The Most Expensive U.S. Inaguation in History

[double helix]

Originally Posted by oscar

Well said as usual Lon.

If anyone has a beef about the cost of Obama's Inaugaration, they should look to Britain and The Royal Family. We have coronations, state funerals, opening of Parliment etc etc regually. Even when Her Maj goes to the races, she arrives in a horse drawn carraige with all the regalia. It is heritage.
Obama is setting a standard for heritage. The whole world will be watching him give his Inaguaration speech. That is something for America to be proud of and for the children of America to look back on.
This is not your run of the mill Inaugaration. If it were Bush taking the 2nd office, there would be no interest in what it costs. Obama has made history by becoming the first black man in the white house and he rightly deserves a ceromony that will befit that momentuous occassion in the world not just America. It is a one off that is hardly likely to be repeated in decades, so why begrudge the cost?

We have enough problems here funding the 2012 Olympics. Any idea of how much that one's costing the British Tax Payer?

Look, Bush didn't spend a quarter of what Obama is. Not on his first, nor his second inaguation. And Bush did pretty much what he promised despite having 911 to deal with. He made mistakes which he admits to.
I don't know how your folk deal with the Royal family spending such money when your own countrymen are economically strapped. Over here ELECTED officials are supposed to be WORKING for the people not showing off how much they can spend on themselves. Thats why its such an outrage. People are living on the street, starving, children are starving and this man feels its ok to spend OUR money on himself. History making or no, its an outrage.
As for my criticisms being premature, we'll see. So far Obama has been disdainfully extravagant and presumptuous in the face of our economic melt down.
So far, he's not even officially in office and he has already gone back on nearly every primary campaign promise he made.
Leadership, there are five things a great leader must do in order to lead effectively.
Be honest, have ethics and integrity, be competent and keep his promises. So far Obama has put a question mark on everyone of these five principles.

[oscar]

Originally Posted by double helix

Look, Bush didn't spend a quarter of what Obama is. Not on his first, nor his second inaguation. And Bush did pretty much what he promised despite having 911 to deal with. He made mistakes which he admits to.
I don't know how your folk deal with the Royal family spending such money when your own countrymen are economically strapped. Over here ELECTED officials are supposed to be WORKING for the people not showing off how much they can spend on themselves. Thats why its such an outrage. People are living on the street, starving, children are starving and this man feels its ok to spend OUR money on himself. History making or no, its an outrage.
As for my criticisms being premature, we'll see. So far Obama has been disdainfully extravagant and presumptuous in the face of our economic melt down.
So far, he's not even officially in office and he has already gone back on nearly every primary campaign promise he made.
Leadership, there are five things a great leader must do in order to lead effectively.
Be honest, have ethics and integrity, be competent and keep his promises. So far Obama has put a question mark on everyone of these five principles.

Bush has wasted trillions of your tax paying citizens money funding an illegal war in Iraq and Afghaistan and funding the Israeli government and it's military.
Bush allowed The banks to totally control your country and drove your country into massive debt. The debt to China alone is trillions. You will be working for many years to come just paying that lot back and that's provided Obama doesn't have to go for bail out again to pay for the past 8 years farcical administration.
You talk of a great leader having honesty, ethics and integrity.
You have a history of womanising Presidents, crooked Presidents (Nixon) and Bush and Bush senior who have no ethics.
It ios the past 8 years of the Bush Administration you need to look to for your economic meltdown and not begrudge America one day of being in the Limelight in a favourable fashion to the rest of the world.

[double helix]

Originally Posted by oscar

Bush has wasted trillions of your tax paying citizens money funding an illegal war in Iraq and Afghaistan and funding the Israeli government and it's military.
Bush allowed The banks to totally control your country and drove your country into massive debt. The debt to China alone is trillions. You will be working for many years to come just paying that lot back and that's provided Obama doesn't have to go for bail out again to pay for the past 8 years farcical administration.
You talk of a great leader having honesty, ethics and integrity.
You have a history of womanising Presidents, crooked Presidents (Nixon) and Bush and Bush senior who have no ethics.
It ios the past 8 years of the Bush Administration you need to look to for your economic meltdown and not begrudge America one day of being in the Limelight in a favourable fashion to the rest of the world.

