posted on May 3, 2007 08:54:58 PM new
"Arguments over deal uninformed liberals.
You were proven WRONG."
Yes, we were wrong. As wrong as the bomb squad looking for a bomb and finding a 20 year old firecracker instead. Your own CIC dismissed these old, degraded, non-working WMD's, Linda. They were not the reason we invaded Iraq. They were aware of these from the beginning and still announced that there were no WMD's.
posted on May 3, 2007 08:59:38 PM new
Now that you're backed in the corner again, Linda_K you try your usual approach of pretending that other things were said.
All along I have claimed that the weapons of mass destruction that Bush said they had to go to war over were NOT there. And they were NOT there.
Here are excerpts from his speech:
"Facing clear evidence of peril, we cannot wait for the final proof -- the smoking gun -- that could come in the form of a mushroom cloud."
"Some worry that a change of leadership in Iraq could create instability and make the situation worse. The situation could hardly get worse, for world security and for the people of Iraq. The lives of Iraqi citizens would improve dramatically if Saddam Hussein were no longer in power, just as the lives of Afghanistan's citizens improved after the Taliban."
"Iraq is a land rich in culture, resources, and talent. Freed from the weight of oppression, Iraq's people will be able to share in the progress and prosperity of our time. If military action is necessary, the United States and our allies will help the Iraqi people rebuild their economy, and create the institutions of liberty in a unified Iraq at peace with its neighbors."
Now, years later......... how sad that all those lives are lost and their country is wrecked.
posted on May 3, 2007 09:05:42 PM new
Oh and one last ditch effort to DISTORT the time frame we're talking about.
tsk tsk tsk CC....shame on you. HINDSIGHT changes a lot of things.
Want to PROVE when we knew the FOUND WOMD YOU DENIED had EVER been FOUND was determined to be not as deadly??? LOL
Want to dispute ALL the TRUE claims about ALL the VIOLATIONS saddam HAD committed????
A reality check would be GREAT for you. There is a HUGE difference between CLAIMING NONE had been found and 'stockpiles or MASSIVE amounts' were found.
Obviously that is too hard to compute for you liberals. LOL
=========
But as my last post for the night......
I LOVE reposting all these dems who VOTED for the war.....and whom the liberals here REFUSE to acknowledge THEY TOO are responsible for our invading Iraq.
Nope....now their 'story' is Bush lied to THEM. LOL LOL LOL
What are they? ALL BLIND SHEEP, stupid enough to 'blindly follow' a man those SAME liberals continue to imply is so STUPID?
lol
Then they're stupid too - with not a single brain cell to make these oh-so-important decisions without bilnd faith in whom they now call stupid. LOL
===========
Since we haven't found WMD in Iraq, a lot of the anti-war/anti-Bush crowd is saying that the Bush administration lied about Iraq's weapons of mass destruction.
Well, if they're going to claim that the Bush administration lied, then there sure are a lot of other people, including quite a few prominent Democrats, who have told the same "lies" since the inspectors pulled out of Iraq in 1998.
Here are just a few examples that prove that the Bush administration didn't lie about weapons of mass destruction...
