Quotes and Facts on Iraq

"Now let me be clear -- I suffer no illusions about Saddam Hussein.  He is a brutal man.  A ruthless man.  A man who butchers his own people to secure his own power.  He has repeatedly defied UN resolutions, thwarted UN inspection teams, developed chemical and biological weapons, and coveted nuclear capacity.  He's a bad guy.  The world, and the Iraqi people, would be better off without him."

    State Senator Barack Obama (Democrat, Illinois)
    Speech at Federal Plaza, Chicago, Illinois
    October 2, 2002



"Every nation has to either be with us, or against us.  Those who harbor terrorists, or who finance them, are going to pay a price."

    Senator Hillary Clinton (Democrat, New York)
    During an interview on CBS Evening News with Dan Rather
    September 13, 2001




"My position is very clear: The time has come for decisive action to eliminate the threat posed by Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction.  I'm a co-sponsor of the bipartisan Resolution that's presently under consideration in the Senate.  Saddam Hussein's regime is a grave threat to America and our allies.  We know that he has chemical and biological weapons today, that he's used them in the past, and that he's doing everything he can to build more.  Every day he gets closer to his long-term goal of nuclear capability.

Democracy will not spring up by itself overnight in a multi-ethnic, complicated society that's suffered under one repressive regime after another for generations.  The Iraqi people deserve and need our help to rebuild their lives and to create a prosperous, thriving, open society.  All Iraqis, including Sunnis, Shia and Kurds, deserve to be represented.  This is not just a moral imperative.  It's a security imperative.  It is in America's national interest to help build an Iraq at peace with itself and its neighbors, because a democratic, tolerant and accountable Iraq will be a peaceful regional partner, and such an Iraq could serve as a model for the entire Arab world."

    Senator John Edwards (Democrat, North Carolina)
    Speech at the Center for Strategic and International Studies
    October 7, 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.  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, effects American security.

This is a very difficult vote, this is probably the hardest decision I've ever had to make.  Any vote that might lead to war should be hard, but I cast it with conviction."

    Senator Hillary Clinton (Democrat, New York)
    Addressing the US Senate
    October 10, 2002




"In the next century, the community of nations may see more and more 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, drug traffickers or organized criminals who travel the world among us unnoticed.

If we fail to respond today, Saddam and all those who would follow in his footsteps will be emboldened tomorrow by the knowledge that they can act with impunity, even in the face of a clear message from the United Nations Security Council and clear evidence of a weapons of mass destruction program."

    President Clinton
    Address to Joint Chiefs of Staff and Pentagon staff
    February 17, 1998



America is threatened by an "unholy axis":

"We must exercise responsibility not just at home, but around the world.  On the eve of a new century, we have the power and the duty to build a new era of peace and security.

We must combat an unholy axis of new threats from terrorists, international criminals, and drug traffickers.  These 21st century predators feed on technology and the free flow of information... And they will be all the more lethal if weapons of mass destruction fall into their hands.

Together, we must confront the new hazards of chemical and biological weapons and the outlaw states, terrorists, and organized criminals seeking to acquire them.  Saddam Hussein has spent the better part of this decade and much of his nation's wealth not on providing for the Iraqi people but on developing nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons and the missiles to deliver them."

    President Clinton
    State of the Union address
    January 27, 1998



"The hard fact is that so long as Saddam remains in power, he threatens the well-being of his people, the peace of his region, the security of the world.

The best way to end that threat once and for all is with a new Iraqi government -- a government ready to live in peace with its neighbors, a government that respects the rights of its people."

    President Clinton
    Oval Office Address to the American People
    December 16, 1998



"People can quarrel with whether we should have more troops in Afghanistan or internationalize Iraq or whatever, but it is incontestable that on the day I left office, there were unaccounted for stocks of biological and chemical weapons."

    Former President Clinton
    During an interview on CNN's "Larry King Live"
    July 22, 2003



"Iraq is a long way from Ohio, 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."

    Madeleine Albright, President Clinton's Secretary of State
    Town Hall Meeting on Iraq at Ohio State University
    February 18, 1998



"Imagine the consequences if Saddam fails to comply and we fail to act.  Saddam will be emboldened, believing the international community has lost its will.  He 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 ten times since 1983."

    Sandy Berger, President Clinton's National Security Advisor
    Town Hall Meeting on Iraq at Ohio State University
    February 18, 1998



"No one has done what Saddam Hussein has done, or is thinking of doing.  He is producing weapons of mass destruction, and he is qualitatively and quantitatively different from other dictators."

    Madeleine Albright, President Clinton's Secretary of State
    Town Hall Meeting on Iraq at Ohio State University
    February 18, 1998



Regime change in Iraq has been official US policy since 1998.  The Iraq Liberation Act of 1998, signed into law by President Clinton, states:

"It should be the policy of the United States to support efforts to remove the regime headed by Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq and to promote the emergence of a democratic government to replace that regime."

    Iraq Liberation Act of 1998
    105th Congress, 2nd Session
    September 29, 1998



In 2003, the United Nations scheduled Saddam's regime to chair the UN Conference on Disarmament.  (Allied forces liberated Baghdad on April 9th, 2003, and Saddam was found hiding in a hole on December 12th, 2003.)

United Nations
January 16, 2003

Press Release


The Conference on Disarmament, the world's sole multilateral forum for disarmament negotiations, will open its 2003 session on Monday, 20 January, at the Palais des Nations.  The first public plenary will take place at 10 a.m. Tuesday, 21 January.

The session will open under the presidency of Ambassador Rakesh Sood, Permanent Representative of India to the Conference on Disarmament.  The presidency of the Conference rotates amongst its member States according to the English alphabetical order; each President holds office for four working weeks.  During 2003, the presidency of the Conference also will be held by Indonesia, Islamic Republic of Iran, Iraq, Ireland, and Israel.  The Conference's annual session is divided into three parts.  The first part of the session will conclude on 28 March; the second will run from 12 May to 27 June; and the third will be held from 28 July to 10 September.



Associated Press
February 13, 1999

Bin Laden reportedly leaves Afghanistan, whereabouts unknown

Osama bin Laden, the Saudi millionaire accused by the United States of plotting bomb attacks on two U.S. embassies in Africa, has left Afghanistan, Afghan sources said Saturday.

Taliban authorities in the militia's southern stronghold of Kandahar refused to either confirm or deny reports that bin Laden had left the country.

Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein has offered asylum to bin Laden, who openly supports Iraq against the Western powers.

Despite repeated demands from Washington, the Taliban refused to hand over bin Laden after the August 7 bombings of the U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania, demanding proof of his involvement in terrorist activities.

The Taliban did promise that bin Laden would not use Afghanistan as a staging arena for terrorist activities.



An Iraqi man calls into a radio show, which had as a guest Andrea Buffa from "United for Peace & Justice," and tries to get her to answer a single question.

    March 10, 2003
    KVI 570 AM, Seattle, WA



CHRIS MATTHEWS, HOST: Were we right to go to this war alone [sic], basically without the Europeans behind us [sic]?  Was that something we had to do?

