Breaking News: Saddam possessed WMD, extensive terror ties

Well, perhaps that most of the people outside of urban areas will tend to vote for the local warlord?

0 Replies

Yes, more than once by one voter.

0 Replies

It may mimic the Florida election process. Embarrassed

0 Replies

Xena wrote:

What our side has done is liberate millions of people. Our side has given a chance for millions of people to live a life of their choosing. Our side has given millions opportunities they never would have known before..

Evidently you have NO IDEA what the hell is going on in Iraq right now, NONE!!! This is the worst catastrophic failure ANY president has EVER committed!!! You fail to see any semblance of responsibility on this administration. You fail to see how they were WRONG about EVERYTHING concerning Iraq.

Do you even remember the reasons for going to war??? Were you even awake, or were you just a puppet for the propaganda spewed out by Bush!!! Bush is an ABSOLUTE FAILURE on EVERYTHING HE HAS EVER TOUCHED!!! He has managed to bankrupt THREE different oil companies, in Texas none the less, and he is doing the SAME WITH OUR COUNTRY!!!

So you think we should have invaded because SOMETIME in the future Saddam MAY have had sanctions lifted and he MAY at that time have decided to re-invest in a WMD program, therefor it was imperitive we needed to remove him from power!!! Do you know how absolutely ludicrous this sounds?

Now, let me ask you, If Iraq had no oil, do we invade??? Would we have killed tens of thousands of Iraqis, lost over 1000 American soldiers and maimed over 5000 YOUNG Americans If Iraq didn't have the second largest supply of oil in the world???

Quote:

The following paragraph states, were still sifting through a mountain of documents. Of course we would liked to have found them. This still doesn't take away from the premise we went to war on.

THIS WAS THE PREMISE WE WENT TO WAR ON!!! Read the SOTU Address from from January of 03'. Saddam was an GRAVE AND DIRECT THREAT to American security. He HAS WMDs and he is ACTIVELY pursuing Nuclear weapons!!! EVERYTHING was an absolute LIE!!! Prove me wrong and show how he did NOT LIE to the American public.

Quote:

Pres Bush wasn't the only one who said it! After the stockpiles weren't found, you can't say Pres lied about anything. It is easy to accuse him after all the politicians, Jorda, Egypt and the entire world said the exact same thing.

HE is the one who INVADED a sovern country for pre-emptive purposes, Not Egypt, NOT Jordan, NOT the rest of the world. Bush now has EVERY SINGLE dead person on the invasion on his freaking blood stained hands!!!

Quote:

Hans Blix is an appeasing a-hole! It's all coming out! With the reports today, it said

No, in fact if you want to see the appeasing a-hole, you should take some time for reflection, there is nothing more appeasing then defending a liar who killed Americans for PROFIT for his supporters!!!!

Quote:

Mr Duelfer told a Senate committee yesterday the Saddam regime "had made progress in eroding sanctions, and had it not been for September 11, things would have taken a very different turn for the regime". He pointed out the report was comprehensive but "not final" as a team of 900 linguists were still sifting through a mountain of documents.

THIS just goes to show AGAIn how miserable of a failure Bush is at diplomacy. It's Bush's JOB to keep the sanctions up, he lacked not only the personality, but also the mental capacity to handle such a task!!!

Quote:

Saddam was supposed to prove he destroyed them, if he didn't have them. That still makes the invasion just. There is still the question as to how he destroyed them or where there are now. Saddam never came clean, hindered the inspections by not allowing the inspectors to interview the scientists without minders, by not allowing surveillance over land and never shown any documents proving he didn't have them.

It is the job of the POTUS to sort through the truth and to GET THINGS RIGHT!!!!

Quote:

You don't do anyone in Iraq or here any favors by trying to conclude the war in Iraq is unjust. You don't take into consideration the reasons. 12 years of resolutions, not abiding by the rules of the no-fly zone, his using WMD's to kill his own people and his neighbors, deceiving the entire region and the world, are all valid reasons to take him out. The world is better off without him in power. Thank God we did, if we didn't the sanctions may have been lifted and then we'd have to deal with an even worse threat than he already was.

Were you prepared to believe Saddam without any proof? I wasn't. I wanted the US, as did Kerry AND Edwards to use diplomacy and weapons inspectors to do their jobs. Read Kerry's speech after the vote, which by the way, was NOT a VOTE FOR WAR!!! We were supposed to go to war as a LAST RESORT!!! That was the vote!!! We went to war as a FIRST RESORT, NOT A LAST ONE!!!!

Quote:

He suggested that only the ousted leader knew what his weapons plans were and that even close aides were uncertain whether Iraq had WMD or not.

