Oh hell yea... Where have you been Mr. Cheney?

This is more than overdue:

"As most of you know, I have spent a lot of years in public service, and first came to work in Washington, D.C. back in the late 1960s. I know what it’s like to operate in a highly charged political environment, in which the players on all sides of an issue feel passionately and speak forcefully.

In such an environment people sometimes lose their cool, and yet in Washington you can ordinarily rely on some basic measure of truthfulness and good faith in the conduct of political debate. But in the last several weeks we have seen a wild departure from that tradition.

And the suggestion that’s been made by some U. S. senators that the President of the United States or any member of this Administration purposely misled the American people on pre-war intelligence is one of the most dishonest and reprehensible charges ever aired in this city...

Some of the most irresponsible comments have, of course, come from politicians who actually voted in favor of authorizing force against Saddam Hussein. These are elected officials who had access to the intelligence, and were free to draw their own conclusions.

They arrived at the same judgment about Iraq’s capabilities and intentions that was made by this Administration and by the previous Administration. There was broad-based, bipartisan agreement that Saddam Hussein was a threat … that he had violated U.N. Security Council Resolutions … and that, in a post-9/11 world, we couldn’t afford to take the word of a dictator who had a history of WMD programs, who had excluded weapons inspectors, who had defied the demands of the international community, who had been designated an official state sponsor of terror, and who had committed mass murder.

Those are facts.

What we’re hearing now is some politicians contradicting their own statements and making a play for political advantage in the middle of a war. The saddest part is that our people in uniform have been subjected to these cynical and pernicious falsehoods day in and day out. American soldiers and Marines are out there every day in dangerous conditions and desert temperatures – conducting raids, training Iraqi forces, countering attacks, seizing weapons, and capturing killers – and back home a few opportunists are suggesting they were sent into battle for a lie.

The President and I cannot prevent certain politicians from losing their memory, or their backbone – but we’re not going to sit by and let them rewrite history.

We’re going to continue throwing their own words back at them. And far more important, we’re going to continue sending a consistent message to the men and women who are fighting the war on terror in Iraq, Afghanistan, and many other fronts.

We can never say enough how much we appreciate them, and how proud they make us. They and their families can be certain: That this cause is right … and the performance of our military has been brave and honorable … and this nation will stand behind our fighting forces with pride and without wavering until the day of victory.

Let the moonbat caterwauling begin... and may the truth continue to ring loudly and clearly despite their shrieking.  The left have had their say long enough, now it's time (and it's past time actually) to speak truth to their ineptness, their lies, their deceitfulness... especially those holier than thou religious leftists who spew their septic swill on a variety of forums, lectures, pulpits and websites, especially those who masquerade as moderates and are using their lies to fill their fundraising coffers.  You know who you are.

UPDATE: Ian has the video.

Comments

[Witch King]

Dink Cheney is ALSO famous for uttering these LIES so please, go right ahead and trash whatever tiny shed of credibility Butally HONESTY had by using Dink Cheny as your truth teller:

Dick Cheney, Aug. 26, 2002: "Simply stated, there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons of mass destruction."

Dick Cheney, Sept. 2002: "[Saddam Hussein] has indeed stepped up his capacity to produce and deliver biological weapons. . . he has reconstituted his nuclear program to develop a nuclear weapon. . . ."

Dick Cheney, March 16, 2003: "We believe he has, in fact, reconstituted nuclear weapons."

Dick Cheney, Oct. 10, 2003:: Saddam Hussein "had an established relationship with al Qaeda, providing training to al Qaeda members in the areas of poisons, gases, making conventional bombs."

Dick Cheney, Jan. 21, 2004: "I think there's overwhelming evidence that there was a connection between al-Qaida and the Iraqi government. I'm very confident that there was an established relationship there."

[Witch King]

Credibility of Brutally Honest, I apologize for the misspelling

[Nicks]

Witch King,

I love it when some one will let the voice of the people be heard, and use the quotes of our “leaders” to do it !! Here are some other lies, er, I mean quotes, to add to yours:

Former VP Al Gore: "We know that he has stored nuclear supplies, secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country."

John Edwards: "Serving on the Intelligence Committee and seeing day after day, week after week, briefings on Saddam's weapons of mass destruction and his plans on using those weapons, he cannot be allowed to have nuclear weapons, it's just that simple. The whole world changes if Saddam ever has nuclear weapons."

Ted Kennedy: "We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction."

Clinton Secretary of State Madeleine Albright: "We must stop Saddam from ever again jeopardizing the stability and the security of his neighbors with weapons of mass destruction."

Clinton National Security Advisor Sandy Berger: "[Saddam will] use those weapons of mass destruction again as he has ten times since 1983."

John Kerry: "I will be voting to give the president of the U.S. the authority to use force if necessary to disarm Saddam because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security... Without question we need to disarm Saddam Hussein."