SENATOR JOHN EDWARDS (Democrat, North Carolina): I think that we were right to go.  I think we were right to go to the United Nations.  I think we couldn't let those who could veto in the Security Council hold us hostage.  And I think Saddam Hussein being gone is good.  Good for the American people, good for the security of that region of the world, and good for the Iraqi people.

MATTHEWS: If you think the decision, which was made by the president, when basically he saw the French weren't with us and the Germans and the Russians weren't with us, was he right to say, "We're going anyway"?

EDWARDS: I stand behind my support of that, yes.

MATTHEWS: You believe in that?


    Senator John Edwards (Democrat, North Carolina)
    During an interview on MSNBC's "Hardball"
    October 13, 2003



The Guardian
February 6, 1999

Saddam link to Bin Laden

By Julian Borger

Saddam Hussein's regime has opened talks with Osama bin Laden, bringing closer the threat of a terrorist attack using chemical, biological or nuclear weapons, according to US intelligence sources and Iraqi opposition officials.

The key meeting took place in the Afghan mountains near Kandahar in late December.  The Iraqi delegation was led by Farouk Hijazi, Baghdad's ambassador in Turkey and one of Saddam's most powerful secret policemen, who is thought to have offered Bin Laden asylum in Iraq.

News of the negotiations emerged in a week when the US attorney general, Janet Reno, warned the Senate that a terrorist attack involving weapons of mass destruction was a growing concern.  "There's a threat, and it's real," Ms Reno said, adding that such weapons "are being considered for use."



Dan Rather, anchorman for CBS News, appears on The David Letterman Show shortly after 9-11.  The show had been off the air for a week.

Below are transcript excerpts.

RATHER: President Bush made what I think is his strongest statement yet when he went to the Pentagon this afternoon.  He was Giuliani-esque -- I don't think he would mind me saying that, no.  He looked the camera straight in the eye -- unblinking -- and said "Osama Dead or Alive."

[Audience applause]

RATHER: And with what we're dealing with here, which is not one man [Bin Laden], it's a hydra-headed operation that's in 55 countries around the world.  Now granted, the focus is on, and we should understand, not just Afghanistan -- Afghanistan, Sudan, Iran, Iraq, Syria, and Libya.

RATHER: They hate America.  They hate us.  This is one thing that makes this war different.  They don't want territory, they don't want what we got -- they want to kill us and destroy us.  It's a heavy statement, but it's true -- they seek to accomplish our death.  Death as a people, as a society, and a culture.


RATHER: Who can explain madmen, and who can explain evil.

RATHER: Saddam Hussein, if he isn't connect to this, he's connected to any other things.  He's part of this 'Hate America' thing.  You have to understand, Saddam Hussein is somebody I have sat this close, eye to eye.

LETTERMAN: The other day, Dick Cheney -- who to me seemed like the real deal -- Dick Cheney was talking about how counter-intelligence and espionage is dirty business, and maybe now we were going to have to get down in the mud with these people, and I thought well Holy God wasn't that the way it was supposed to be?

RATHER: This [war] will be long, the casualties will be greater.  Let's face it, we've already had more casualties, I mean five thousand of our fellow Americans have been killed already.  When we talk about casualties, we've suffered casualties, but there will be more.  When we send out sons and daughters into this kind of war, into this Twilight Zone that they're going, there will be great casualties.  Now, it remains to be seen whether we have the staying power, that's basically up to you, and me, and everybody in the audience, and every American, whether we have the staying power, whether we have the will to stay with it, is the big question.  But you say 'Will it do anything?'  I certainly think it can, but what would we think of ourselves if we didn't try.

RATHER: This will take years, this may very well take another four, eight, ten years.  The world's view of us, in many places with many people, is we just don't have the stomach to stick anything out.  Well, we were great during World War II, but this is a new generation, they're all spoiled.

Dan Rather, CBS News Anchor
Interview on "The David Letterman Show"
September 17, 2001



Click Photo to Enlarge
January 11, 1999

Saddam + Bin Laden?  America's two enemies are courting.

By Christopher Dickey, Gregory Vistica, and Russell Watson

In the no-fly zones of northern and southern Iraq, Saddam Hussein's gunners blindly fired surface-to-air missiles at patrolling American and British warplanes.  In Yemen, terrorists seized a group of British Commonwealth and American tourists, and four of the hostages died in a shootout.  In Tel Aviv, the US Embassy abruptly closed down after receiving a terrorist threat.  Perhaps it was just a typical week in the Middle East.  But in a region where no one puts much faith in blind coincidence, last week's conjunction of Iraqi antiaircraft fire and terrorism aimed at the countries that had just bombed Iraq convinced some that a new conspiracy was afoot.

Here's what is known so far: Saddam Hussein, who has a long record of supporting terrorism, is trying to rebuild his intelligence network overseas -- assets that would allow him to establish a terrorism network. US sources say he is reaching out to Islamic terrorists, including some who may be linked to Osama bin Laden, the wealthy Saudi exile accused of masterminding the bombing of two US embassies in Africa last summer.  US intelligence has had reports of contacts between low-level agents.  Saddam and bin Laden have interests -- and enemies -- in common.  Both men want US military forces out of Saudi Arabia.  Bin Laden has been calling for all-out war on Americans, using as his main pretext Washington's role in bombing and boycotting Iraq.  Now bin Laden is engaged in something of a public-relations offensive, having granted recent interviews, one for NEWSWEEK.  He says "any American who pays taxes to his government" is a legitimate target.



Video for some of these quotes, click to play.

"There is a very easy way to prevent anyone from being put into harm's way, and that is for Saddam Hussein to disarm, and I have absolutely no belief that he will.  I have to say that this is something I have followed for more than a decade.

For now nearly 20 years, the principal reason why women and children in Iraq have suffered, is because of Saddam's leadership.

The very difficult question for all of us, is how does one bring about the disarmament of someone with such a proven track record of a commitment, if not an obsession, with weapons of mass destruction.

I ended up voting for the Resolution after carefully reviewing the information and intelligence I had available, talking with people whose opinions I trusted, trying to discount political or other factors that I didn't believe should be in any way a part of this decision, and it is unfortunate that we are at the point of a potential military action to enforce the resolution.  That is not my preference, it would be far preferable if we had legitimate cooperation from Saddam Hussein, and a willingness on his part to disarm, and to account for his chemical and biological storehouses.

With respect to whose responsibility it is to disarm Saddam Hussein, I do not believe that given the attitudes of many people in the world community today that there would be a willingness to take on very difficult problems were it not for United States leadership.  And I am talking specifically about what had to be done in Bosnia and Kosovo, where my husband could not get a Security Council resolution to save the Kosovar Albanians from ethnic cleansing.  And we did it alone as the United States, and we had to do it alone.  It would have been far preferable if the Russians and others had agreed to do it through the United Nations -- they would not.  I'm happy that, in the face of such horrible suffering, we did act."