The Duelfer report found that there had been no "identifiable group of WMD policy makers or planners separate from Saddam.

"Instead, his lieutenants understood WMD revival was his goal from their long association with Saddam and his infrequent but firm, verbal comments and directions to them."

OK, I think I understand you now, you can determine what Hussen was THINKING because his aids say so, yet these same aids thought he had WMDs, so which one was it???

0 Replies

cicerone imposter wrote:

Now that you've identified the progress, now list all the negatives about this coming election - if you dare.

If you dare? Please...

Elections in Afghanistan is a positive.

The election stolen in Florida?.. Laughing

Too funny... You are really brainwashed..
The whole reason I decided to give Bush a chance was because of the chad fiasco in Florida. It was the only reason I decided the Democrats were really off the deep end... If they cared anything about counting the votes they would have done it in every county, every state.. It was a total embarressment, to the Democrat Party..

0 Replies

Xena, That reponse was to cjh. Try again!

0 Replies

Here, Xena, it seems you're incapable of a simple search for fraud in Florida. I typed "voting fraud in Florida" and got 346,000 hits. I'll lead you to water, but the rest is up to you. http://search.yahoo.com/bin/search?p=fraud%20in%20florida%20voting

0 Replies

You're the one that's brainwashed. Afghanistan is not yet ready for "free and safe elections." You don't have to take my word for it. Read the following link. http://www.hrw.org/backgrounder/asia/afghanistan0904/afghanistan0904.pdf

I'll find you more. ITMT, please find sources that says the elections in Afghanistan is "progressing."

0 Replies

Xena, Do you understand anything about "democracy?"

This piece is from the NYT.

Beaten Afghan Brides
By NICHOLAS D. KRISTOF

Published: October 6, 2004

KABUL, Afghanistan

I had an inspiration about where Osama bin Laden might be hiding. But when I visited the women's detention center in Kabul, there was no sign of him.

I did meet Ellaha, a bold 19-year-old prisoner who startled me by greeting me in English. (Like many Afghans, she uses only one name.) She had been attending college as a refugee in Iran when her family pulled her out, alarmed that education might corrupt a young lady's morals.

Her family returned to Afghanistan, and she found work in a U.S. construction company, where her bosses were so impressed that they began arranging a scholarship for her to go to Canada to study.

That horrified her family because the patriarchs had decided that she would marry her cousin. "I didn't agree to marry him," she told me through an interpreter, "because he is not educated and I don't like his job - he is a butcher. Plus, he's three years younger than me."

"When it was almost time for me to go to Canada, and I was asking about flights," she added, "they tied me up and locked me in a room. It was in my uncle's house. My father said, 'O.K., beat her.' I'd never been beaten like that in all my life. My uncle and cousins were all beating me. ... They broke my head, and I was bleeding."

Ms. Ellaha's younger sister, who had been pledged to another cousin, was facing the same treatment. After a week of being tied up, the two sisters agreed to marry their cousins.

"So we went home," Ms. Ellaha added, "and escaped."

The two sisters moved into a cheap guesthouse as they prepared to flee Afghanistan. But their family learned where they were hiding, and the police came to arrest them.

On what charge?

"It's because their lives were in danger," said Rana, the head of the detention center. Ms. Ellaha agrees that her family was pretty close to killing her. The sister is apparently back home, but I was not allowed to interview her.

The police subjected Ms. Ellaha to a mandatory virginity test. Fortunately, her hymen was intact, or she would have faced a prison sentence.

Now she worries that she will be released into her family's custody and then forced to marry her cousin. If that happens, she told me, "I will kill myself."

The entire jail is a kaleidoscope of woe. It's been two years since President Bush declared that in Afghanistan, "Today, women are free." But that's news to the inmates.

Nazilah, 17, had been married to an old man with tuberculosis who beat her - she was his second wife. She ran away and was picked up by the police. Now the authorities are figuring out whether they can return her to her husband's family without getting her killed.

Then there is Sohailla, 18, who says she was kidnapped for three days by the family of a young man who wanted to marry her (the police suspect that she went to his house voluntarily). The police subjected her to a virginity test; after she failed, she got a three-year sentence for fornication.

Inequality is so deeply embedded in this society that there are no easy solutions. In a new opinion poll in Afghanistan, 87 percent of those surveyed said women needed to ask their husbands' permission to vote. There was little difference in the answers of men and women.

The best route to change is new schools, new clinics and more economic opportunity - and those steps are just what the lack of security is blocking in much of southern Afghanistan, the most traditional part of the country. Mr. Bush urgently needs to bolster security in rural areas in the south, so reconstruction projects can go ahead there. The liberation of Afghanistan from the Taliban was crucial, but only a first step.

