mandate and authority of international weapons inspectors; and he games the system to keep buying time against enforcement of the just and legitimate demands of the United Nations, the Security Council, the United States and our allies. Those are simply the facts.”

Congressman Henry Waxman (Democrat, California)
Addressing the US Congress
October 10, 2002

“Heavy as they are, the costs of action must be weighed against the price of inaction. If Saddam defies the world and we fail to respond, we will face a far greater threat in the future. Saddam will strike again at his neighbors; he will make war on his own people. And mark my words, he will develop weapons of mass destruction. He will deploy them, and he will use them.”

President Clinton
National Address from the Oval Office
December 16, 1998

US Senators who voted YES to authorize the use of United States Armed Forces against Iraq:

Allard, Wayne (R-CO)
Allen, George (R-VA)
Baucus, Max (D-MT)
Bayh, Evan (D-IN)
Bennett, Robert (R-UT)
Biden, Joseph (D-DE)
Bond, Christopher (R-MO)
Breaux, John (D-LA)
Brownback, Sam (R-KS)
Bunning, Jim (R-KY)
Burns, Conrad (R-MT)
Campbell, Ben (R-CO)
Cantwell, Maria (D-WA)
Carnahan, Jean (D-MO)
Carper, Thomas (D-DE)
Cleland, Max (D-GA)
Clinton, Hillary (D-NY)
Cochran, Thad (R-MS)
Collins, Susan (R-ME)
Craig, Larry (R-ID)
Crapo, Michael (R-ID)
Daschle, Tom (D-SD)
DeWine, Mike (R-OH)
Dodd, Christopher (D-CT)
Domenici, Pete (R-NM)
Dorgan, Byron (D-ND)
Edwards, John (D-NC)
Ensign, John (R-NV)
Enzi, Michael (R-WY)
Feinstein, Dianne (D-CA)
Fitzgerald, Peter (R-IL)
Frist, Bill (R-TN)
Gramm, Phil (R-TX)
Grassley, Chuck (R-IA)
Gregg, Judd (R-NH)
Hagel, Chuck (R-NE)
Harkin, Tom (D-IA)
Hatch, Orrin (R-UT)
Helms, Jesse (R-NC)
Hollings, Ernest (D-SC)
Hutchinson, Tim (R-AR)
Hutchison, Kay (R-TX)
Inhofe, James (R-OK)
Johnson, Tim (D-SD)
Kerry, John (D-MA)
Kohl, Herb (D-WI)
Kyl, Jon (R-AZ)
Landrieu, Mary (D-LA)
Lieberman, Joseph (D-CT)
Lincoln, Blanche (D-AR)
Lott, Trent (R-MS)
Lugar, Richard (R-IN)
McCain, John (R-AZ)
McConnell, Mitch (R-KY)
Miller, Zell (D-GA)
Murkowski, Lisa (R-AK)
Nelson, Bill (D-FL)
Nelson, Ben (D-NE)
Nickles, Don (R-OK)
Reid, Harry (D-NV)
Roberts, Pat (R-KS)
Rockefeller, John (D-WV)
Santorum, Rick (R-PA)
Schumer, Charles (D-NY)
Sessions, Jeff (R-AL)
Shelby, Richard (R-AL)
Smith, Robert (R-NH)
Smith, Gordon (R-OR)
Snowe, Olympia (R-ME)
Specter, Arlen (R-PA)
Stevens, Ted (R-AK)
Thomas, Craig (R-WY)
Thompson, Fred (R-TN)
Thurmond, Strom (R-SC)
Torricelli, Robert (D-NJ)
Voinovich, George (R-OH)
Warner, John (R-VA)

US Congressional Representatives who voted YES to authorize the use of United States Armed Forces against Iraq:

Brady (TX)
Brown (SC)
Carson (OK)
Davis (FL)
Davis, Jo Ann
Davis, Tom
Green (TX)
Green (WI)
Hall (TX)
Hastings (WA)
Johnson (CT)
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, Sam
Jones (NC)
Kennedy (MN)
Kennedy (RI)
Kind (WI)
King (NY)
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (KY)
Lucas (KY)
Lucas (OK)
Maloney (NY)
McCarthy (NY)
Miller, Dan
Miller, Gary
Miller, Jeff
Moran (KS)
Peterson (MN)
Peterson (PA)
Pryce (OH)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Ryan (WI)
Ryun (KS)
Smith (MI)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Smith (WA)
Taylor (MS)
Taylor (NC)
Watkins (OK)
Watts (OK)
Weldon (FL)
Weldon (PA)
Wilson (NM)
Wilson (SC)
Young (AK)
Young (FL)

all copied from this source. it is amazing how virtually everyone in charge of our leading our country has purposefully lied to the american people to get us into an unwinnable quagmire war, where we trade blood and beheadings for oil. however, i would just like to blame the republicans for all of it.

thank you.

steven valentine, “y” scholar

18 Responses to “steve’s rules on lying”

  1. LucyC

    I LOVE YOU, TRAVIS! (With my husband’s permission, of course, since he loves you and Doug too!) Thank you for all the information! I LOVE IT!!!