   Senator Hillary Clinton (Democrat, New York)
   During a meeting with "Code Pink" at the US Capitol
   March 6, 2003



"There is now no incentive for Hussein to comply with the inspectors or to refrain from using weapons of mass destruction to defend himself if the United States comes after him.  And he will use them; we should be under no illusion about that."

    Joseph Wilson, Advisor to John Kerry 2004 Presidential Campaign
    In a Los Angeles Times editorial: "A 'Big Cat' With Nothing to Lose"
    February 6, 2003; Page B17




BILL MOYERS: President Bush's recent speech to the American Enterprise Institute, he said, let me quote it to you.  "The danger posed by Saddam Hussein and his weapons cannot be ignored or wished away."  You agree with that?

JOE WILSON: I agree with that.  Sure.

BILL MOYERS: "The danger must be confronted."  You agree with that?  "We would hope that the Iraqi regime will meet the demands of the United Nations and disarm fully and peacefully.  If it does not, we are prepared to disarm Iraq by force.  Either way, this danger will be removed.  The safety of the American people depends on ending this direct and growing threat."  You agree with that?

JOE WILSON: I agree with that.  Sure.  The President goes on to say in that speech, as he did in the State of the Union Address, is we will liberate Iraq from a brutal dictator.  All of which is true.

    Joseph Wilson, Advisor to John Kerry 2004 Presidential Campaign
    During an interview with Bill Moyers
    February 28, 2003



The Washington Post
January 23, 1999; Page A02

Official Cites Gains Against Bin Laden

By Vernon Loeb

Richard A. Clarke, the Clinton administration's senior counterterrorism official, provided new information in defense of President Clinton's decision to fire Tomahawk cruise missiles at the El Shifa pharmaceutical plant in Khartoum, Sudan, in retaliation for Osama bin Laden's role in the Aug. 7 embassy bombings.

While U.S. intelligence officials disclosed shortly after the missile attack that they had obtained a soil sample from the El Shifa site that contained a precursor of VX nerve gas, Clarke said that the U.S. government is "sure" that Iraqi nerve gas experts actually produced a powdered VX-like substance at the plant that, when mixed with bleach and water, would have become fully active VX nerve gas.

Clarke said U.S. intelligence does not know how much of the substance was produced at El Shifa or what happened to it.  But he said that intelligence exists linking bin Laden to El Shifa's current and past operators, the Iraqi nerve gas experts, and the National Islamic Front in Sudan.

Given the evidence presented to the White House before the airstrike, Clarke said, the president "would have been derelict in his duties if he didn't blow up the facility."



"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."

    Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi (Democrat, California)
    Statement on US Led Military Strike Against Iraq
    December 16, 1998



"Saddam Hussein certainly has chemical and biological weapons.  There's no question about that."

    Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi (Democrat, California)
    During an interview on "Meet The Press"
    November 17, 2002



"I come to this debate, Mr. Speaker, as one at the end of 10 years in office on the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, where stopping the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction was one of my top priorities.  I applaud the President on focusing on this issue and on taking the lead to disarm Saddam Hussein.  ...  Others have talked about this threat that is posed by Saddam Hussein.  Yes, he has chemical weapons, he has biological weapons, he is trying to get nuclear weapons."

    Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi (Democrat, California)
    Addressing the US House of Representatives
    October 10, 2002
    Congressional Record, p. H7777



"There's no question that Saddam Hussein is a threat to the United States and to our allies.

If Saddam persists in thumbing his nose at the inspectors, then we're clearly going to have to do something about it."

    Howard Dean, Democratic Presidential Candidate
    During an interview on "Face The Nation"
    September 29, 2002



"We stopped the fighting [in 1991] on an agreement that Iraq would take steps to assure the world that it would not engage in further aggression and that it would destroy its weapons of mass destruction.  It has refused to take those steps.  That refusal constitutes a breach of the armistice which renders it void and justifies resumption of the armed conflict."

    Senator Harry Reid (Democrat, Nevada)
    Addressing the US Senate
    October 9, 2002
    Congressional Record, p. S10145



"It is the duty of any president, in the final analysis, to defend this nation and dispel the security threat.  Saddam Hussein has brought military action upon himself by refusing for 12 years to comply with the mandates of the United Nations.  The brave and capable men and women of our armed forces and those who are with us will quickly, I know, remove him once and for all as a threat to his neighbors, to the world, and to his own people, and I support their doing so."

    Senator John Kerry (Democrat, Massachusetts)
    Statement on eve of military strikes against Iraq
    March 17, 2003



Wesley Clark, 2004 Democratic presidential candidate, discusses Saddam's WMD:

WESLEY CLARK: He does have weapons of mass destruction.

MILES O'BRIEN: And you could say that categorically?

WESLEY CLARK: Absolutely.

MILES O'BRIEN: All right, well, where are, where is, they've been there a long time and thus far we've got 12 empty casings.  Where are all these weapons?

WESLEY CLARK: There's a lot of stuff hidden in a lot of different places, Miles, and I'm not sure that we know where it all is.  People in Iraq do.  The scientists know some of it.  Some of the military, the low ranking military; some of Saddam Hussein's security organizations.  There's a big organization in place to cover and deceive and prevent anyone from knowing about this.

    Wesley Clark, Democratic Presidential Candidate
    During an interview on CNN
    January 18, 2003



"It appears that with the deadline for exile come and gone, Saddam Hussein has chosen to make military force the ultimate weapons inspections enforcement mechanism.  If so, the only exit strategy is victory, this is our common mission and the world's cause."

    Senator John Kerry (Democrat, Massachusetts)
    Statement on commencement of military strikes against Iraq
    March 20, 2003



Senator John Edwards, when asked about "Axis of Evil" countries Iran, Iraq, and North Korea:

"I mean, we have three different countries that, while they all present serious problems for the United States -- they're dictatorships, they're involved in the development and proliferation of weapons of mass destruction -- you know, the most imminent, clear and present threat to our country is not the same from those three countries.  I think Iraq is the most serious and imminent threat to our country."

    Senator John Edwards (Democrat, North Carolina)
    During an interview on CNN's "Late Edition"
    February 24, 2002



"Those who doubted whether Iraq or the world would be better off without Saddam Hussein, and those who believe today that we are not safer with his capture, don't have the judgment to be President, or the credibility to be elected President.

No one can doubt or should doubt that we are safer -- and Iraq is better -- because Saddam Hussein is now behind bars."

   Senator John Kerry (Democrat, Massachusetts)
   Speech at Drake University in Iowa
   December 16, 2003



John Edwards, while voting YES to the Resolution authorizing US military force against Iraq:

"Others argue that if even our allies support us, we should not support this resolution because confronting Iraq now would undermine the long-term fight against terrorist groups like Al Qaeda. Yet, I believe that this is not an either-or choice. Our national security requires us to do both, and we can."

   Senator John Edwards (Democrat, North Carolina)
   US Senate floor statement: "Authorization of the Use of
   United States Armed Forces Against Iraq"
   October 10, 2002



"I think it was the right decision to disarm Saddam Hussein. And when the president made the decision, I supported him, and I support the fact that we did disarm him."