If this sounds like a gloomy assessment, it was reinforced when I located Ms. Ellaha's father, Said Jamil, a carpenter, and spoke to him on the street in his Kabul neighborhood. He told me that he was arranging for his daughter to be released to him - but he vowed that he would no longer allow her to "be so free."

He did promise me that he would not beat Ms. Ellaha or force her to marry her cousin. I asked him to show mercy toward his daughter, but I have a bad feeling about what lies ahead.

This is how "women are free" in Afghanistan.

0 Replies

By Mary Dalrymple
The Associated Press

Monday 04 October 2004

CLEVELAND - Republicans have been trying to suppress voting in states where the presidential race is too close to call, Democratic nominee John Kerry said Sunday at one of the city's largest predominantly black churches.

"In battleground states across the country, we're hearing stories of how people are trying to make it harder to file for additional time, or how they're making it harder to even register," Kerry told an enthusiastic congregation at East Mt. Zion Baptist Church.

"We're not going to let that happen because the memories of 2000 are too strong. We're not going to allow 1 million African Americans to be disenfranchised."

http://www.truthout.org/docs_04/100504X.shtml

0 Replies

Election 2004 - Bush and Black voter intimidation in Florida

by Robert Wilkinson

Even though this was reported a few weeks ago, it's important to remember as we approach this election that at least one of the Bush brothers has sent out the state troopers in yet another attempt to intimidate blacks in Florida. This anti-democratic heavy handed tactic targets elderly blacks who are trying to get out the vote. This is political jackbooting of the worst kind.

The story was broken by the New York Times' Bob Herbert, who reported that the state police in Florida are "investigating" elderly black voters for allegations of fraud in the Orlando mayoral election of last March. Hmmm. Officials of course refuse to comment except to say it has something to do with absentee ballots, and that they have no idea when the investigation will end. You can bet it will last through the election.

The cops, armed and dangerous, have questioned voters in their homes, as well as volunteers involved in "get out the vote" activities. Officials refuse to state what criminal activity took place, but acknowledge that they are focusing on elderly blacks who are members of the Orlando League of Voters. This organization has successfully mobilized the black vote through registration, helping the elderly to understand the ballot, and drive people to the polls, all legal activities the last time I checked.

As Herbert states, "The vile smell of voter suppression is all over this so-called investigation by the Florida Department of Law Enforcement." People are afraid they're going to jail simply for voting absentee, and apparently many who have voted absentee are now "refusing to allow campaign workers to come to their homes." It has cast a chill on the volunteers as well, since no one wants armed and dangerous strangers on a political witch hunt to come to their doors. He closes his article with "The long and ugly tradition of suppressing the black vote is alive and thriving in the Sunshine state."

This is not idle paranoia. Having lived in Florida for most of my childhood, I can attest that the state police can make anyone uptight, even if they have nothing to hide. And they answer to the guv, who just happens to be Bush's brother. Hmmm. It seems relevant to refer you at this time to an article called "Just Imagine" that I published a while ago, and is important to remember as we move into the final days of this election.

Don't forget that the investigations into voters' rights being violated in Florida in election 2000 took place after our illegal, appointed prez took office. Break the law blatently, steal the election, and then investigate after you take home the marbles. It's easy to investigate improprieties after getting what you want, then blame problems on a few bad apples. Just who did get punished for the widespread violation of black voter rights in Florida back then? If you have an answer, let me know.

0 Replies

McGentrix wrote:

Cyc., we wasted too much time begging the UN for acceptance. It was during that time the WMD's were claimed to have been moved. We should have simply attacked when we were ready. Instead, we tried Kerry's "Global approval" or whatever nonsense he is spouting ans Saddam used the time to move his family, money and weapons to Syria just in case.

This is simply untrue. We did, in fact, attack as soon as we were ready. The UN stuff started when troops weren't even in the vicinity and when war plans weren't even close to being finished.

As to Saddam moving weapons and all, feel free to provide evidence. As it stands this has just been an oft-repeated concpiracy theory and I have never seen any compelling evidence (or even just plain shoddy evidence).

0 Replies

What evidence do you require Craven? I've posted at least twice on reports and statements made about material being moved.

What dates were the weapon inspectors allowed back in to Iraq? What dates did US forces start to gather on the borders of Iraq? How long did our troops sit in the desert and wait to go in.

I don't think you have your facts straight on this Craven.

0 Replies

McGentrix wrote:

What evidence do you require Craven? I've posted at least twice on reports and statements made about material being moved.