"[W]e 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 Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs." -- From a letter signed by Joe Lieberman, Dianne Feinstein, Barbara A. Milulski, Tom Daschle, & John Kerry among others on October 9, 1998
"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. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to refine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer- range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies." -- From a December 6, 2001 letter signed by Bob Graham, Joe Lieberman, Harold Ford, & Tom Lantos among others
"Whereas Iraq has consistently breached its cease-fire agreement between Iraq and the United States, entered into on March 3, 1991, by failing to dismantle its weapons of mass destruction program, and refusing to permit monitoring and verification by United Nations inspections; Whereas Iraq has developed weapons of mass destruction, including chemical and biological capabilities, and has made positive progress toward developing nuclear weapons capabilities" -- From a joint resolution submitted by Tom Harkin and Arlen Specter on July 18, 2002
"Saddam's goal ... is to achieve the lifting of U.N. sanctions while retaining and enhancing Iraq's weapons of mass destruction programs. We cannot, we must not and we will not let him succeed." -- Madeline Albright, 1998
"(Saddam) 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 10 times since 1983" -- National Security Adviser Sandy Berger, Feb 18, 1998
"Iraq made commitments after the Gulf War to completely dismantle all weapons of mass destruction, and unfortunately, Iraq has not lived up to its agreement." -- Barbara Boxer, November 8, 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 Byrd, October 2002
"There's no question that Saddam Hussein is a threat... Yes, he has chemical and biological weapons. He's had those for a long time. But the United States right now is on a very much different defensive posture than we were before September 11th of 2001... He is, as far as we know, actively pursuing nuclear capabilities, though he doesn't have nuclear warheads yet. If he were to acquire nuclear weapons, I think our friends in the region would face greatly increased risks as would we." -- Wesley Clark on September 26, 2002
"What is at stake is how to answer the potential threat Iraq represents with the risk of proliferation of WMD. Baghdad's regime did use such weapons in the past. Today, a number of evidences may lead to think that, over the past four years, in the absence of international inspectors, this country has continued armament programs." -- Jacques Chirac, October 16, 2002
"The community of nations may see more and more of 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. If we fail to respond today, Saddam and all those who would follow in his footsteps will be emboldened tomorrow." -- Bill Clinton in 1998
"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, though there is apparently no evidence of his involvement in the terrible events of September 11, 2001. 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. Should he succeed in that endeavor, he could alter the political and security landscape of the Middle East, which as we know all too well affects American security." -- Hillary Clinton, October 10, 2002
"I am absolutely convinced that there are weapons...I saw evidence back in 1998 when we would see the inspectors being barred from gaining entry into a warehouse for three hours with trucks rolling up and then moving those trucks out." -- Clinton's Secretary of Defense William Cohen in April of 2003
"Iraq is not the only nation in the world to possess weapons of mass destruction, but it is the only nation with a leader who has used them against his own people." -- Tom Daschle in 1998
"Saddam Hussein's regime represents a grave threat to America and our allies, including our vital ally, Israel. For more than two decades, Saddam Hussein has sought weapons of mass destruction through every available means. We know that he has chemical and biological weapons. He has already used them against his neighbors and his own people, and is trying to build more. We know that he is doing everything he can to build nuclear weapons, and we know that each day he gets closer to achieving that goal." -- John Edwards, Oct 10, 2002
"The debate over Iraq is not about politics. It is about national security. It should be clear that our national security requires Congress to send a clear message to Iraq and the world: America is united in its determination to eliminate forever the threat of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction." -- John Edwards, Oct 10, 2002
"I share the administration's goals in dealing with Iraq and its weapons of mass destruction." -- Dick Gephardt in September of 2002
"Iraq does pose a serious threat to the stability of the Persian Gulf and we should organize an international coalition to eliminate his access to weapons of mass destruction. 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." -- Al Gore, 2002
"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction." -- Bob Graham, December 2002
"Saddam Hussein is not the only deranged dictator who is willing to deprive his people in order to acquire weapons of mass destruction." -- Jim Jeffords, October 8, 2002
"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction." -- Ted Kennedy, September 27, 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." -- Ted Kennedy, Sept 27, 2002
"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." -- John F. Kerry, Oct 2002
"The threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real, but as I said, it is not new. It has been with us since the end of that war, and particularly in the last 4 years we know after Operation Desert Fox failed to force him to reaccept them, that he has continued to build those weapons. He has had a free hand for 4 years to reconstitute these weapons, allowing the world, during the interval, to lose the focus we had on weapons of mass destruction and the issue of proliferation." --
John Kerry, October 9, 2002