Man, blame Bush all you want. "Past eight years of the Bush Administration " is just so much media retoric. The people wanted that war. Go back and look at the polls right after 9-11. Go back and look at Bush's approval rating. Illigal war my ass. Bad decisions were made early in the conflict, sure. Blame whoever you want.

The truth is the economy was stagnant and on the verge of spreling down when Bush took office. Why else would he campaign on TAX CUTS and why else would the feds cut the intrest rate weeks after he took office. Clinton was too busy rubbing cigars in places he shoudn't have been and didn't take care of the country. He handed off democratic bad decisions with Fanny Mae and Freddy Mac to Bush. But no one wants to look at that. Bush was hit with bigger problems the first four years and didn't pay attention to the big bankers. True. He admits that.
So do you really think Obama's plans of a seven billion dollar bail out for our economy is the way to go? Or is it just more bad money tossed after bad money?
And Oscar, 2012 is supposed to be the end of the world. Sorry bout that olympic thing.

[oscar]

Originally Posted by double helix

Man, blame Bush all you want. "Past eight years of the Bush Administration " is just so much media retoric. The people wanted that war. Go back and look at the polls right after 9-11. Go back and look at Bush's approval rating. Illigal war my ass. Bad decisions were made early in the conflict, sure. Blame whoever you want.

The truth is the economy was stagnant and on the verge of spreling down when Bush took office. Why else would he campaign on TAX CUTS and why else would the feds cut the intrest rate weeks after he took office. Clinton was too busy rubbing cigars in places he shoudn't have been and didn't take care of the country. He handed off democratic bad decisions with Fanny Mae and Freddy Mac to Bush. But no one wants to look at that. Bush was hit with bigger problems the first four years and didn't pay attention to the big bankers. True. He admits that.
So do you really think Obama's plans of a seven billion dollar bail out for our economy is the way to go? Or is it just more bad money tossed after bad money?
And Oscar, 2012 is supposed to be the end of the world. Sorry bout that olympic thing.

The Bush Administration and the illegal war in Iraq cost Mccain the election.
I suggest you also do some research into 9/11. The pilots in the planes were Saudi not Iraqui. There was no reason to invade Iraq other than your President carrying out un-finished business of his fathers. There was no viable means to invade Iraq. Al-Qaeda is a network of islamic extremists that exist in every Eastern Country not just in Iraq. Sadam did not have the military capability of being any threat to America. It was actually America who funded Iraq during the Iraq wars. Bush's first demand after 9/11 was to Afghanistan to hand over Bin Laden. Where does Iraq come into that?
If you research your own financial history, you will find that Clinton was the greatest economist your country ever had yet you seem to prefer to resort to tacky comments about cigars.
If Obama doesn't bail you out, your looking at the deepest depression your country has ever seen.

[double helix]

Originally Posted by oscar

The Bush Administration and the illegal war in Iraq cost Mccain the election.
I suggest you also do some research into 9/11. The pilots in the planes were Saudi not Iraqui. There was no reason to invade Iraq other than your President carrying out un-finished business of his fathers. There was no viable means to invade Iraq. Al-Qaeda is a network of islamic extremists that exist in every Eastern Country not just in Iraq. Sadam did not have the military capability of being any threat to America. It was actually America who funded Iraq during the Iraq wars. Bush's first demand after 9/11 was to Afghanistan to hand over Bin Laden. Where does Iraq come into that?
If you research your own financial history, you will find that Clinton was the greatest economist your country ever had yet you seem to prefer to resort to tacky comments about cigars.
If Obama doesn't bail you out, your looking at the deepest depression your country has ever seen.