   Senator John Kerry (Democrat, Massachusetts)
   During a Democratic Primary Debate at the University of South Carolina
   May 3, 2003



"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.

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

   Senator Edward Kennedy (Democrat, Massachusetts)
   Speech at Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies
   September 27, 2002



John Kerry, while voting YES to the Resolution authorizing US military force against Iraq:

"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."

   Senator John Kerry (Democrat, Massachusetts)
   Addressing the US Senate
   October 9, 2002



"As a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, I firmly believe that the issue of Iraq is not about politics.  It's about national security.  We know that for at least 20 years, Saddam Hussein has obsessively sought weapons of mass destruction through every means available.  We know that he has chemical and biological weapons today.  He has used them in the past, and he is doing everything he can to build more.  Each day he inches closer to his longtime goal of nuclear capability -- a capability that could be less than a year away.

The path of confronting Saddam is full of hazards.  But the path of inaction is far more dangerous.  This week, a week where we remember the sacrifice of thousands of innocent Americans made on 9-11, the choice could not be starker.  Had we known that such attacks were imminent, we surely would have used every means at our disposal to prevent them and take out the plotters.  We cannot wait for such a terrible event -- or, if weapons of mass destruction are used, one far worse -- to address the clear and present danger posed by Saddam Hussein's Iraq."

   Senator John Edwards (Democrat, North Carolina)
   US Senate floor statement: "Iraqi Dictator Must Go"
   September 12, 2002



"Without question, we 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.  He miscalculated an eight-year war with Iran.  He miscalculated the invasion of Kuwait.  He miscalculated America's response to that act of naked aggression.  He miscalculated the result of setting oil rigs on fire.  He miscalculated the impact of sending scuds into Israel and trying to assassinate an American President.  He miscalculated his own military strength.  He miscalculated the Arab world's response to his misconduct.  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.

In U.N. Security Council Resolution 1441, the United Nations has now affirmed that Saddam Hussein must disarm or face the most serious consequences.  Let me make it clear that the burden is resoundingly on Saddam Hussein to live up to the ceasefire agreement he signed and make clear to the world how he disposed of weapons he previously admitted to possessing."

   Senator John Kerry (Democrat, Massachusetts)
   Speech at Georgetown University
   January 23, 2003



Congressman Gephardt links Saddam with the threat of terrorists nuking US cities:

BOB SCHIEFFER, Chief Washington Correspondent: And with us now is the Democratic presidential candidate Dick Gephardt.  Congressman, you supported taking military action in Iraq.  Do you think now it was the right thing to do?

REP. RICHARD GEPHARDT, D-MO, Democratic Presidential Candidate: I do.  I base my determination on what I heard from the CIA.  I went out there a couple of times and talked to everybody, including George Tenet.  I talked to people in the Clinton administration.

SCHIEFFER: Well, let me just ask you, do you feel, Congressman, that you were misled?

GEPHARDT: I don't.  I asked very direct questions of the top people in the CIA and people who'd served in the Clinton administration.  And they said they believed that Saddam Hussein either had weapons or had the components of weapons or the ability to quickly make weapons of mass destruction.  What we're worried about is an A-bomb in a Ryder truck in New York, in Washington and St. Louis.  It cannot happen.  We have to prevent it from happening.  And it was on that basis that I voted to do this.

   Congressman Richard Gephardt (Democrat, Montana)
   Interviewed on CBS News "Face the Nation"
   November 2, 2003



"We have not reached parity with them. We have the right to kill 4 million Americans -- 2 million of them children -- and to exile twice as many and wound and cripple hundreds of thousands.  Furthermore, it is our right to fight them with chemical and biological weapons, so as to afflict them with the fatal maladies that have afflicted the Muslims because of the [Americans'] chemical and biological weapons."

   Islamic terrorist group "Al Qaeda"
   June 12, 2002



"[W]e have evidence of meetings between Iraqi officials and leaders of al Qaeda, and testimony that Iraqi agents helped train al Qaeda operatives to use chemical and biological weapons.  We also know that al Qaeda leaders have been, and are now, harbored in Iraq.

Having reached the conclusion I have about the clear and present danger Saddam represents to the U.S., I want to give the president a limited but strong mandate to act against Saddam."

   Senator Joseph Lieberman (Democrat, Connecticut)
   In a Wall Street Journal editorial Lieberman authored titled: "Why Democrats    Should Support the President on Iraq"
   October 7, 2002



"Dear Mr. President: ... We 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 Iraq sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs."


John Kerry, Carl Levin, Joe Lieberman, Frank R. Lautenberg, Dick Lugar, Kit Bond, Jon Kyl, Chris Dodd, John McCain, Kay Bailey Hutchison, Alfonse D'Amato, Bob Kerrey, Pete V. Domenici, Dianne Feinstein, Barbara A. Mikulski, Thomas Daschle, John Breaux, Tim Johnson, Daniel K. Inouye, Arlen Specter, James Inhofe, Strom Thurmond, Mary L. Landrieu, Wendell Ford, Chuck Grassley, Jesse Helms, Rick Santorum.

   Letter to President Clinton
   Signed by Senators Tom Daschle, John Kerry and others
   October 9, 1998



"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.

We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country."

   Al Gore, Former Clinton Vice-President
   Speech to San Francisco Commonwealth Club
   September 23, 2002



Al Gore said last night that the time had come for a "final reckoning" with Iraq, describing the country as a "virulent threat in a class by itself" and suggesting that the United States should consider ways to oust Saddam Hussein.

"Even if we give first priority to the destruction of terrorist networks, and even if we succeed, there are still governments that could bring us great harm.  And there is a clear case that one of these governments in particular represents a virulent threat in a class by itself: Iraq.  As far as I am concerned, a final reckoning with that government should be on the table."

   The New York Times
   Gore, Championing Bush, Calls For a 'Final Reckoning' With Iraq
   February 13, 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 C. Byrd
   Former Ku Klux Klan recruiter, currently a US Senator (Democrat, West Virginia)
   Addressing the US Senate
   October 3, 2002



"Iraq appears not to have come to a genuine acceptance -- not even today -- of the disarmament, which was demanded of it and which it needs to carry out to win the confidence of the world and to live in peace."

   Dr. Hans Blix, Chief UN Weapons Inspector
   Addressing the UN Security Council
   January 27, 2003




"The nerve agent VX is one of the most toxic ever developed.

13,000 chemical bombs were dropped by the Iraqi Air Force between 1983 and 1988, while Iraq has declared that 19,500 bombs were consumed during this period.  Thus, there is a discrepancy of 6,500 bombs.  The amount of chemical agent in these bombs would be in the order of about 1,000 tonnes."

   Dr. Hans Blix, Chief UN Weapons Inspector
   Addressing the UN Security Council
   January 27, 2003




"The recent inspection find in the private home of a scientist of a box of some 3,000 pages of documents, much of it relating to the laser enrichment of uranium support a concern that has long existed that documents might be distributed to the homes of private individuals. ...we cannot help but think that the case might not be isolated and that such placements of documents is deliberate to make discovery difficult and to seek to shield documents by placing them in private homes."