"(W)e 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. ...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." -- John Kerry, Jan 23, 2003
"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandates of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them." -- Carl Levin, Sept 19, 2002
"Every day Saddam remains in power with chemical weapons, biological weapons, and the development of nuclear weapons is a day of danger for the United States." -- Joe Lieberman, August, 2002
"Over the years, Iraq has worked to develop nuclear, chemical and biological weapons. During 1991 - 1994, despite Iraq's denials, U.N. inspectors discovered and dismantled a large network of nuclear facilities that Iraq was using to develop nuclear weapons. Various reports indicate that Iraq is still actively pursuing nuclear weapons capability. There is no reason to think otherwise. Beyond nuclear weapons, Iraq has actively pursued biological and chemical weapons.U.N. inspectors have said that Iraq's claims about biological weapons is neither credible nor verifiable. In 1986, Iraq used chemical weapons against Iran, and later, against its own Kurdish population. While weapons inspections have been successful in the past, there have been no inspections since the end of 1998. There can be no doubt that Iraq has continued to pursue its goal of obtaining weapons of mass destruction." -- Patty Murray, October 9, 2002
"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." -- Nancy Pelosi, December 16, 1998
"Even today, Iraq is not nearly disarmed. Based on highly credible intelligence, UNSCOM [the U.N. weapons inspectors] suspects that Iraq still has biological agents like anthrax, botulinum toxin, and clostridium perfringens in sufficient quantity to fill several dozen bombs and ballistic missile warheads, as well as the means to continue manufacturing these deadly agents. Iraq probably retains several tons of the highly toxic VX substance, as well as sarin nerve gas and mustard gas. This agent is stored in artillery shells, bombs, and ballistic missile warheads. And Iraq retains significant dual-use industrial infrastructure that can be used to rapidly reconstitute large-scale chemical weapons production." -- Ex-Un Weapons Inspector Scott Ritter in 1998
"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years. And that may happen sooner if he can obtain access to enriched uranium from foreign sources -- something that is not that difficult in the current world. We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction." -- John Rockefeller, Oct 10, 2002
"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." -- John Rockefeller, Oct 10, 2002
"Whether one agrees or disagrees with the Administration's policy towards Iraq, I don't think there can be any question about Saddam's conduct. 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." -- Henry Waxman, Oct 10, 2002
John Hawkins
=========
YEP those are the words of the new liberal/dem TURNCOATS.
posted on May 3, 2007 09:11:12 PM new
Now that you're backed in the corner again, Linda_K you try your usual approach of pretending that other things were said.
All along I have claimed that the weapons of mass destruction that Bush said they had to go to war over were NOT there. And they were NOT there.
Here are excerpts from his speech:
"Facing clear evidence of peril, we cannot wait for the final proof -- the smoking gun -- that could come in the form of a mushroom cloud."
"Some worry that a change of leadership in Iraq could create instability and make the situation worse. The situation could hardly get worse, for world security and for the people of Iraq. The lives of Iraqi citizens would improve dramatically if Saddam Hussein were no longer in power, just as the lives of Afghanistan's citizens improved after the Taliban."
"Iraq is a land rich in culture, resources, and talent. Freed from the weight of oppression, Iraq's people will be able to share in the progress and prosperity of our time. If military action is necessary, the United States and our allies will help the Iraqi people rebuild their economy, and create the institutions of liberty in a unified Iraq at peace with its neighbors."
Now, years later......... how sad that all those lives are lost and their country is wrecked.
posted on May 3, 2007 09:15:09 PM new
"Want to PROVE when we knew the FOUND WOMD YOU DENIED had EVER been FOUND was determined to be not as deadly??? LOL"
” Santorum and Hoekstra are hyping a document that describes degraded, pre-1991 munitions that were already acknowledged by the White House’s Iraq Survey Group and dismissed.
posted on May 3, 2007 09:18:01 PM new
I'll tell you kiara to go look at YOUR post on the bottom of page ONE. You're singing a different tune now. LOL
======
Iraq is not wrecked.
They are doing just as American's did WHEN first fighting for separation from ENGLAND.
Not something you'd EVER be able to understand....being the pacifist that you are.....the 'one who lives in so false utopia' of a world without war.
In other words GROW UP....learn to deal with the realities of a group of religious fanatics who ARE using terrorism ALL OVER OUR WORLD.
BLAME them for a change - saddam and ALL terrorists have NOTHING but EVIL in their hearts and minds.
Take those rose-colored glasses off, they're BLINDING you to the reality of what's going on worldwide.
"While the democratic party complains about everything THIS President does to protect our Nation": "What would a Democrat president have done at that point?"
"Apparently, the answer is: Sit back and wait for the next terrorist attack."
I'll rephrase it so hopefully you can BETTER grasp my point.
Your pitiful copy and paste isn't addressing the FACT that BEFORE I POSTED the links speaking abou this womd....you and your ilk here FALSELY claimed NONE had been found.
AFTER I prove you wrong, by giving links to those who did report the FOUND WOMD.....then you changed the argument to ...it's old.
Which is what MY articles said. NOT something ANY of you liberals here could manage to post on your own....BEFORE I brought it up.
So....as I said. ALL of the liberals initial posts CLAIMING there was NO WMD.....were WRONG.