  2. Curtis

    Never thought I’d see myself at least partially agreeing with Travis. I especially like the Hamza quote above. Nuclear weapons by 2005! What a bunch of hogwash! We were really looking for any dirt from sources that Lucy would never have trusted.

    As for democrats, contemptible creatures at least and not better than republicans at all. I voted for Nader the last 3 elections myself.

  3. Steve


    You have failed to do any research. When Cheney pushed Tenet to give the false intelligence about Iraq, who wouldn’t have voted to go to war with them. The difference, Bush and Cheney lied to the nation. Everyone who voted for the war was going on faulty intelligence that our Bushitler and Cheney cooked up. Big difference. One is dishonest. The other has been deceived. Watch the Frontline special. Those are credible sources from the CIA. Again, I see that you’ve ignored it because you can’t think critically.

  4. Ryan

    So the CIA was coerced into “false intelligence” and have now realized the error of their ways, no longer taking crap from the White House?! (as indicated by the “tense relations” between them and the administration)

  5. Steve

    No Ryan. Obviously you did not look into what happened either. George Tenet was pressured by Cheney and Co. to give the slam dunk case which Colin Powell took before the UN. By the way he later came to regret that (“the lowest day in my life…” or something like that). Cheney and Bush knew the intelligence was flawed. They lied. How Travis can equate people who lie with those who act on false information is beyond me. He seems to think that by putting up a list of Democrats who supported the war (because they didn’t have the whole picture) or action against Sadam he has shown me that there is no difference. There is a big difference. I don’t know how Curtis can agree with Travis on this one. And Nader, now there’s a winner. Guess what Curtis, truth be told, you voted for Bush.

    The other truth is that I am not a “Y” scholar. I don’t claim BYU as my alma mater. I chose not to go there as I told Travis earlier. But truth is relative to him. Must be a Republican thing. The only reason I mentioned that I was accepted to BYU is because Travis was on his self-righteous horse again saying that I wished that I could have gone there.

  6. Curtis

    Sorry Steve,
    I shouldn’t make it sound like I’m taking sides against you. What I meant is that I’m so sick of the corruptions on both sides of the aisle and think it is very hypocritical of some democrats to turn against the war when it became popular to do so. I think there was enough evidence before the war to make people at least question the intelligence they were hearing of. The National Intelligence Estimate in Iraq of 2001 should have made everyone scratch their head. I agree that Cheney’s office of Special Operations or whatever that was called, basically made up intelligence and that is what we went to war on.

    You too have achieved the notoriety of a Latin American left-wing president by making the headlines here!

    Keep up the good work, you’re one of the few voices of reason on this blog.

  7. Steve

    Actually, I should apologize to you Curtis. I actually like what Ralph Nader stands for. Loved his last letter to Bushitler. It’s just that I think of the 2000 Florida vote. If only those that had voted for Nader would’ve voted for Gore we wouldn’t be in the mess we are now. What we really need is a runoff election between the top two candidates. That way I could vote my conscience (Nader) and then vote for the Democrat (the lesser of two evils).

    By the way did you see how the wonderfully restrained IDF killed something like 19 Lebanese children this morning ( That makes Travis’ cartoon look really silly. More like the Israeli soldier is shooting at the baby carriage with nobody else around.

  8. Ryan

    Steve…Bill Clinton was impeached because of perjury. Democrats wanted to censure Bush (or worse than censure) for NSA wiretapping. Scooter Libby was indicted for leaking Valerie Plame’s name. Do we see a pattern? You do something wrong (or are accused of doing something wrong) and political enemies make it the news. Why hasn’t this happened with your theory besides the “Frontline special?”

  9. Ryan

    To be more specific…everyone is simply floating “rumors” and “questions” regarding pre-war intelligence. No one is actually doing anything about it, which stinks like the bad political game it is.