You got that right, about the depression. Clinton was an ass. He feathered his own nest. Always has, always will. Any president who sits in front of the american people and OUTRIGHT LIES about his moral behavior puts into question EVERY thing he has ever done while in service to his people. Greatest economist. Yes, he came out of his presidency very nicely well off. Lots of lucritive deals made with many foreign countires for after he left office. Go back before he took office. He had an easy ride, glided right in and sailed on the crest.
Tacky comments? The man was tacky, amoral and shameful.
Yes, lets hope Obama does better.
Bush, as bad as his run was was at the very least a good man who made the wrong decisions.
Oscar, left a message in you profile. you in box is full. later.

[mikeinie]

Originally Posted by double helix

150 thousand dollars so far. Who's footing the bill, why the American people of course. 44 thousand has been raised via donations and the rest sits squarely on the backs of the American tax payer.

On top of all that Barrak bought Michel a 33 thousand dollar ring for the Inauguration, just for helping him out with the campaign. Gee. How much does a Junior U.S Senetor make anyway.

1 billion for an economic bailout program. Who's going to pay for that? Not China, they have there own economic issues and are having difficulty buying up other nations debt. Not anyone but the American tax payer. You Bet.

Already, Obama has reneged on his most prominent campaign promises. No changes to capital gains taxes so the rich get to keep getting their tax breaks.
A continuation of Bushes tax rebate program essentially, Bushes education program essentially, Bushes bail out for big business and so forth.

Really, all Obama is doing is saying hey folks, I got into the white house and guess what, I really can't do any of what I promised so lets get government involved in your lives in a big way and everyone below $250,000 in income can be on government programs and welfare. We can build up the countries infastructure and provide jobs for the unemployed while we tax the employed middle class TO DEATH to pay for it. Yeah! and when the middle class falls into the unemployed ranks we can open soup kitchens with the rotting food the farmers can't sell and pay the unemployed to dole it out while we tax the upper middle class TO DEATH to pay for it. Yeah. Sounds good to me and Michel, but we'll as her mama just to be on the safe side.

Now, don't get me wrong. I'm not an Obama hater. I hope he does raise this country out of the slump we are in and restore our nation to the status it once had in this world. I just can't imagin how he's going to do that TAXING the very people he promised not to tax while favoring the very people he promised to tax while instituing programs that enable the poor to stay poor and the middle class to get poorer while we all have to live off of the government.

And another thing, whats he going to do with all the solders coming back from Iraq when shuts down the war? What's he going to do with alll the insergents he releases from Guantanamo when they start blowing up dignitaries in Iraq and the U.S.?

33 thousand dollars could go a long way towords boosting some small local enconomic areas. Sitting on his wifes finger it ain't doing a whole lot of good for anyone.

150 thousand could do even more.

Pehaps he plans of building the economy by training and employing more personal secuity personel. 50 thousand proly ain't enough.

Come on, how much has been spent on the war? How much have the banks screwed you for? How many jobs have been lost?

Sometime you just need to party. There are about 4,000,000 people going to the inauguration, your 150,000 works out to be about 37 cents each.

America and the world, for once in a very long time, is in a good mood. Just enjoy the party. Start fighting over the politics tomorrow.

[Raven]

'And another thing, whats he going to do with all the solders coming back from Iraq when shuts down the war? What's he going to do with alll the insergents he releases from Guantanamo when they start blowing up dignitaries in Iraq and the U.S.?'

He's trying to send them all here.

[Kindle]

Originally Posted by double helix

150 thousand dollars so far. Who's footing the bill, why the American people of course. 44 thousand has been raised via donations and the rest sits squarely on the backs of the American tax payer.

On top of all that Barrak bought Michel a 33 thousand dollar ring for the Inauguration, just for helping him out with the campaign. Gee. How much does a Junior U.S Senetor make anyway.

1 billion for an economic bailout program. Who's going to pay for that? Not China, they have there own economic issues and are having difficulty buying up other nations debt. Not anyone but the American tax payer. You Bet.

