Terrorists are pu**ies

[catocom]

Never a waste to bring the truth to the table.

This was Oct-7-2002.

Some worry that a change of leadership in Iraq could create instability and make the situation worse. The situation could hardly get worse, for world security and for the people of Iraq. The lives of Iraqi citizens would improve dramatically if Saddam Hussein were no longer in power, just as the lives of Afghanistan's citizens improved after the Taliban. The dictator of Iraq is a student of Stalin, using murder as a tool of terror and control, within his own cabinet, within his own army, and even within his own family.

On Saddam Hussein's orders, opponents have been decapitated, wives and mothers of political opponents have been systematically raped as a method of intimidation, and political prisoners have been forced to watch their own children being tortured.

America believes that all people are entitled to hope and human rights, to the non-negotiable demands of human dignity. People everywhere prefer freedom to slavery; prosperity to squalor; self-government to the rule of terror and torture. America is a friend to the people of Iraq. Our demands are directed only at the regime that enslaves them and threatens us. When these demands are met, the first and greatest benefit will come to Iraqi men, women and children. The oppression of Kurds, Assyrians, Turkomans, Shi'a, Sunnis and others will be lifted. The long captivity of Iraq will end, and an era of new hope will begin.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/10/20021007-8.html


Need more refs? I can dig some more.

 

[freako104]

no but to me its all bs since it didnt come out til after we started having the luck we did with the WMDs

 

[Gonz]

no but to me its all bs since it didnt come out til after we started having the luck we did with the WMDs

This was Oct-7-2002.

 

[MrBishop]

Bish, in principle, your thoughts on the media make sense. Don't give them a spotlight & they'll have nothing to look for. Then I realize that terrorism began around the French revolution (another fine French product) & there was no CNN or NY Times then.

It was mostly tongue-in-cheek....mind you, a lot of truth is said in jest.

You can't reign in the media any more than you can stop people from rubberknecking at a carcrash. It's that seedier hidden-behind-the-fridge part of our human nature.

 

[The Other One]

Clinton awards Halliburton a no-bid contract in Yugoslavia - That was a
good thing.
Bush awards Halliburton a no-bid contract in Iraq - That was a bad
thing.

Clinton spends 77 billion on war in Serbia - That was good.
Bush spends 87 billion in Iraq - That was bad.

Clinton imposes regime change in Serbia - good.
Bush imposes regime change in Iraq - bad.

Clinton bombs Christian Serbs on behalf of Muslim Albanian terrorists -
good.
Bush liberates 25 million from a genocidal dictator - bad.

Clinton bombs Chinese embassy - good.
Bush bombs terrorist camps - bad.

Clinton commits felonies while in office - good.
Bush lands on aircraft carrier in jumpsuit - bad.

Clinton says there are mass graves in Serbia - good.
Entire world says there are WMD in Iraq - bad.

No mass graves found in Serbia - good.
Not many (12) WMD found in Iraq - bad.

Stock market crashes in 2000 under Clinton - good.
Slow Recovery under Bush - bad.

Clinton refuses to take custody of terrorist Bin Laden - good.
Bin Laden attacks World Trade Center and Pentagon under Bush - bad.

Terrorist training camps operate in Afghanistan under Clinton - good.
Bush destroys terrorist training camps in Afghanistan - bad.

Clinton says Saddam has nukes - good.
Bush says Saddam has nukes - bad.

Clinton calls for regime change in Iraq - good.
Bush imposes regime change in Iraq - bad.

Clinton rewards North Korea for nuclear blackmail - good.
Bush stands up to North Korean nuclear blackmail - bad.

Milosevic in custody almost three years without being convicted - good.
Saddam in custody almost seven months without being convicted - bad

 

[freako104]

right and when were we looking for the WMDS? I remember we were there only a few months

 

[catocom]

right and when were we looking for the WMDS? I remember we were there only a few months

You've lost me again.
I don't understand the question, or the statement.
Could you rephrase?

 

[freako104]

how long were we looking for the WMDs? it was well before he mentioned the possible links

 

[Gonz]

Before the war...

Sept 14 2002

Saddam Hussein's regime continues to support terrorist groups and to oppress its civilian population. It refuses to account for missing Gulf War personnel, or to end illicit trade outside the U.N.'s oil-for-food program. And although the regime agreed in 1991 to destroy and stop developing all weapons of mass destruction and long-range missiles, it has broken every aspect of this fundamental pledge.

By supporting terrorist groups, repressing its own people and pursuing weapons of mass destruction in defiance of a decade of U.N. resolutions, Saddam Hussein's regime has proven itself a grave and gathering danger. To suggest otherwise is to hope against the evidence. To assume this regime's good faith is to bet the lives of millions and the peace of the world in a reckless gamble. And this is a risk we must not take.