    Why are Democrats sitting on their hands with regard to such an “obvious” crime? (according to you)

  10. Steve

    Just because you haven’t been doing any reading and believe all the hot air coming out of Bushitler’s administration, don’t expect the rest of us to do the same. The Frontline report just came out. Give it some time. If you Google “PBS Cheney’s War Dark Side” you will see about ~3E5 hits already! You can watch it here Here is a nice summary of the program Clearly the most damaging of the evidence comes from Paul Pillar one of the authors of the “National Intelligence Estimate” on Iraq. I put it in quotes because when the administration asked for one to convince the public about the need to go to war, it didn’t even exist. They cobbled it together in less than 2 months. Here’s another nice review of the program If you watch the program you will see the credibility of the former administration officials and the CIA agents far outweighs that of Cheney, Tenet, and Bush. Cheney and George Tenet of course declined to comment. Funny how Tenet was awarded the presidential Medal of Freedom for his silence. Clearly Powell recognized that the “slam dunk” case was fabricated. You may not realize it but with this evidence, and the Downing Street Memo, and his state of the union address, we know Bush lied and cooked the evidence. Why do you defend a liar? Isn’t lying against your religion? Isn’t it worse if it results in the loss of one life (let alone thousands perhaps more than a hundred thousand)? Face it Ryan, Your man Bush and Cheney are evil incarnate. If anyone ever had a doubt about the slime in the Nixon administration, that is clearly eradicated now.

  11. Curtis

    No need to apologize Steve. I’m glad you’re here to give a more balanced perspective to the topics these guys bring up.
    I’m all for instant runoff voting. That is how they vote in Australia, San Francisco etc. It would be a much more democratic way of electing our officials.
    Yes, I saw the news this morning. I’m holding Rice and other Bush administration officials directly responsible since they could have ended this thing right after it started had they wanted to like the whole rest of the world was requesting. There is definitely blood on their hands.

  12. Curtis

    They are now saying that 34 of 56 corpses brought to Tyre Government Hospital from Qana are kids. Israel has murdered them in cold blood. I know some will say they were warned to leave, but twice now, fleeing from a town after being warned to leave, caravans have been attacked by Israel. I know some will say it is Hezbollah’s fault for firing from civilian populated neighborhoods, but what does Israel also do when invading a town? They use civilian living quarters for cover. Finally, Siniora showed some spine and told Rice to not come to his country for talks. He said there needs to be a ceasefire first, and praised Hezbollah for defending the country. The bomb at Qana was made in the USA. Congratulations Rice and Bush, you now have the blood of Qana kids on your hands.

  13. Curtis

    For a BBC video news report from Qana see here:

  14. Curtis

    Here’s a good article about why it is ridiculous to say that those remaining in South Lebanon after being warned to leave, stay there because they are Hezbollah.

  15. Curtis

    Here’s a great explanation of why the rest of the world sees things differently than we do in the Middle East. It’s called “censorship” or “a cover up.” This author found massive imbalances in reporting on Palestinian/Israeli issues.

  16. Curtis

    And from the New York Times, more explanation for the slow-witted, of why the Israeli warnings to get out of town before the bombings don’t leave just Hezbollah behind:

    QANA, Lebanon, July 30 — The dead lay in strange shapes. Several had open mouths filled with dirt. Faces were puffy. A man’s arm was extended straight out from his body, his fingers spread. Two tiny children, a girl and boy, lay feet to head in the back of an ambulance, their skin like wax.

    Rescue workers and neighbors removed one of the victims of Israeli airstrikes in the Lebanese town of Qana.
    In the all-day scramble to retrieve the bodies from the remains of this one house — backhoes dug for hours at the site after an early-morning airstrike — tallies of the dead varied, from as many as 60 to 27, many of them children.

    This was the single most lethal episode in the course of this sudden war. The survivors will remember it as the day their children died. For the village, it is a fresh pain in a wound cut more than 10 years ago, when an Israeli attack here killed more than 100 civilians. Many of them were children, too.

    The Israeli government apologized for that airstrike, as it did for the one here on Sunday. It said that residents had been warned to leave and should have already been gone.

    But leaving southern Lebanon now is dangerous. The two extended families staying in the house that the Israeli missile struck — the Shalhoubs and the Hashims — had discussed leaving several times over the past two weeks. But they were poor — most worked in tobacco or construction — and the families were big and many of their members weak, with a 95-year-old, two relatives in wheelchairs and dozens of children. A taxi north, around $1,000, was unaffordable.

    And then there was the risk of the road itself.

    Dozens, including 21 refugees in the back of a pickup truck on July 15, have been killed by Israeli strikes while trying to evacuate. Missiles hit two Red Cross ambulances last weekend, wounding six people and punching a circle in the center of the cross on one’s roof. A rocket hit the ambulance convoy that responded in Qana on Sunday.

    “We heard on the news they were bombing the Red Cross,” said Zaineb Shalhoub, a 22-year-old who survived the bombing. She was lying quietly in a hospital bed in Tyre.

    “What can we do with all of our kids?” she asked. “There was just no way to go.”

    They had moved to the house on the edge of a high ridge, which was dug into the earth. They thought it would be safer. The position helped muffle the sound of the bombs.

    But its most valuable asset was water. The town, mostly abandoned, had not had power or running water in many days. A neighbor rigged a pumping system, and the Shalhoubs and Hashims ran a pipe from that house to theirs.