For now, I'd be happy with a link to said postings. In all likelihood it'll be more of the same ole same ole.

We can dissect the evidence if you'd like.

Quote:

What dates were the weapon inspectors allowed back in to Iraq?

They entered on the 18th November of, 2002 if I remember correctly. Iraq agreed to allow them to enter a bit before this but I do not remember the date. I do know that the resolution that spurred this decision was passed on the 8th.

Quote:

What dates did US forces start to gather on the borders of Iraq?

Bush authorized deployment to Iraq on the 21st of December, 2002. At that point, full deployment in the mid-east was expected around March.

Between December 24th and January 5th the US issued 25,000 deployment orders to Iraq.

Between January 6th and January 11th the US issued 62,000 deployment orders to Iraq.

Between January 13th and January 17th the US issued 33,000 deployment orders to Iraq.

Between February 2nd and February 8th the US issued 20,000 deployment orders to Iraq.

When the full contingient arrived, the war started.

Quote:

How long did our troops sit in the desert and wait to go in.

They didn't. Like I said, your contention that the UN efforts stalled the war is inaccurate.

Some soldiers waited, but they waited for their fellow soldiers to get there and for the US military resources to come to bear on the region. They did not wait due to the UN efforts.

Long before the UN efforts started, Rumsfeld called them a dangerous distraction, and ultimately his feelings were bourne out in how the war played out.

The UN efforts continued only while the military was getting it's resources to the area. Once they were ready the war followed shortly thereafter.

In February 2002, troops were still being deployed to Iraq. On March 17, 2003 Bush quit the UN efforts with the 48 hour ultimatum to Saddam and on March 19th the first strike occured.

Quote:

I don't think you have your facts straight on this Craven.

I disagree.

0 Replies

BTW, while I do not recall the precise figures, I do recall that the daily cost to keep the troops deployed was substantial, and that for the troops to "sit in the desert and wait" was cited as being intenable due to the logistics and cost.

It was this metric that allowed many pundits to predict the general date of the beginning of the war, as they counted on it being not too long after the ready date.

Whatever the reasons, the troops did not sit around and wait for the UN effort to peter out.

0 Replies

Xena wrote:

They would rather have let the sanctions be lifted for their own greed, excusing the sponsoring of terrorism. They are as guilty as any nation that supports terrorism, they are one in the same..

now xena, that is no way to talk about our superb vice president and his record at halliburton. you make it sound like he should take responsiblity for that company's wanton abuse of subsidiary loopholes to do business with iraq, and iran btw, while he was in charge of said company during the sanction years.

shame on you. Rolling Eyes

0 Replies

Xena wrote:

The election stolen in Florida?..
Too funny... You are really brainwashed..
The whole reason I decided to give Bush a chance was because of the chad fiasco in Florida. It was the only reason I decided the Democrats were really off the deep end... If they cared anything about counting the votes they would have done it in every county, every state.. It was a total embarressment, to the Democrat Party..

think back, little one... who was it that was hopping around yelling and pounding on the doors of the counting room? "let us in !!!" "let us in !!!" "let us in !!!" "let us in !!!"

republicans.

troubling.

0 Replies

Kerry Accuses GOP of Suppressing Voting
By Mary Dalrymple
The Associated Press

This is your source?
http://www.truthout.org/docs_04/100504X.shtml
AP is not credible, they are left leaning..

As long as Jesse Jackson has anything to do with the black disenfranchising you know its BULL. If you believe Jesse and Al Sharpton, I feel bad for you... These people have no credibility at all..

=============================================

The DNC already has hundreds of lawyers waiting in the wings for a full assault on the election when Bush wins...

I wonder if those lawyers will look into all the Democrats who are trying to falsly register voters? Hillary and the Jewish town in New York, I vote for Dead People,

South Dakota. Scary.
http://www.tysknews.com/Articles/dnc_corruption.htm

=====================================
Leftists still refuse to do what's right
Wisconsin voting rules make it easy for election fraud

September 15, 2004

With Wisconsin being a swing state in the presidential election, the Democratic vote fraudsters who surfaced in 2000 will be back in droves this year. In fact, they're already here.
An outfit called the "New Voter Project" claims to be nonpartisan but is being bankrolled and staffed by leftists. The organization is already active in Wisconsin and already involved in trouble. Thousands of "voters" registered by this group in the last few weeks have submitted registration forms without the legally required proof of identification. This has forced village and city clerks all over the region to send out notices asking for the information. Why would so many of these forms be filled out without identification?