   Dr. Hans Blix, Chief UN Weapons Inspector
   Addressing the UN Security Council
   January 27, 2003




"I have mentioned the issue of anthrax to the Council on previous occasions and I come back to it as it is an important one.

Iraq has declared that it produced about 8,500 litres of this biological warfare agent, which it states it unilaterally destroyed in the summer of 1991.  Iraq has provided little evidence for this production and no convincing evidence for its destruction.

There are strong indications that Iraq produced more anthrax than it declared, and that at least some of this was retained after the declared destruction date.  It might still exist.  Either it should be found and be destroyed under UNMOVIC supervision or else convincing evidence should be produced to show that it was, indeed, destroyed in 1991."

   Dr. Hans Blix, Chief UN Weapons Inspector
   Addressing the UN Security Council
   January 27, 2003




"His regime threatens the safety of his people, the stability of his region, and the security of all the rest of us.

What if he fails to comply, and we fail to act, or we take some ambiguous third route which gives him yet more opportunities to develop this program of weapons of mass destruction and continue to press for the release of the sanctions and continue to ignore the solemn commitments that he made?

Well, he will conclude that the international community has lost its will. He will then conclude that he can go right on and do more to rebuild an arsenal of devastating destruction.

And some day, some way, I guarantee you, he'll use the arsenal."

   President Clinton
   Address to Joint Chiefs of Staff and Pentagon staff
   February 17, 1998



CNN: How did Hussein intend to use the weapon, once it was completed?

HAMZA: Saddam has a whole range of weapons of mass destruction, nuclear, biological and chemical. According to German intelligence estimates, we expect him to have three nuclear weapons by 2005. So, the window will close by 2005, and we expect him then to be a lot more aggressive with his neighbors and encouraging terrorism, and using biological weapons. Now he's using them through surrogates like al Qaeda, but we expect he'll use them more aggressively then.

   Dr. Khidhir Hamza, former Iraqi Nuclear Scientist for 20 years
   Interviewed on CNN
   October 22, 2001



October 10, 2002

House gives Bush authority for war with Iraq

The House voted 296-133 to give Bush the authority to use U.S. military force to make Iraq comply with U.N. resolutions requiring it to give up weapons of mass destruction.



October 11, 2002

Senate approves Iraq war resolution

In a major victory for the White House, the Senate early Friday voted 77-23 to authorize President Bush to attack Iraq if Saddam Hussein refuses to give up weapons of mass destruction as required by U.N. resolutions.



On December 12th, 2003, US forces captured Saddam Hussein as he hid in a dirt hole in Adwar, 10 miles from Tikrit.

"Ladies and gentlemen, we got him," Paul Bremer, the US administrator in Iraq, announced.  "The tyrant is a prisoner."

At a Baghdad press conference officials showed a videotape of Saddam's inspection following his capture.  When the former dictator's face appeared onscreen, Iraqi journalists in the audience immediately jumped up shouting uncontrollably "Death to Saddam!" and "Go to Hell Saddam!" and later broke down sobbing. 

"He was caught like a rat," said Major General Ray Odierno of the 4th Infantry Division.  "It was ironic that he was in a hole in the ground across the river from the great palaces he built using all the money he robbed from the Iraqi people."

In Baghdad, radio stations played celebratory music, residents fired small arms in the air in celebration, and others drove through the streets, shouting, "They got Saddam!  They got Saddam!"

The former dictator was found with a pistol and $750,000 in US currency.

Lieutenant General Ricardo Sanchez said "Saddam Hussein will never return to a position of power from which he can punish, terrorize, intimidate and exploit the Iraqi people as the did for more than 35 years."



"Some have said we must not act until the threat is imminent.  Since when have terrorists and tyrants announced their intentions, politely putting us on notice before they strike?  If this threat is permitted to fully and suddenly emerge, all actions, all words, and all recriminations would come too late.  Trusting in the sanity and restraint of Saddam Hussein is not a strategy, and it is not an option."

   President Bush
   State of the Union address
   January 28, 2003



"We are finding people even as we speak.  Yet we know that there is a very grim task ahead to do everything we can to find every person, to account for every single person who went to work.  That is all they did: they went to work, on a beautiful September day in New York.

We will also stand united behind our President as he and his advisors plan the necessary actions to demonstrate America's resolve and commitment.  Not only to seek out an exact punishment on the perpetrators, but to make very clear that not only those who harbor terrorists, but those who in any way aid or comfort them whatsoever will now face the wrath of our country.  And I hope that that message has gotten through to everywhere it needs to be heard.  You are either with America in our time of need or you are not.

We also stand united behind our resolve -- as this resolution so clearly states -- to recover and rebuild in the aftermath of these tragic acts.  You know, New York was not an accidental choice for these madmen, these terrorists, these instruments of evil."

    Senator Hillary Clinton (Democrat, New York)
    Addressing the US Senate
    September 12, 2001



"The global community -- in the form of the United Nations -- has declared repeatedly, through multiple resolutions, that the frightening prospect of a nuclear-armed Saddam cannot come to pass.  But the U.N. has been unable to enforce those resolutions.  We must eliminate that threat now, before it is too late.

But this isn't just a future threat.  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.

As the attacks of September 11 demonstrated, the immense destructiveness of modern technology means we can no longer afford to wait around for a smoking gun.  September 11 demonstrated that the fact that an attack on our homeland has not yet occurred cannot give us any false sense of security that one will not occur in the future.  We no longer have that luxury.

September 11 changed America.  It made us realize we must deal differently with the very real threat of terrorism, whether it comes from shadowy groups operating in the mountains of Afghanistan or in 70 other countries around the world, including our own.

There has been some debate over how "imminent" a threat Iraq poses.  I do believe that Iraq poses an imminent threat, but I also believe that after September 11, that question is increasingly outdated.  It is in the nature of these weapons, and the way they are targeted against civilian populations, that documented capability and demonstrated intent may be the only warning we get.  To insist on further evidence could put some of our fellow Americans at risk.  Can we afford to take that chance?  We cannot!

The President has rightly called Saddam Hussein's efforts to develop weapons of mass destruction a grave and gathering threat to Americans.  The global community has tried but failed to address that threat over the past decade.  I have come to the inescapable conclusion that the threat posed to America by Saddam's weapons of mass destruction is so serious that despite the risks -- and we should not minimize the risks -- we must authorize the President to take the necessary steps to deal with that threat."

   Senator John D. Rockefeller (Democrat, West Virginia)
   Also a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee
   Addressing the US Senate
   October 10, 2002



UN weapons inspectors were forced to leave Iraq in 1998:

November 5, 1998

U.N. Security Council votes to condemn Iraq

The United Nations Security Council late Thursday voted unanimously to condemn Iraq and to demand that Baghdad immediately resume cooperation with U.N. weapons inspectors.  Baghdad has already said it will not comply.

The resolution called Iraq's decision last week to halt cooperation with the U.N. Special Commission a "flagrant violation" of the 1991 resolution on Iraqi disarmament.  It is the 45th U.N. resolution involving Iraq since the country invaded Kuwait in 1990.