Already, Obama has reneged on his most prominent campaign promises. No changes to capital gains taxes so the rich get to keep getting their tax breaks.
A continuation of Bushes tax rebate program essentially, Bushes education program essentially, Bushes bail out for big business and so forth.

Really, all Obama is doing is saying hey folks, I got into the white house and guess what, I really can't do any of what I promised so lets get government involved in your lives in a big way and everyone below $250,000 in income can be on government programs and welfare. We can build up the countries infastructure and provide jobs for the unemployed while we tax the employed middle class TO DEATH to pay for it. Yeah! and when the middle class falls into the unemployed ranks we can open soup kitchens with the rotting food the farmers can't sell and pay the unemployed to dole it out while we tax the upper middle class TO DEATH to pay for it. Yeah. Sounds good to me and Michel, but we'll as her mama just to be on the safe side.

Now, don't get me wrong. I'm not an Obama hater. I hope he does raise this country out of the slump we are in and restore our nation to the status it once had in this world. I just can't imagin how he's going to do that TAXING the very people he promised not to tax while favoring the very people he promised to tax while instituing programs that enable the poor to stay poor and the middle class to get poorer while we all have to live off of the government.

And another thing, whats he going to do with all the solders coming back from Iraq when shuts down the war? What's he going to do with alll the insergents he releases from Guantanamo when they start blowing up dignitaries in Iraq and the U.S.?

33 thousand dollars could go a long way towords boosting some small local enconomic areas. Sitting on his wifes finger it ain't doing a whole lot of good for anyone.

150 thousand could do even more.

Pehaps he plans of building the economy by training and employing more personal secuity personel. 50 thousand proly ain't enough.

Why is it that you should get to decide how Obama spends his money? He has no obligation to turn his money over to bailing out, or starting up, another person's business.

How would you react if someone told you that your spending was not in keeping with what they thought was the best use of your money?

[BTS]

Originally Posted by oscar

The Bush Administration and the illegal war in Iraq cost Mccain the election.
I suggest you also do some research into 9/11. The pilots in the planes were Saudi not Iraqui. There was no reason to invade Iraq other than your President carrying out un-finished business of his fathers. There was no viable means to invade Iraq. Al-Qaeda is a network of islamic extremists that exist in every Eastern Country not just in Iraq. Sadam did not have the military capability of being any threat to America. It was actually America who funded Iraq during the Iraq wars. Bush's first demand after 9/11 was to Afghanistan to hand over Bin Laden. Where does Iraq come into that?
If you research your own financial history, you will find that Clinton was the greatest economist your country ever had yet you seem to prefer to resort to tacky comments about cigars.
If Obama doesn't bail you out, your looking at the deepest depression your country has ever seen.

For the record.............this is about the third tyme I have tried to edjumacate those that call this "Bush's War"

How many of these quotes are Bush's?=0
How many are war-mongering Republicans?=0



"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line." --President Bill Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998

"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program." --President Bill Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998

"Iraq is a long way from [here], 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." --Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998

"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983." --Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998

"[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." Letter to President Clinton, signed by: -- Democratic Senators Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others, Oct. 9, 1998

"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." -Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998

"Hussein has ... chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies." -- Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999

"There is no doubt that ... 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 redefine 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." Letter to President Bush, Signed by: -- Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), and others, Dec 5, 2001
"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 mandate of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and th! e means of delivering them." -- Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002

"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country." -- Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002
"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power." -- Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002

"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction." -- Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002

"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains 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 capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..." -- Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 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." -- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002

"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 ... We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction." -- Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002

"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" -- Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 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." -- Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 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." -- Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), Dec. 8, 2002

"Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... 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 ... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real..." -- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003


THE REAL STORY OF 'CURVEBALL'

How German Intelligence Helped Justify the US Invasion of Iraq

By Erich Follath, John Goetz, Marcel Rosenbach and Holger Stark
Five years ago, the US government presented what it said was proof that Iraq harbored biological weapons. The information came from a source developed by German intelligence -- and it turned out to be disastrously wrong. But to this day, Germany denies any responsibility.


For you Britts.............