There's more. The director of the Wisconsin branch of the New Voter Project is Jessy Tolkan. She's already been involved in election fraud! Tolkan ran for the Madison Common Council in 2001 and was elected. She gave up the seat under pressure and a pending investigation after allegations were made that she lied about her address on her nomination papers and was not a resident of the district in which she ran. Tolkan's father, an attorney, has threatened to sue me in a lame attempt to get me to stop reporting on his daughter and the slimy activities of the New Voter Project.

Virtually none of the forms sent out by the local clerks to the shady registrants have been responded to. The only plausible explanation for that is that the "voters" not only aren't voters but aren't real people, either.

The Democrats are the ones who use fraud to try to shake up the election. They cry like babies, but they should look in the mirror...

0 Replies

DontTreadOnMe wrote:

Xena wrote:
They would rather have let the sanctions be lifted for their own greed, excusing the sponsoring of terrorism. They are as guilty as any nation that supports terrorism, they are one in the same..

now xena, that is no way to talk about our superb vice president and his record at halliburton. you make it sound like he should take responsiblity for that company's wanton abuse of subsidiary loopholes to do business with iraq, and iran btw, while he was in charge of said company during the sanction years.

shame on you.

The point is there are loopholes that are taken advantage of.. For Edwards to cry, like the baby he is, about the rich and what they pay or don't pay is hypocritical.. The Dems are nothing but a bunch of hypocrites!
They stink of hypocracy... They are the ones playing politics with our national security..

Guess what? A little thing like 9-11 happened!!! Cheney realizes this and so does our President. The Left loonies don't seem to understand that everything changed that day... Any criticizism of Cheney while he and Halliburton were working together, doesn't have anything to do with what is happening now!

0 Replies

Craven de Kere wrote:

McGentrix wrote:
What evidence do you require Craven? I've posted at least twice on reports and statements made about material being moved.

For now, I'd be happy with a link to said postings. In all likelihood it'll be more of the same ole same ole.

We can dissect the evidence if you'd like.

http://www.able2know.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=845824#845824

Quote:

Quote:
What dates were the weapon inspectors allowed back in to Iraq?

They entered on the 18th November of, 2002 if I remember correctly. Iraq agreed to allow them to enter a bit before this but I do not remember the date. I do know that the resolution that spurred this decision was passed on the 8th.

8 November 2002: UN Security Council unanimously passes a new resolution on Iraq's disarmament, warning of "serious consequences" for material breaches. This came as a direct result of US pressure to get Saddam under control. Without the resolution and US pressure, Saddam does not let the UN inspectors in to do the job they had been locked out of for 4 years.

Quote:

Quote:
What dates did US forces start to gather on the borders of Iraq?

Bush authorized deployment to Iraq on the 21st of December, 2002. At that point, full deployment in the mid-east was expected around March.

Between December 24th and January 5th the US issued 25,000 deployment orders to Iraq.

Between January 6th and January 11th the US issued 62,000 deployment orders to Iraq.

Between January 13th and January 17th the US issued 33,000 deployment orders to Iraq.

Between February 2nd and February 8th the US issued 20,000 deployment orders to Iraq.

When the full contingient arrived, the war started.

On November 2, some 8,000 sailors and Marines set sail for the Persian Gulf from San Diego with the seven-ship battle group of the aircraft carrier Constellation. The battle group carries 72 Navy and Marine Corps warplanes, which would be used in the round-the-clock bombardment of Baghdad and other Iraqi cities that is expected to precede a ground invasion. It also includes a guided-missile destroyer and two guided-missile cruisers that would be used to launch cruise missiles at Iraqi targets. Also during this time The US was building the coalition and feeling out our allies on attacking Iraq.

Feb. 24-March 14: The U.S. and Britain's lobbying efforts among UN Security Council members to garner support for a strike on Iraq yield only two supporters (Spain and Bulgaria). link

Quote:

Quote:
How long did our troops sit in the desert and wait to go in.

They didn't. Like I said, your contention that the UN efforts stalled the war is inaccurate.

Some soldiers waited, but they waited for their fellow soldiers to get there and for the US military resources to come to bear on the region. They did not wait due to the UN efforts.

Long before the UN efforts started, Rumsfeld called them a dangerous distraction, and ultimately his feelings were bourne out in how the war played out.

The UN efforts continued only while the military was getting it's resources to the area. Once they were ready the war followed shortly thereafter.

In February 2002, troops were still being deployed to Iraq. On March 17, 2003 Bush quit the UN efforts with the 48 hour ultimatum to Saddam and on March 19th the first strike occured.

Quote:
I don't think you have your facts straight on this Craven.

I disagree.

Me too.

0 Replies

Breaking News: Saddam possessed WMD, extensive terror ties

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know