But again....none of you can even ADMIT that TRUTH. sad sad sad....but always the MO of a stubborn liberal. NEVER can admit to being wrong.
posted on May 3, 2007 09:50:16 PM new
Why should I be, kiara, when you never are.
You're the one who can't face FACTS.
re-read what you said on page one of this thread.
NOTHING about old, un-usable womd.
You LIED about something totally different.
Again proven a liar....maybe you need to get sober.
"While the democratic party complains about everything THIS President does to protect our Nation": "What would a Democrat president have done at that point?"
"Apparently, the answer is: Sit back and wait for the next terrorist attack."
posted on May 3, 2007 09:59:26 PM new
So....I do AGREE with this thread title.
"and the lies go on"
they sure have in this whole thread.
ALL by the liberals. tsk tsk tsk
page one: the FIRST of several posts made by kiara....DENYING there were ANY womd.
kiara said:
"No weapons of mass destruction were ever found. Only you and your rag sheets claim they were, Linda_K. You are trying to use the troops to back your lies by claiming they found them. How despicable and anti-American can you get?"
Over and over again she LIED.
And somehow she and the other ilberals here think this administration would have KNOWN the womd FOUND by our troops were old womd????
How in the world do they come up with this nonsense?
Had our troops not invaded Iraq...these womd would NEVER have been found. Least wise by the BLIND weapon inspectors the left put such UNDYING faith in. LOL LOL
So not ONLY would we have continue to listen to the LIE the liberals LOVE to repeat....but we wouldn't have had a clue, pre-invasion, as to just how old they were.
But could an UNSOBER, anti-war, Bush bashing liberal like kiara ever figure that out on their own?
It sadly appears the answer is NEVER. Can't put two and two together.
posted on May 3, 2007 10:17:49 PM new
I know exactly what I said and exactly what weapons I am talking about, Linda_K. It's my mind and my thoughts so of course I know.
Are you having problems sleeping?
Did you know that lack of sleep can:
* Increase moodiness
* Decrease ability to concentrate
* Decrease retention of new info.
* Challenge your ability to manage stress
* Lessen your body's ability to fight off illness
For these reasons, it may be costly to ignore sleep problems or bad sleep habits.
posted on May 3, 2007 10:56:34 PM new
Now, now, it's really not good to become stressed so late at night.
Here, I will tell you a bedtime story by your favorite 'Commander Guy'.
Once upon a time......
"Some worry that a change of leadership in Iraq could create instability and make the situation worse. The situation could hardly get worse, for world security and for the people of Iraq. The lives of Iraqi citizens would improve dramatically if Saddam Hussein were no longer in power, just as the lives of Afghanistan's citizens improved after the Taliban."
posted on May 3, 2007 11:06:18 PM new
Wrong again, kiara. Just more FALSE assumptions from you...you with the broken crystal ball.
It never stresses me out to prove how wrong your positions are - how little you know. NEVER.
I thoroughly enjoy it. It's FUN.
Instead of reading fairytales...you should read some US history.
These changes don't happen overnight.
OUR dem congress voted for Gen Patraes 100%. Got that?
They weren't objecting to HIS new plan for Iraq.
Not ONE dem/lib disgreed that he should be our NEW Iraqi commander.
But they like you are children who expect these major, historical changes to happen in short order they are PLAYING for their own political gain. They could care less about our security or future dealing with terrorist.
IF they were....they wouldn't be working to force us to SURRENDER to the terrorists and AQ in Iraq.
But...like you remain with a childs mind....they have their political gains to try and achieve.
NONE of which is in America's best interests....only their own. Just like your little games kiara.
And you don't even live here.
They NEVER have...they NEVER will.
Find a clue kiara.
"While the democratic party complains about everything THIS President does to protect our Nation": "What would a Democrat president have done at that point?"
"Apparently, the answer is: Sit back and wait for the next terrorist attack."
To sink so low and use the troops and lie about them finding weapons of mass destruction just to continue your propaganda is despicable and anti-American, Linda_K.
Boy were you wrong, kiara.
This admin stated SEVERAL times this was going to be a LONG WAR.
Some even said maybe 10 years or so.
Play all your childish games you need to....not dealing with the reality we face against worldwide terrorism....isn't going to change a thing.
I'm thankful we still have men, stong men, with backbones that won't ever admit defeat to ANY terrorist.
I hope MY country is lucky enough....smart enough to put another strong leader in office who won' be either.