"As a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, I firmly believe that the issue of Iraq is not about politics.  It's about national security.  We know that for at least 20 years, Saddam Hussein has obsessively sought weapons of mass destruction through every means available.  We know that he has chemical and biological weapons today.  He has used them in the past, and he is doing everything he can to build more.  Each day he inches closer to his longtime goal of nuclear capability -- a capability that could be less than a year away.

I believe that Saddam Hussein's Iraqi regime represents a clear threat to the United States, to our allies, to our interests around the world, and to the values of freedom and democracy we hold dear.

What's more, the terrorist threat against America is all too clear.  Thousands of terrorist operatives around the world would pay anything to get their hands on Saddam's arsenal, and there is every possibility that he could turn his weapons over to these terrorists.  No one can doubt that if the terrorists of September 11th had weapons of mass destruction, they would have used them.  On September 12, 2002, we can hardly ignore the terrorist threat, and the serious danger that Saddam would allow his arsenal to be used in aid of terror.

The time has come for decisive action.  With our allies, we must do whatever is necessary to guard against the threat posed by an Iraq armed with weapons of mass destruction, and under the thumb of Saddam Hussein.

The United States must lead an international effort to remove the regime of Saddam Hussein -- and to assure that Iraq fulfills its obligations to the international community.

This is not an easy decision, and it carries many risks.  It will also carry costs, certainly in resources, and almost certainly in lives.  After careful consideration, I believe that the risk of inaction is far greater than the risk of action.

We must address the most insidious threat posed by weapons of mass destruction -- the threat that comes from the ability of terrorists to obtain them.

The path of confronting Saddam is full of hazards.  But the path of inaction is far more dangerous.  This week, a week where we remember the sacrifice of thousands of innocent Americans made on 9-11, the choice could not be starker.  Had we known that such attacks were imminent, we surely would have used every means at our disposal to prevent them and take out the plotters.  We cannot wait for such a terrible event -- or, if weapons of mass destruction are used, one far worse -- to address the clear and present danger posed by Saddam Hussein's Iraq."

   Senator John Edwards (Democrat, North Carolina)
   Addressing the US Senate
   September 12, 2002



"Dear Mr. President:

The events of September 11 have highlighted the vulnerability of the United States to determined terrorists. As we work to clean up Afghanistan and destroy al Qaeda, it is imperative that we plan to eliminate the threat from Iraq.

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.

The threat from Iraq is real, and it cannot be permanently contained. For as long as Saddam Hussein is in power in Baghdad, he will seek to acquire weapons of mass destruction and the means to deliver them. We have no doubt that these deadly weapons are intended for use against the United States and its allies. Consequently, we believe we must directly confront Saddam, sooner rather than later.

Mr. President, all indications are that in the interest of our own national security, Saddam Hussein must be removed from power."


       Congressman Harold Ford (Democrat, Tennessee)
       Senator Bob Graham (Democrat, Florida)
       Congressman Tom Lantos (Democrat, California)
       Senator Joseph Lieberman (Democrat, Connecticut)

       Senator Sam Brownback (Republican, Kansas)
       Senator Jesse Helms (Republican, North Carolina)
       Congressman Henry Hyde (Republican, Illinois)
       Senator Trent Lott (Republican, Mississippi)
       Senator John McCain (Republican, Arizona)
       Senator Richard Shelby (Republican, Alabama)

Letter to President Bush
December 5, 2001



"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."

   Congressman Henry Waxman (Democrat, California)
   Addressing the US Congress
   October 10, 2002



"Heavy as they are, the costs of action must be weighed against the price of inaction.  If Saddam defies the world and we fail to respond, we will face a far greater threat in the future.  Saddam will strike again at his neighbors; he will make war on his own people.  And mark my words, he will develop weapons of mass destruction.  He will deploy them, and he will use them."

   President Clinton
   National Address from the Oval Office
   December 16, 1998




"Ten years after the Gulf War and Saddam is still there and still continues to stockpile weapons of mass destruction.  Now there are suggestions he is working with al Qaeda, which means the very terrorists who attacked the United States last September may now have access to chemical and biological weapons."

   James P. Rubin, President Clinton's State Department spokesman
   In a PBS documentary titled "Saddam's Ultimate Solution"
   July 11, 2002



Full text of Resolution authorizing US military force against Iraq.

US Senators who voted YES to authorize the use of United States Armed Forces against Iraq:

Allard, Wayne (R-CO)
Allen, George (R-VA)
Baucus, Max (D-MT)
Bayh, Evan (D-IN)
Bennett, Robert (R-UT)
Biden, Joseph (D-DE)
Bond, Christopher (R-MO)
Breaux, John (D-LA)
Brownback, Sam (R-KS)
Bunning, Jim (R-KY)
Burns, Conrad (R-MT)
Campbell, Ben (R-CO)
Cantwell, Maria (D-WA)
Carnahan, Jean (D-MO)
Carper, Thomas (D-DE)
Cleland, Max (D-GA)
Clinton, Hillary (D-NY)
Cochran, Thad (R-MS)
Collins, Susan (R-ME)
Craig, Larry (R-ID)
Crapo, Michael (R-ID)
Daschle, Tom (D-SD)
DeWine, Mike (R-OH)
Dodd, Christopher (D-CT)
Domenici, Pete (R-NM)
Dorgan, Byron (D-ND)
Edwards, John (D-NC)
Ensign, John (R-NV)
Enzi, Michael (R-WY)
Feinstein, Dianne (D-CA)
Fitzgerald, Peter (R-IL)
Frist, Bill (R-TN)
Gramm, Phil (R-TX)
Grassley, Chuck (R-IA)
Gregg, Judd (R-NH)
Hagel, Chuck (R-NE)
Harkin, Tom (D-IA)
Hatch, Orrin (R-UT)
Helms, Jesse (R-NC)
Hollings, Ernest (D-SC)
Hutchinson, Tim (R-AR)
Hutchison, Kay (R-TX)
Inhofe, James (R-OK)
Johnson, Tim (D-SD)
Kerry, John (D-MA)
Kohl, Herb (D-WI)
Kyl, Jon (R-AZ)
Landrieu, Mary (D-LA)
Lieberman, Joseph (D-CT)
Lincoln, Blanche (D-AR)
Lott, Trent (R-MS)
Lugar, Richard (R-IN)
McCain, John (R-AZ)
McConnell, Mitch (R-KY)
Miller, Zell (D-GA)
Murkowski, Lisa (R-AK)
Nelson, Bill (D-FL)
Nelson, Ben (D-NE)
Nickles, Don (R-OK)
Reid, Harry (D-NV)
Roberts, Pat (R-KS)
Rockefeller, John (D-WV)
Santorum, Rick (R-PA)
Schumer, Charles (D-NY)
Sessions, Jeff (R-AL)
Shelby, Richard (R-AL)
Smith, Robert (R-NH)
Smith, Gordon (R-OR)
Snowe, Olympia (R-ME)
Specter, Arlen (R-PA)
Stevens, Ted (R-AK)
Thomas, Craig (R-WY)
Thompson, Fred (R-TN)
Thurmond, Strom (R-SC)
Torricelli, Robert (D-NJ)
Voinovich, George (R-OH)
Warner, John (R-VA)


Full text of Resolution authorizing US military force against Iraq.