Saddam Hussein's defiance has confronted the United Nations with a difficult and defining moment: Are Security Council resolutions to be honored and enforced, or cast aside without consequence? Will the United Nations serve the purposes of its founding, or will it be irrelevant?

Sept 12 2002, at the UN

Last year, the U.N. Commission on Human Rights found that Iraq continues to commit extremely grave violations of human rights, and that the regime's repression is all pervasive. Tens of thousands of political opponents and ordinary citizens have been subjected to arbitrary arrest and imprisonment, summary execution, and torture by beating and burning, electric shock, starvation, mutilation, and rape. Wives are tortured in front of their husbands, children in the presence of their parents -- and all of these horrors concealed from the world by the apparatus of a totalitarian state.

If the Iraqi regime wishes peace, it will immediately and unconditionally forswear, disclose, and remove or destroy all weapons of mass destruction, long-range missiles, and all related material.

If the Iraqi regime wishes peace, it will immediately end all support for terrorism and act to suppress it, as all states are required to do by U.N. Security Council resolutions.

If the Iraqi regime wishes peace, it will cease persecution of its civilian population, including Shi'a, Sunnis, Kurds, Turkomans, and others, again as required by Security Council resolutions.

If the Iraqi regime wishes peace, it will release or account for all Gulf War personnel whose fate is still unknown. It will return the remains of any who are deceased, return stolen property, accept liability for losses resulting from the invasion of Kuwait, and fully cooperate with international efforts to resolve these issues, as required by Security Council resolutions.

If the Iraqi regime wishes peace, it will immediately end all illicit trade outside the oil-for-food program. It will accept U.N. administration of funds from that program, to ensure that the money is used fairly and promptly for the benefit of the Iraqi people.

Oct 7, 2002.

The threat comes from Iraq. It arises directly from the Iraqi regime's own actions -- its history of aggression, and its drive toward an arsenal of terror. Eleven years ago, as a condition for ending the Persian Gulf War, the Iraqi regime was required to destroy its weapons of mass destruction, to cease all development of such weapons, and to stop all support for terrorist groups. The Iraqi regime has violated all of those obligations. It possesses and produces chemical and biological weapons. It is seeking nuclear weapons. It has given shelter and support to terrorism, and practices terror against its own people. The entire world has witnessed Iraq's eleven-year history of defiance, deception and bad faith.

First, some ask why Iraq is different from other countries or regimes that also have terrible weapons. While there are many dangers in the world, the threat from Iraq stands alone -- because it gathers the most serious dangers of our age in one place. Iraq's weapons of mass destruction are controlled by a murderous tyrant who has already used chemical weapons to kill thousands of people. This same tyrant has tried to dominate the Middle East, has invaded and brutally occupied a small neighbor, has struck other nations without warning, and holds an unrelenting hostility toward the United States.

And that is the source of our urgent concern about Saddam Hussein's links to international terrorist groups. Over the years, Iraq has provided safe haven to terrorists such as Abu Nidal, whose terror organization carried out more than 90 terrorist attacks in 20 countries that killed or injured nearly 900 people, including 12 Americans. Iraq has also provided safe haven to Abu Abbas, who was responsible for seizing the Achille Lauro and killing an American passenger. And we know that Iraq is continuing to finance terror and gives assistance to groups that use terrorism to undermine Middle East peace.

We know that Iraq and the al Qaeda terrorist network share a common enemy -- the United States of America. We know that Iraq and al Qaeda have had high-level contacts that go back a decade. Some al Qaeda leaders who fled Afghanistan went to Iraq. These include one very senior al Qaeda leader who received medical treatment in Baghdad this year, and who has been associated with planning for chemical and biological attacks. We've learned that Iraq has trained al Qaeda members in bomb-making and poisons and deadly gases. And we know that after September the 11th, Saddam Hussein's regime gleefully celebrated the terrorist attacks on America.

Some have argued that confronting the threat from Iraq could detract from the war against terror. To the contrary; confronting the threat posed by Iraq is crucial to winning the war on terror. When I spoke to Congress more than a year ago, I said that those who harbor terrorists are as guilty as the terrorists themselves. Saddam Hussein is harboring terrorists and the instruments of terror, the instruments of mass death and destruction. And he cannot be trusted. The risk is simply too great that he will use them, or provide them to a terror network.

Knowing these realities, America must not ignore the threat gathering against us. Facing clear evidence of peril, we cannot wait for the final proof -- the smoking gun -- that could come in the form of a mushroom cloud. As President Kennedy said in October of 1962, "Neither the United States of America, nor the world community of nations can tolerate deliberate deception and offensive threats on the part of any nation, large or small. We no longer live in a world," he said, "where only the actual firing of weapons represents a sufficient challenge to a nations security to constitute maximum peril."

