I'm tired of Hannity's "Clinton made more definitive charges against Iraq"

... leading up the operation Desert Fox. Hannity claims (over and over) that Bill Clinton gave stronger reasons, used the same intelligence, and made more "definitive" charges or reasons for the bombing of Iraq in 1998.

Here's what he said on Dec. 16, 1998:

"Earlier today I ordered America's armed forces to strike military and security targets in Iraq. They are joined by British forces," Clinton said.

"Their mission is to attack Iraq's nuclear, chemical and biological weapons programs and its military capacity to threaten its neighbors,"

All through this article, weapons programs was stressed:

http://www.cnn.com/US/9812/16/clinton.iraq.speech/

I can find no "definitive" (Hannity's word) statement made by Clinton that rises to the level of:

Iraq was involved in 9/11.

Iraq was working with Al Queda.

Iraq was six months away from a nuke.

Bush cast as present evidence the contents of a report from 1996. In those accounts, the IAEA described the history of an Iraqi nuclear weapons program that arms inspectors had systematically destroyed.

Iraq obtained uranium from Nigeria.

Iraq has made several attempts to buy high-strength aluminum tubes used to enrich uranium for a nuclear weapon.

Iraq was stockpiling chemical and biological weapons.

Iraq could deploy weapons of mass destruction within 45 minutes of an order to do so.

So, what were Clinton's "definitive" statements? Anyone?

but that 1998 bombing was a discrace and clinton and blair should hang thier heads in shame..

... Hannity spouts that Clinton used even stronger and definitive reasons for the action in an attempt to dismiss those who say Bush lied.

remember that recent study of people with right wing leaning views having some "problems" like fear of things that are unknown. hannity is a good fit for it.