Hillary Clinton: "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, his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists including al-Qa'ida 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."

Bob Graham: "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."

Nancy Pelosi: "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."

Carl Levin: "We begin with a common belief that Saddam Hussein...is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them."

[Rick]

Nick... I knew the caterwauling would begin and I'm honored that we're seeing it right here...

But I'm more than honored at your response...

Nails 'em buddy...

And thanks much for your reply on my Mr. Blue-Gray Eyes post...

[Witch King]

You want MY words? Fine, Cheney showed an utter lack of leadership by listening to Ahmed Chalabi before the war. He basically parroted Chalabi's comments on the situation in Iraq and about Saddam, both proven to be NOT TRUE. Cheney allowed Chalabi to set the dictate for what happened. Was Cheney WOEFULLY unaware that Chalabi had escaped Jordan in the trunk of a car ahead of the Jordanian police? Why would Cheney give such creedence to a person under indictment? Chalabi and Cheney were perfect for each other, they kept telling each other what they wanted to hear to get their war on....

[Nicks]

they kept telling each other what they wanted to hear to get their war on....

Their war? How about the Edwards-Kennedy-Kerry-Clinton-Pelos war? They voted for it, they gave Bush the go ahead, they are the checks and balance between the executive and legislative branch. They had access to the same information Bush and Cheney had. If Bush lied, the democrats swore to it.

Nicks

[Witch King]

So you keep repeating the Dems had ALL the same information as the White House in the run up to the war.

Mmm hmm, do you REALLY TRULY believe that the entire Congress was privvy to the EXACT SAME intelligence briefings and EXACT SAME Pentagon intel as Cheney and Bush?

Grow up, that argument won't hunt.

[Nicks]

Witch King writes,
Mmm hmm, do you REALLY TRULY believe that the entire Congress was privvy to the EXACT SAME intelligence briefings and EXACT SAME Pentagon intel as Cheney and Bush?

Johnny Edwards seems to think so,

John Edwards: "Serving on the Intelligence Committee and seeing day after day, week after week, briefings on Saddam's weapons of mass destruction and his plans on using those weapons, he cannot be allowed to have nuclear weapons, it's just that simple. The whole world changes if Saddam ever has nuclear weapons."

Witch King adds,

Grow up

Guess you told me. Very persuasive.

Nicks

[Wild Thing]

I LOVE his speech, Cheney has always been a favorite of mine!
Thank you so much for your post!!!

[Presbypoet]

In late 2002, I worried Saddam would cooperate, and get rid of everything. The inspectors would certify him clean, and the day after the inspectors left, he would restart every program. With us no longer having a reason to do no fly zones he would be free to go after the Kurds. That was our biggest mistake. We were lucky Saddam thought Bush was a Clinton. He didn't think we would attack.

What I would like to see is any evidence it was sane to think Saddam didn't have WMD in 2003. He kept jerking the inspector's chain, submitting information designed to make people think he had something to hide.

It is like a man who robbed a bank, and shot a guard; the police stop his getaway car. When the cops tell him to put his hands up, he reaches in his coat...and they shoot him. Later the ACLU complains they didn't have any evidence he was reaching for a gun. He had a gun. They had no evidence he got rid of it. It is the same situation with Saddam, except there was more evidence he was armed, by his evasive actions.

I was quite interested in what was going on. I followed the Command Post daily. I thought we should go after Saddam. Nothing that has happened since has changed my opinion. He was the most dangerous man on earth in 2002.

The burden of proof in 2002 was on Saddam, to prove Saddam didn't have dangerous weapons, not on us to prove he did. We seem to forget that.

[Redbeard]

"So you keep repeating the Dems had ALL the same information as the White House in the run up to the war.

Mmm hmm, do you REALLY TRULY believe that the entire Congress was privvy to the EXACT SAME intelligence briefings and EXACT SAME Pentagon intel as Cheney and Bush?"

So when faced with facts proving that the Dems held the same beliefs about Saddam and WMDs, you resort to a mere implication that the Dems had insufficient intelligence without providing even a hint of evidence?

When faced with evidence it is best to respond with counter evidence and not merely implication.

Tell us again which argument won't hunt?

[iyam leQ]

when jon stewart did his segment on dick's mouthwatering masterpiece on how to keep on lying even when the whole world knows the truth, it was priceless. one thing you can always count on this administration. whenever they level accusations, you can bet that's where they're hiding their own guilt. rewriting history? ya, that's exactly what this administration is trying to do.

[Redbeard]

"how to keep on lying even when the whole world knows the truth"

What I find most interesting about this comment is that you had to scroll right past the proof of the Democrats preaching the same "lie" to get to the comment box.

You literally ignored the evidence in order to make that statement.