David Kay, Bush's boy, says that the consensus of the intelligience community is that the "trailers in question" found in Iraq were NOT used to make biological weapons, but were instead used to make hydrogen gas. A week ago V-P Cheney said that these same trailers were "conclusive proof" that Saddam had a biological weapons program. Despite repeated reports that many in the CIA and the intelligience community before the war were highly skeptical that Saddam had large quantities of weaponized weapons of mass destruction, we are now told that they are to blame for Bush's statements that Saddam had massive amounts of WMD and was planning to use them on America. In October of 2002 the CIA told Bush that they did NOT believe that Saddam was pursuing a nuclear weapons program. In 2003 at the State of the Union Address Bush told Americans that Saddam was pursuing nuclear weapons to use against America. Condoleeza Rice made reference to the "mushroom cloud" that America would wake up to if we did not conquer Iraq. This despite the fact that the CIA told them they did not believe that was a threat. Can we afford to have a President who will tell you anything to justify a war? We find out also this morning that there will be a "summer offensive" in Afghanistan, undoubtedly to capture Bin Laden and his high command in Al Qaida. This has apparently been on the back burner for over a year, although American intelligience has concluded that Bin Laden and Jawahiri, the two men most responsible for 911, are still alive and probably living in mountainous regions of Afghanistan. Bin Laden might become a campaign issue this summer, and it is one thing for thousands of Americans to go unavenged, but it is entirely another thing when the living Bin Laden might threaten George Bush's re-election campaign. That explains the summer offensive.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/politics/administration/whbriefing/?nav=hptop_ts Along those same lines, here is an article on how Bush is beginning to duck and dodge on Iraq and WMD. When reading it remember that David Kay is basically Bush's bitch and will try and protect him all that he can.
Cotton Bowl, I'm not defending Bush by any means on the Iraq/WMD issue. To be honest, I think there are more pressing issues in this upcoming campaign. I'm searching for something from either party/candidates that attracts me to one over the other. But I am curious. If you don't mind. What would you do if you were innagurated 1/05 or the candidate of your choice was innagurated on 1/05 with our troops in Iraq? I wouldn't have an answer to my own question, so I understand if you don't either, but am curious given your obvious passion over this issue?
So Kay is Bush's b*tch when he says things like the below. But you do not seem to think negative of him when you try to quote him about stockpiles and the "trailers in question"