IRAQ’S WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION

THE ASSESSMENT OF THE BRITISH GOVERNMENT

Among the charges listed against Saddam:

• * The U.N. and U.S. intelligence sources have known for some time that Saddam Hussein has materials to produce chemical and biological weapons, but he has not accounted for them:

• 
  * 26,000 liters of anthrax—enough to kill several million people
  * 38,000 liters of botulinum toxin
  * 500 tons of sarin, mustard and VX nerve agents
  * Almost 30,000 munitions capable of delivering chemical agents
  * From three Iraqi defectors, we know that Iraq in the late 1990s had several mobile biological weapons labs. But he has not disclosed them.

In addition, British intelligence still stands by its claim that Saddam sought to buy uranium from Nigeria.

British Intel Details Scope of Saddam's Weapons

Blair released a dossier this morning compiled by British intelligence that outlines the presumed extent of Hussein's weapons of mass destruction program. He said the British intelligence agency responsible for keeping him informed believes Hussein has continued to build his chemical and biological weapons programs after more than a decade of flouting U.N. sanctions that require open access to international weapons inspectors.


"I set out the history in some detail because occasionally debate on this issue seems to treat it as if it had suddenly arisen, coming out of nowhere on a whim in the last few months of 2002," Blair said. "It is an 11-year history: a history of U.N. will flouted, lies told by Saddam about existence of his chemical biological and nuclear weapons programs, obstruction, defiance and denial."
The prime minister said the only consistent theme in Iraq's history since the Persian Gulf War is Hussein's total determination to maintain his weapons program.
In the dossier on Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program, the British government maintains that in 1998 Iraq had 360 tons of bulk chemical warfare agents, including one and a half tons of VX nerve agent, and also had 3,000 tons of "precursor chemicals," which could be used to create chemical weapons. The report also says that at the same time Iraq had enough "growth media" to produce 26,000 liters of anthrax spores and tens of thousands of special munitions for the delivery of chemical and biological agents, according to Blair.


Since 1998, the report states, Iraq had rebuilt previously destroyed chemical and biological weapons facilities and has acquired large amounts of needed chemicals and equipment by purchasing and smuggling dual-use items. Britain now believes Iraq can produce many biological agents, including anthrax, botulinum toxin, aflatoxin and ricin.
Money taken illegally from the U.N. Oil for Food program has bankrolled many of these purchases. Blair alleged today that Saddam siphons $3 billion from the program every year.
Iraq's nuclear capabilities have increasingly alarmed the international community as well. Blair said Hussein has attempted to buy large amounts of uranium from sources in Africa and no one is sure if he was successful. Intelligence agencies have also shown that Iraq has bought or tried to buy equipment to produce enriched uranium needed to build nuclear weapons.
All the evidence points to one thing, Blair said. "The case for ensuring Iraqi disarmament is overwhelming," he said. "I defy anyone on the basis of this evidence to say that it is an unreasonable demand for the international community to make when, after all, it is only the same demand that we have made for 11 years and (Saddam) has rejected." Bush backed up these comments with another call for the United Nations to pass a strong resolution on Iraq. "And if they're unable to do so, the United States and our friends will act because we believe in peace," he said today. "We want to keep the peace. We don't trust this man, and that's what the Blair report showed today."

[sunny104]

Originally Posted by BTS

For the record.............this is about the third tyme I have tried to edjumacate those that call this "Bush's War"

How many of these quotes are Bush's?=0
How many are war-mongering Republicans?=0



"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line." --President Bill Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998

"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program." --President Bill Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998

"Iraq is a long way from [here], 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." --Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998

"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983." --Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998

"[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." Letter to President Clinton, signed by: -- Democratic Senators Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others, Oct. 9, 1998

"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." -Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998

"Hussein has ... chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies." -- Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999

"There is no doubt that ... 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 redefine 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." Letter to President Bush, Signed by: -- Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), and others, Dec 5, 2001
"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 mandate of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and th! e means of delivering them." -- Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002

"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country." -- Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002
"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power." -- Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002