Time will tell.
"While the democratic party complains about everything THIS President does to protect our Nation": "What would a Democrat president have done at that point?"
"Apparently, the answer is: Sit back and wait for the next terrorist attack."
posted on May 3, 2007 11:43:41 PM new
Nope, I wasn't wrong. They didn't find the weapons they justified going to war for and Bush agrees.
But Linda_K...... looks like the Bush fairy tales haven't relaxed you at all for beddie-time.
How about thinking of Ann Coulter and Rush Limbaugh........picture their faces on woolly sheep bodies and you're one of them too......... along with all your other neo-con sheep buddies .............
posted on May 3, 2007 11:48:38 PM new
Whoops! Don't want to wake you up but forgot to tell you that Helen was right today when she said the quotes she listed were correct.
posted on May 3, 2007 11:59:12 PM new
Nope....once again kiara...you aren't dealing with reality.
"Nope, I wasn't wrong. They didn't find the weapons they justified going to war for and Bush agrees."
We WEREN'T talking about all the other stuff you, CC and ld brought up LATER.
You three were DENYING that our troops HAD found ANY womd.
I said they had...you all said they hadn't. YOU all were incorrect....or intentionally lying.
I posted PROOF from our military about the womd being found in Iraq....and you three continued to DENY the FACTS.
THEN you started saying all the other things I never disputed.
All I disputed is that womd WAS found.....while you all continued to say it wasn't. That only rags had reported it.
Those 'rags' reported what our military commanders on the ground in Iraq were reporting.
So again....deny your lies....just further proves to me that even when confronted with the actual TRUTH....in print....you won't believe it.
tsk tsk tsk
kiara said: Don't be anti-American and use the troops to support your lies on a chat board.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"While the democratic party complains about everything THIS President does to protect our Nation": "What would a Democrat president have done at that point?"
"Apparently, the answer is: Sit back and wait for the next terrorist attack."
Ann Coulter
[ edited by Linda_K on May 4, 2007 12:05 AM ]
posted on May 4, 2007 05:28:30 AM new
Linda can not face the FACTS when they are presented to her. The WMD that Bush claims were there were never found.
The pre-war intelligence was spotty at best. In 2001 Powell said that Saddam was not a threat and did not have and WMD. That has alreay been pointed out.
There is further proof that Bush had plans to attack Iraq before 9/11. Any one with knowledge and a thought process can put the pieces together and see that Bush wanted this war with or without 9/11.
Absolute faith has been shown, consistently, to breed intolerance. And intolerance, history teaches us, again and again, begets violence.
---------------------------------- The duty of a patriot in this time and place is to ask questions, to demand answers, to understand where our nation is headed and why. If the answers you get do not suit you, or if they frighten you, or if they anger you, it is your duty as a patriot to dissent. Freedom does not begin with blind acceptance and with a flag. Freedom begins when you say 'No.'
posted on May 4, 2007 06:03:42 AM new
Linda--After a long investigation, which included knowledge of these old, degraded, pre Gulf War, non-working weapons--the president--yours and mine--said no WMD were found. Want to dispute that? Don't argue semantics with me. Talk to Pres. Bush.
posted on May 4, 2007 06:23:20 AM new
Linda has an irrational resistence to weakness in her leader, causing her to frantically block out the truth that WMD were not found. I believe that she would be just as disturbed and blind if a liberal leader like JFK happened to be in the White House.
It's abnormal to see facts, words straight from the horses mouth that WMD were not found and still believe that they were.
posted on May 4, 2007 06:31:11 AM new
"So again....deny your lies....just further proves to me that even when confronted with the actual TRUTH....in print....you won't believe it."
They are not MY lies. That is the official stance of the White House. We have given you information in PRINT which you refuse to believe. What does that make you?
posted on May 4, 2007 12:32:30 PM newWe WEREN'T talking about all the other stuff you, CC and ld brought up LATER.
Once again I have no idea who the 'we' is behind your computer.
I didn't bring up anything later. From the beginning I was talking about the weapons of mass destruction Bush claimed were there that were never found and I posted his statements to prove it back on the first page. So of course those were the weapons I was referring to.
The world saw the news reports about the caches the troops found but there weren't enough of them and they were in no condition to destroy America with a 'mushroom cloud'.
Bush said, "We have not found stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction"
"Iraq did not have the weapons that our intelligence believed were there."