US Congressional Representatives who voted YES to authorize the use of United States Armed Forces against Iraq:

Brady (TX)
Brown (SC)
Carson (OK)
Davis (FL)
Davis, Jo Ann
Davis, Tom
Green (TX)
Green (WI)
Hall (TX)
Hastings (WA)
Johnson (CT)
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, Sam
Jones (NC)
Kennedy (MN)
Kennedy (RI)
Kind (WI)
King (NY)
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (KY)
Lucas (KY)
Lucas (OK)
Maloney (NY)
McCarthy (NY)
Miller, Dan
Miller, Gary
Miller, Jeff
Moran (KS)
Peterson (MN)
Peterson (PA)
Pryce (OH)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Ryan (WI)
Ryun (KS)
Smith (MI)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Smith (WA)
Taylor (MS)
Taylor (NC)
Watkins (OK)
Watts (OK)
Weldon (FL)
Weldon (PA)
Wilson (NM)
Wilson (SC)
Young (AK)
Young (FL)


US State Department
November 4, 1998

Bin Laden, Atef Indicted in U.S. Federal Court for African Bombings

New York -- Usama bin Laden and Muhammad Atef were indicted November 4 in Manhattan federal court for the August 7 bombings of the US embassies in Nairobi, Kenya, and Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, and for conspiring to kill Americans outside the United States.

Bin Laden's "al Qaeda" organization functioned both on its own and through other terrorist organizations, including the Al Jihad group based in Egypt, the Islamic Group also known as el Gamaa Islamia led at one time by Sheik Omar Abdel Rahman, and a number of other jihad groups in countries such as Sudan, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, and Somalia.

Bin Laden, the US Attorney charged, engaged in business transactions on behalf of Al Qaeda, including purchasing warehouses for storage of explosives, transporting weapons, and establishing a series of companies in Sudan to provide income to al Qaeda and as a cover for the procurement of explosives, weapons, and chemicals, and for the travel of operatives.

According to the indictment, bin Laden and al Qaeda forged alliances with the National Islamic Front in Sudan and with representatives of the Government of Iran and its associated terrorist group Hezballah with the goal of working together against their common enemies in the West, particularly the United States.

"In addition, al Qaeda reached an understanding with the Government of Iraq that al Qaeda would not work against that government and that on particular projects, specifically including weapons development, al Qaeda would work cooperatively with the Government of Iraq," the indictment said.

Beginning in 1992, bin Laden allegedly issued through his "fatwah" committees a series of escalating "fatwahs" against the United States, certain military personnel, and, eventually in February 1998, a "fatwah" stating that Muslims should kill Americans -- including civilians -- anywhere in the world they can be found.



US Senators who voted YES to the "PATRIOT ACT" - October 25, 2001:

Measure Number: H.R. 3162 (Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism (USA PATRIOT ACT) Act of 2001 )

Measure Title: A bill to deter and punish terrorist acts in the United States and around the world, to enhance law enforcement investigatory tools, and for other purposes.

Akaka, Daniel (D-HI)
Allard, Wayne (R-CO)
Allen, George (R-VA)
Baucus, Max (D-MT)
Bayh, Evan (D-IN)
Bennett, Robert (R-UT)
Biden, Joseph (D-DE)
Bingaman (D-NM)
Bond, Christopher (R-MO)
Boxer, Barbara (D-CA)
Breaux, John (D-LA)
Brownback, Sam (R-KS)
Bunning, Jim (R-KY)
Burns, Conrad (R-MT)
Byrd, Robert (D-WV)
Campbell, Ben (R-CO)
Cantwell, Maria (D-WA)
Carnahan, Jean (D-MO)
Carper, Thomas (D-DE)
Chafee, Lincoln (R-RI)
Cleland, Max (D-GA)
Clinton, Hillary (D-NY)
Cochran, Thad (R-MS)
Collins, Susan (R-ME)
Conrad, Kent (D-ND)
Corzine, Jon (D-NJ)
Craig, Larry (R-ID)
Crapo, Michael (R-ID)
Daschle, Tom (D-SD)
Dayton, Mark (D-MN)
DeWine, Mike (R-OH)
Dodd, Christopher (D-CT)
Domenici, Pete (R-NM)
Dorgan, Byron (D-ND)
Durbin, Richard (D-IL)
Edwards, John (D-NC)
Ensign, John (R-NV)
Enzi, Michael (R-WY)
Feinstein, Dianne (D-CA)
Fitzgerald, Peter (R-IL)
Frist, Bill (R-TN)
Graham, Bob (D-FL)
Gramm, Phil (R-TX)
Grassley, Chuck (R-IA)
Gregg, Judd (R-NH)
Hagel, Chuck (R-NE)
Harkin, Tom (D-IA)
Hatch, Orrin (R-UT)
Helms, Jesse (R-NC)
Hollings, Ernest (D-SC)
Hutchinson, Tim (R-AR)
Hutchison, Kay (R-TX)
Inhofe, James (R-OK)
Inouye, Daniel (D-HI)
Jeffords, Jim (I-VT)
Johnson, Tim (D-SD)
Kennedy, Edward (D-MA)
Kerry, John (D-MA)
Kohl, Herb (D-WI)
Kyl, Jon (R-AZ)
Leahy, Patrick (D-VT)
Levin, Carl (D-MI)
Lieberman, Joseph (D-CT)
Lincoln, Blanche (D-AR)
Lott, Trent (R-MS)
Lugar, Richard (R-IN)
McCain, John (R-AZ)
McConnell, Mitch (R-KY)
Mikulski, Barbara (D-MD)
Miller, Zell (D-GA)
Murkowski, Lisa (R-AK)
Murray, Patty (D-WA)
Nelson, Bill (D-FL)
Nelson, Ben (D-NE)
Nickles, Don (R-OK)
Reed, Jack (D-RI)
Reid, Harry (D-NV)
Roberts, Pat (R-KS)
Rockefeller, John (D-WV)
Santorum, Rick (R-PA)
Sarbanes, Paul (D-MD)
Schumer, Charles (D-NY)
Sessions, Jeff (R-AL)
Shelby, Richard (R-AL)
Smith, Robert (R-NH)
Smith, Gordon (R-OR)
Snowe, Olympia (R-ME)
Specter, Arlen (R-PA)
Stabenow, Debbie (D-MI)
Stevens, Ted (R-AK)
Thomas, Craig (R-WY)
Thompson, Fred (R-TN)
Thurmond, Strom (R-SC)
Torricelli, Robert (D-NJ)
Voinovich, George (R-OH)
Warner, John (R-VA)
Wellstone, Paul (D-MN)
Wyden, Ron (D-OR)


US Senators who voted YES to reauthorize the "PATRIOT ACT" - March 2, 2006:

Measure Number: H.R. 3199 (USA PATRIOT Improvement and Reauthorization Act of 2005)

Measure Title: A bill to extend and modify authorities needed to combat terrorism, and for other purposes.