On Saddam Hussein's orders, opponents have been decapitated, wives and mothers of political opponents have been systematically raped as a method of intimidation, and political prisoners have been forced to watch their own children being tortured.

America believes that all people are entitled to hope and human rights, to the non-negotiable demands of human dignity. People everywhere prefer freedom to slavery; prosperity to squalor; self-government to the rule of terror and torture. America is a friend to the people of Iraq. Our demands are directed only at the regime that enslaves them and threatens us. When these demands are met, the first and greatest benefit will come to Iraqi men, women and children. The oppression of Kurds, Assyrians, Turkomans, Shi'a, Sunnis and others will be lifted. The long captivity of Iraq will end, and an era of new hope will begin.

Iraq is a land rich in culture, resources, and talent. Freed from the weight of oppression, Iraq's people will be able to share in the progress and prosperity of our time. If military action is necessary, the United States and our allies will help the Iraqi people rebuild their economy, and create the institutions of liberty in a unified Iraq at peace with its neighbors.

Most every speech is about WMDs. They were the threat to the US & our allies.

 

[freako104]

they were a perceived threat. Kung Jim Il is much more a threat

 

[catocom]

they were a perceived threat. Kung Jim Il is much more a threat

So now your saying your for pulling out of Iraq, and going "back" to
Korea full force?

 

[catocom]

how long were we looking for the WMDs? it was well before he mentioned the possible links

Links?
I thought we were talking about Saddam's "direct" brutalization of the Iraqi people. (and others)

 

[Gonz]

shhh, Cat, you'll get 'em all confused with facts

 

[freako104]

So now your saying your for pulling out of Iraq, and going "back" to
Korea full force?

I was against Iraq the whole time. so yes for pulling out. not for going to Korea though. Against the use of violence.


We didnt start talking about Sadams brutal murdering of his people. not until after we had been fighting the war for some time.

 

[Gonz]

We didnt start talking about Sadams brutal murdering of his people. not until after we had been fighting the war for some time.

a few posts up...sections of speeches made...befoer the Iraq theatre was added to the War on Terrorism...

 

[MrBishop]

"WMD" sells more papers and gets more airtime than does protecting Iraqi citizens from their despot leader. The more popular the idea of going in to remove the fangs of Saddam became, the more limelight it got. Before tyhe war began....as far as I can tell...all other issues were shelved. Protecting America and the World from WMDs became the main reason for going in.

Ignoring the inspectors and the calls for evidence, the war went on..hoping to find the WMDs and prove the reasoning for choosing to go to war. IMHO...if the WMDs had stayed on par with humanitarian reasons for going into Iraq, all this mess wouldn't be all over the internet etc... What could've been said saw "We have yet to find the hidden WMDs, but in our searches, we have found X# of mass graves filled with people whom we might have saved had we gone in sooner."

The moment that the WMD war drum started beating louder than every other reason for going in, was when the demise of the 'reasoning' behind choosing to go to war with Iraq. From that point on...all people searching for 'hidden agendas' for the war had their ammo handed to them with every day where the WMDs weren't found.

 

[PT]

"WMD" sells more papers and gets more airtime than does protecting Iraqi citizens from their despot leader. The more popular the idea of going in to remove the fangs of Saddam became, the more limelight it got. Before tyhe war began....as far as I can tell...all other issues were shelved. Protecting America and the World from WMDs became the main reason for going in.

Ignoring the inspectors and the calls for evidence, the war went on..hoping to find the WMDs and prove the reasoning for choosing to go to war. IMHO...if the WMDs had stayed on par with humanitarian reasons for going into Iraq, all this mess wouldn't be all over the internet etc... What could've been said saw "We have yet to find the hidden WMDs, but in our searches, we have found X# of mass graves filled with people whom we might have saved had we gone in sooner."

The moment that the WMD war drum started beating louder than every other reason for going in, was when the demise of the 'reasoning' behind choosing to go to war with Iraq. From that point on...all people searching for 'hidden agendas' for the war had their ammo handed to them with every day where the WMDs weren't found.

Very true, all of it. Sad thing is we have found WMD's. Press doesn't seem to care much about them now though.

 

[MrBishop]

Very true, all of it. Sad thing is we have found WMD's. Press doesn't seem to care much about them now though.

Too little too late...the press has other stories to bite on now, including the original reason for this thread (Russia) and Hurricane Françes.

 

[catocom]

shhh, Cat, you'll get 'em all confused with facts

yeah this is like talking to my 8 year old niece.
She has a knack for getting me caught in that endless loop of hers

 

[freako104]

a few posts up...sections of speeches made...befoer the Iraq theatre was added to the War on Terrorism...

you know full well we didnt talk about liberating them until the other shit didnt pan out