Kerry Flip-flops on Missing WMDs
Find a Conversation
| Thu, 04-29-2004 - 10:32am |
It's quite a turnaround for Kerry, who just a few weeks ago was complaining, "George Bush sold us on going to war with Iraq based on the threat of weapons of mass destruction. But we still haven't found them . . . . We were misled about weapons of mass destruction."
Key Kerry backer Howard Dean has been even more adamant, insisting to CNN earlier this month, "There were no weapons of mass destruction . . . This is Bushgate, which is far more serious than Watergate."
But Tuesday night on MSNBC's "Hardball," Kerry retreated.
"It appears, as they peel away the weapons of mass destruction issue - and we may yet find them," he told host Chris Matthews. "Look, I want to make it clear. Who knows if a month from now, three months from now, you find some weapons? You may."
Coincidentally or not, Kerry's reversal came a day after the Jordanian government announced that WMDs from Syria were part of an al Qaida plot to kill 80,000 people in Amman with poison gas. At least one of the plotters has admitted he was trained in Iraq.
The top Democrat's flip-flop also followed news that a suspected weapons of mass destruction production facility in Baghdad - disguised as a perfume factory - unexpectedly blew up, killing two GI's who were searching the plant.

Pages
You mean the one with France and Germany? I have one answer: Oil-for-food scandal--THAT is the reason why France and Germany would NOT commit.
Funny, France as a country can be swayed to not go into a war because a few key figures received substantial sums of money from the Iraq oil-for-food program, BUT it obviously played no roll on our decision to GO into Iraq that Haliburton is now making Billions and both the US and British companies are getting huge amounts of money out of the country.
So France and Germany were only against the war because of money, and the US and Britain were only for the war because of these WMDs.
Of course I am concerned about what has happened with the oil-for-food program beneficiaries, but I think it is funny to see people dismiss the money key figures in this war are making yet pointing out so matter-of-factly the money those other people made from Saddam.
And of course, we would never not go to war with a country because of money we received, I mean afterall, we are in a war on terrorism and we go after all those evil countries, particularily the biggest supporter of them all Saudi Arabia... Oh wait, maybe not.
James
janderson_ny@yahoo.com
CL Ask A Guy
James
janderson_ny@yahoo.com
CL Ask A Guy
I have a problem with Haliburton because of all the overcharges they have been caught giving us (after all, what is a few hundred million between friends), and the relationship Cheney and others in this administration
James
janderson_ny@yahoo.com
CL Ask A Guy
What you describe in your post isn't the least bit funny, but your view is so perverted it's tragic.
720,000 Iraqis--women, children, elderly, & infirm died of malnutrician & a lack a medical care because the UN, which was charged with overseeing the OFF program, looked the other way when Saddam used that money for political bribes, personal luxuries, and to purchase illegal weapons.
Halliburton is provided people, goods, and services that are vital to rebuilding the Iraq infrastructure which was decrepit and in disrepair. They are in good standing with the Pentagon because they have a long history of successfully completing military contracts and they have capabilities that other companies don't. There is absolutely nothing illegal, immoral, or unethical about how they are working in Iraq, and if you honestly believe the Iraq war was a make work program for Halliburton, you are lost in some sort of evil vast right wing Republican conspriacy fantasy.
Edited 4/30/2004 5:43 pm ET ET by wrhen
Renee
Like nearly all large corporations, especially ones interested in securing government contracts, they donate to both parties, and make extra big contributions to sitting presidents. I'll get up in arms about their contributions to the Bush campaign when you show me they acted significantly differently towards Clinton's campaigns.
<>
Afraid not. Concerning the Cheney's 2002 income (latest year I could find):
"The wage and salary income reported on the tax return includes $190,134 in government salary for the Vice President. In addition, the tax return reports the payment of deferred compensation from Halliburton Company, in the amount of $162,392. In December 1998, the Vice President elected to defer compensation earned in calendar year 1999 for his services as chief executive officer of Halliburton. This amount is to be paid in fixed annual installments (with interest) in the five years after the Vice President's retirement from Halliburton. That election to defer income became final and unalterable before Mr. Cheney left Halliburton. The amount of deferred compensation received by the Vice President is fixed and is not affected by Halliburton's current economic performance or earnings in any way. It would not be affected even if Halliburton were to become unable to make the deferred compensation payments since the Vice President, before assuming office, purchased an insurance policy that guarantees he will receive the amount owed to him. "
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/04/20030411-8.html
Edited 4/30/2004 5:45 pm ET ET by wrhen
Renee
What about the WMD found in Jordan that could have wiped out 20,000 to 80,000 people linked back to Iraq??? I would say that yes, some have been found. Kerry is concerned that more will be found soon....
You might want to check out the following article.
"Coincidentally or not, Kerry's reversal came a day after the Jordanian government announced that WMDs from Syria were part of an al Qaida plot to kill 80,000 people in Amman with poison gas. At least one of the plotters has admitted he was trained in Iraq."
Renee
Pages