"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction." -- Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002

"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains 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 capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..." -- Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 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." -- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002

"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 ... We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction." -- Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002

"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" -- Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 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." -- Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 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." -- Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), Dec. 8, 2002

"Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... 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 ... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real..." -- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003


THE REAL STORY OF 'CURVEBALL'

How German Intelligence Helped Justify the US Invasion of Iraq

By Erich Follath, John Goetz, Marcel Rosenbach and Holger Stark
Five years ago, the US government presented what it said was proof that Iraq harbored biological weapons. The information came from a source developed by German intelligence -- and it turned out to be disastrously wrong. But to this day, Germany denies any responsibility.


For you Britts.............

IRAQ’S WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION

THE ASSESSMENT OF THE BRITISH GOVERNMENT

Among the charges listed against Saddam:

• * The U.N. and U.S. intelligence sources have known for some time that Saddam Hussein has materials to produce chemical and biological weapons, but he has not accounted for them:

• 
  * 26,000 liters of anthrax—enough to kill several million people
  * 38,000 liters of botulinum toxin
  * 500 tons of sarin, mustard and VX nerve agents
  * Almost 30,000 munitions capable of delivering chemical agents
  * From three Iraqi defectors, we know that Iraq in the late 1990s had several mobile biological weapons labs. But he has not disclosed them.

In addition, British intelligence still stands by its claim that Saddam sought to buy uranium from Nigeria.

British Intel Details Scope of Saddam's Weapons

Blair released a dossier this morning compiled by British intelligence that outlines the presumed extent of Hussein's weapons of mass destruction program. He said the British intelligence agency responsible for keeping him informed believes Hussein has continued to build his chemical and biological weapons programs after more than a decade of flouting U.N. sanctions that require open access to international weapons inspectors.


"I set out the history in some detail because occasionally debate on this issue seems to treat it as if it had suddenly arisen, coming out of nowhere on a whim in the last few months of 2002," Blair said. "It is an 11-year history: a history of U.N. will flouted, lies told by Saddam about existence of his chemical biological and nuclear weapons programs, obstruction, defiance and denial."
The prime minister said the only consistent theme in Iraq's history since the Persian Gulf War is Hussein's total determination to maintain his weapons program.
In the dossier on Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program, the British government maintains that in 1998 Iraq had 360 tons of bulk chemical warfare agents, including one and a half tons of VX nerve agent, and also had 3,000 tons of "precursor chemicals," which could be used to create chemical weapons. The report also says that at the same time Iraq had enough "growth media" to produce 26,000 liters of anthrax spores and tens of thousands of special munitions for the delivery of chemical and biological agents, according to Blair.


Since 1998, the report states, Iraq had rebuilt previously destroyed chemical and biological weapons facilities and has acquired large amounts of needed chemicals and equipment by purchasing and smuggling dual-use items. Britain now believes Iraq can produce many biological agents, including anthrax, botulinum toxin, aflatoxin and ricin.
Money taken illegally from the U.N. Oil for Food program has bankrolled many of these purchases. Blair alleged today that Saddam siphons $3 billion from the program every year.
Iraq's nuclear capabilities have increasingly alarmed the international community as well. Blair said Hussein has attempted to buy large amounts of uranium from sources in Africa and no one is sure if he was successful. Intelligence agencies have also shown that Iraq has bought or tried to buy equipment to produce enriched uranium needed to build nuclear weapons.
All the evidence points to one thing, Blair said. "The case for ensuring Iraqi disarmament is overwhelming," he said. "I defy anyone on the basis of this evidence to say that it is an unreasonable demand for the international community to make when, after all, it is only the same demand that we have made for 11 years and (Saddam) has rejected." Bush backed up these comments with another call for the United Nations to pass a strong resolution on Iraq. "And if they're unable to do so, the United States and our friends will act because we believe in peace," he said today. "We want to keep the peace. We don't trust this man, and that's what the Blair report showed today."

I've tried that too. But the facts always get ignored for some reason. And they say we're brainwashed?!?