1)claims of terrorist ties that did not, and do not hold true
2)claims concerning WMD that did not, and do not hold true- including claims of certain knowledge of location of the WMD (Rumsfeld claimed Tikrit)
3)claims of Iraqi attempted purchase of fissile materials that did not and do not hold true.

1,2 and 3, also and BTW, were not claimed by Clinton, UN or Europe in the clear affirmative in 2000, 2001, or 2003 to my knowledge. Please inform me if I am wrong.

As per your corrections, and my reference to 1441, you did note that the U.N. was indeed convinced there was WMD in Iraq in 2002.

As for the Clinton Administration, it is a matter of record that they and most Democratic leaders were totally convinced of both Saddam's weapons and terrorism links back in the late 1990s. I can scratch up documentation if you want, but it really shouldn't be necessary. Their sudden turnaround in recent months is political, and not related to any real facts.

This web site collects comments from various political leaders and their opinions on WMD. Many quotes are from the years you specify. I think you already dismissed the Chirac quote. Apparently his belief that Iraq had WMD is not conclusive enough for you.

So if Clinton was not lying in 1998, where did all the weapons go between then and now?

You seem to be trying to slide around to the conclusion that sometime between Gore losing the election and Bush being inaugurated, that Saddam suddenly got religion and abandoned or destroyed his entire extensive weapons program, and that Bush made everything up. Am I really supposed to buy this?