Alexander, Lamar (R-TN)
Allard, Wayne (R-CO)
Allen, George (R-VA)
Baucus, Max (D-MT)
Bayh, Evan (D-IN)
Bennett, Robert (R-UT)
Biden, Joseph (D-DE)
Bond, Christopher (R-MO)
Boxer, Barbara (D-CA)
Brownback, Sam (R-KS)
Bunning, Jim (R-KY)
Burns, Conrad (R-MT)
Burr, Richard (R-NC)
Cantwell, Maria (D-WA)
Carper, Thomas (D-DE)
Chafee, Lincoln (R-RI)
Chambliss, Saxby (R-GA)
Clinton, Hillary (D-NY)
Coburn, Tom (R-OK)
Cochran, Thad (R-MS)
Coleman, Norm (R-MN)
Collins, Susan (R-ME)
Conrad, Kent (D-ND)
Cornyn, Jon (R-TX)
Craig, Larry (R-ID)
Crapo, Michael (R-ID)
Dayton, Mark (D-MN)
DeMint, Jim (R-SC)
DeWine, Mike (R-OH)
Dodd, Christopher (D-CT)
Dole, Elizabeth (R-NC)
Domenici, Pete (R-NM)
Dorgan, Byron (D-ND)
Durbin, Richard (D-IL)
Ensign, John (R-NV)
Enzi, Michael (R-WY)
Feinstein, Dianne (D-CA)
Frist, Bill (R-TN)
Graham, Lindsey (R-SC)
Grassley, Chuck (R-IA)
Gregg, Judd (R-NH)
Hagel, Chuck (R-NE)
Hatch, Orrin (R-UT)
Hutchison, Kay (R-TX)
Inhofe, James (R-OK)
Isakson, Johnny (R-GA)
Johnson, Tim (D-SD)
Kennedy, Edward (D-MA)
Kerry, John (D-MA)
Kohl, Herb (D-WI)
Kyl, Jon (R-AZ)
Landrieu, Mary (D-LA)
Lautenberg, Frank (D-NJ)
Lieberman, Joseph (D-CT)
Lincoln, Blanche (D-AR)
Lott, Trent (R-MS)
Lugar, Richard (R-IN)
Martinez, Mel (R-FL)
McCain, John (R-AZ)
McConnell, Mitch (R-KY)
Menendez, Robert (D-NJ)
Mikulski, Barbara (D-MD)
Murkowski, Lisa (R-AK)
Nelson, Ben (D-NE)
Nelson, Bill (D-FL)
Obama, Barack (D-IL)
Pryor, Mark (D-AR)
Reed, Jack (D-RI)
Reid, Harry (D-NV)
Roberts, Pat (R-KS)
Rockefeller, John (D-WV)
Salazar, Ken (D-CO)
Santorum, Rick (R-PA)
Sarbanes, Paul (D-MD)
Schumer, Charles (D-NY)
Sessions, Jeff (R-AL)
Shelby, Richard (R-AL)
Smith, Gordon (R-OR)
Snowe, Olympi (R-ME)
Specter, Arlen (R-PA)
Stabenow, Debbie (D-MI)
Stevens, Ted (R-AK)
Sununu, John (R-NH)
Talent, Jim (R-MO)
Thomas, Craig (R-WY)
Thune, John (R-SD)
Vitter, David (R-LA)
Voinovich, George (R-OH)
Warner, John (R-VA)


This entry is not related to Iraq specifically, but contains some very interesting information.  In August 2002 Richard A. Clarke, former chief counter-terrorism adviser, discusses US strategy in dealing with islamic terrorists:

RICHARD CLARKE: Actually, I've got about seven points, let me just go through them quickly.  Um, the first point, I think the overall point is, there was no plan on Al Qaeda that was passed from the Clinton administration to the Bush administration.

Second point is that the Clinton administration had a strategy in place, effectively dating from 1998.  And there were a number of issues on the table since 1998.  And they remained on the table when that administration went out of office -- issues like aiding the Northern Alliance in Afghanistan, changing our Pakistan policy -- uh, changing our policy toward Uzbekistan.  And in January 2001, the incoming Bush administration was briefed on the existing strategy.  They were also briefed on these series of issues that had not been decided on in a couple of years.

And the third point is the Bush administration decided then, you know, in late January, to do two things.  One, vigorously pursue the existing policy, including all of the lethal covert action findings, which we've now made public to some extent.

And the point is, while this big review was going on, there were still in effect, the lethal findings were still in effect.  The second thing the administration decided to do is to initiate a process to look at those issues which had been on the table for a couple of years and get them decided.

So, point five, that process which was initiated in the first week in February, uh, decided in principle, uh in the spring to add to the existing Clinton strategy and to increase CIA resources, for example, for covert action, five-fold, to go after Al Qaeda.

The sixth point, the newly-appointed deputies -- and you had to remember, the deputies didn't get into office until late March, early April.  The deputies then tasked the development of the implementation details, uh, of these new decisions that they were endorsing, and sending out to the principals.

Over the course of the summer -- last point -- they developed implementation details, the principals met at the end of the summer, approved them in their first meeting, changed the strategy by authorizing the increase in funding five-fold, changing the policy on Pakistan, changing the policy on Uzbekistan, changing the policy on the Northern Alliance assistance.

And then changed the strategy from one of rollback with Al Qaeda over the course of five years, which it had been, to a new strategy that called for the rapid elimination of Al Qaeda.  That is in fact the timeline.

QUESTION: What is your response to the suggestion in the [Aug 12, 2002] Time [magazine] article that the Bush administration was unwilling to take on board the suggestions made in the Clinton administration because of animus against the -- general animus against the foreign policy?

CLARKE: I think if there was a general animus that clouded their vision, they might not have kept the same guy dealing with terrorism issue.  This is the one issue where the National Security Council leadership decided continuity was important and kept the same guy around, the same team in place.  That doesn't sound like animus against, uh, the previous team to me.

JIM ANGLE: You're saying that the Bush administration did not stop anything that the Clinton administration was doing while it was making these decisions, and by the end of the summer had increased money for covert action five-fold.  Is that correct?

CLARKE: All of that's correct.

ANGLE: So, just to finish up if we could then, so what you're saying is that there was no -- one, there was no plan; two, there was no delay; and that actually the first changes since October of '98 were made in the spring months just after the administration came into office?

CLARKE: You got it.  That's right.

   Richard A. Clarke
   Former chief counter-terrorism adviser
   August, 2002



Note: As some of these comments above are embarrassing, some of the specific web pages cited may mysteriously disappear.  In some cases, multiple links have been provided to bypass such disappearances.

Links to the above cited web pages were all working and verified at the time of posting, and the original web pages and text have been archived in their entirety for historical purposes.  All dates and citations provided are 100% accurate to facilitate further research.