Moran Applauds Capture Of Saddam After Previously Opposing War And Blaming It On Jews

"With this week's capture of Saddam Hussein, the Iraqi people will see a brutal dictator brought to justice for heinous crimes and the terrorizing of a nation...With Saddam's capture, the citizens of Iraq now know their future will be free of an oppressive ruler who brutalized them and exploited the country's resources. Although I opposed the Bush Administration's preemptive and unilateral approach toward the Iraq war, I am very pleased that Saddam will no longer pose a threat to his country and the world." (italics added)

Moran has thus now come around to the positions that:

• Saddam committed heinous crimes and terrorized Iraq;
• The citizens of Iraq were not free;
• Saddam threatened the world; and
• It is good for US troops to hunt down Saddam.

Compare Moran's support for the capture of Hussein to what Moran's own website says was his position at the time:

"A second, sponsored by Reps. John Spratt (D-S.C.) and James P. Moran (D-Va.), would have authorized U.S military action only if it is sanctioned by the U.N. Security Council or, failing that, if it is sanctioned by a second congressional vote. It lost 270-155."

Moran's newfound support for going after Saddam was certainly not in evidence last March, when he originally claimed in Reston that: "If it were not for the strong support of the Jewish community for this war with Iraq, we would not be doing this...The leaders of the Jewish community are influential enough that they could change the direction of where this is going, and I think they should."

Is Moran two faced? Does he support the results of the war in Iraq but not the war? Does he oppose the war when speaking before an anti-war audience in Reston but support it otherwise?

<  |  >