    Life had taken on a strange, stunted quality. In a crawl-space basement area near the crushed house, five mattresses were on the floor. A Koran was open to a prayer. A school notebook was on a pillow. Each morning, the women made breakfast for the children. Ms. Shalhoub gave lessons. And they all hoped for rescue.

    The first missile struck around 1 a.m., throwing Mohamed Shalhoub, one of the relatives who uses a wheelchair, into an open doorway. His five children, ages 12 to 2, were still inside the house, as was his wife, his mother and a 10-year-old nephew. He tried to get to them, but minutes later another missile hit. By morning, when the rescue workers arrived, all eight of his relatives were dead.

    “I felt like I was turning around, and the earth was going up and I was going into the earth,” said Mr. Shalhoub, 38, staring blankly ahead in a hospital bed in Tyre.

    Israeli military officials said the building did not collapse until the early morning, and that “munitions” stored in the house might have brought it down. But the house appeared to have been hit from above, and residents said the walls and ceiling came down around them immediately after the first bomb.

    “My mouth was full of sand,” Ms. Shalhoub said. She said doctors had told her family that those who died had been suffocated and crushed to death.

    “They died because of the sand and the bricks, that’s what they told us,” she said.

    At least eight people in the house survived, and told of a long, terrifying night. Some remained buried until morning. Others crawled free. Ms. Shalhoub sat under a tree with Mohamed Shalhoub, without his wheelchair, and three others, listening to the planes flying overhead in the dark.

    “You couldn’t see your finger in front of your face,” said Ghazi Aidibi, a neighbor.

    Ms. Shalhoub said she tried to help a woman who was sobbing from under the wreckage, asking for her baby, but she could not find the child. A neighbor, Haidar Tafleh, said he heard screaming when he approached the debris, but that bombing kept him away.

    “We tried to take them out, but the bombs wouldn’t let us,” Mr. Tafleh said.

    The area took several more hits. A house very close to the Shalhoubs’ was crushed. A giant crater was gouged next to it. Residents said as many as eight buildings had been destroyed over two weeks.

    Collapsed buildings have been a serious problem in southern Lebanon. Dozens of bodies are still stuck under the rubble. The mayor of Tyre, Abed al-Husseini, estimated that about 75 bodies were still buried under rubble in Slifa, a village on the border.

    A grocer, Hassan Faraj, stood outside his shop, near a monument to those killed in the 1996 attack. He said that Hezbollah fighters had not come to Qana, but that residents supported them strongly. There was little evidence of fighters on Sunday, but Hezbollah flags and posters of Shiite leaders trimmed the streets. “They like the resistance here,” he said.

    He cautioned people not to stand in the street in front of his shop, because that was where the ambulance convoy was hit in the morning.

    At the Hakoumi Hospital in Tyre, Mr. Shalhoub sat in bed. His face was slack, stunned. His relatives poured him spicy coffee, and the room filled with its scent. The survivors spoke of their faith as a salve. The children, Mr. Shalhoub said, were in paradise now.

    But 24-year-old Hala Shalhoub, whose two daughters, ages 1 and 5, were killed, was moaning and rocking slightly in her hospital bed.

    “I want to see them,” she said slowly. “I want to hold them.”

    A relative said, “Let her cry.”

    Zaineb Shalhoub, in the next bed, rested quietly.

    “There’s nobody left in our village,” she said. “Not a human or a stone.”

  17. Curtis

    What is Israel’s condition before the Lord in these days with its onslaught against Lebanon and Gaza (and possibly to include Syria in upcoming days)?

    Here is what Isaiah has to say from Chapter 59:

    1 Behold, the LORD’s hand is not shortened, that it cannot save; neither his ear heavy, that it cannot hear:

    2 But your iniquities have separated between you and your God, and your sins have hid his face from you, that he will not hear.

    3 For your hands are defiled with blood, and your fingers with iniquity; your lips have spoken lies, your tongue hath muttered perverseness.

    4 None calleth for justice, nor any pleadeth for truth: they trust in vanity, and speak lies; they conceive mischief, and bring forth iniquity.

    5 They hatch cockatrice’ eggs, and weave the spider’s web: he that eateth of their eggs dieth, and that which is crushed breaketh out into a viper.

    6 Their webs shall not become garments, neither shall they cover themselves with their works: their works are works of iniquity, and the act of violence is in their hands.

    7 Their feet run to evil, and they make haste to shed innocent blood: their thoughts are thoughts of iniquity; wasting and destruction are in their paths.

    8 The way of peace they know not; and there is no judgment in their goings: they have made them crooked paths: whosoever goeth therein shall not know peace.

    Sound familiar?

  18. Curtis

    By the way, I found an article discussing the Israel Lobby and it’s power.