Obama '08?

Source File: http://www.btlonline.org/ritter091903.ram
Former UN Weapons Inspector Charges Bush Launched Iraq War to Pursue Agenda of 'Global Hegemony'

Interview with Scott Ritter, former U.S. Marine and U.N. weapons inspector, conducted by Scott Harris: September 15, 2003

As violence continued to consume U.S.-occupied Iraq, President Bush addressed the nation on Sept. 7 to explain his administration's policies there and request $87 billion for the pacification and reconstruction of both Iraq and Afghanistan. Although the president conspicuously omitted any mention of the U.S. failure to capture Osama bin Laden or to locate any of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction used by his administration to justify its war, he maintained that Iraq was now the central front in the war against terrorism. As he has many times before, the president linked the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks against the U.S. to the toppled regime of Saddam Hussein, despite the lack of any evidence connecting Iraq with the al Qaeda network.

"I confess that countries are pieces on a chessboard upon which is being played out a great game for the domination of the world." - Lord Curzon, British viceroy of India, 1898

I am not a lawyer, but it seems like I have heard a few things, that being one of them.

How does global hegemony fit into evolutionary theory? Was that part of Darwin's thesis? Funny, I missed that part.

Another point, the defendant can demand to have access to evidence, which can then be forked over to their buddies still out there. Folks, this administration is a total and absolute train wreck in regard to national security, and in regard to common sense.

The buses could have been used but ...
1. Even if all the buses were available with drivers and the time to get out, there were not enough to rescue everyone. Simple math based on the number of buses shows that.

2. Would the people have been better off trapped on buses on the road during the storm than in the Superdome and at the Convention Center after it? Probably not.

3. There is no evidence that drivers were available, let alone the buses worked.

So, because the buses could not rescue everyone, it is ok that they rescued no one? That's some poor math. I guess next time my wife goes grocery shopping, I will tell her that since I can't carry all the bags at once, I am not going to carry any of them in. That should turn out well.

Your making conjecture that people would be trapped in the buses during the storm. That's silly as they could have used the buses to evacuate people in the days leading up to the storm as part of an evacuation plan. They could have ferried people from the various low lying areas to the super dome and convention center. Instead, they sat idle.

That's because local officials failed.

Quote:

Another point, the defendant can demand to have access to evidence, which can then be forked over to their buddies still out there. Folks, this administration is a total and absolute train wreck in regard to national security, and in regard to common sense.

Talk about not understanding anything about the criminal process, let alone a trial that threatens national security...
1. You think defendants should not have access to evidence? And you call yourself a patriot? You are an idiot okie.
2. How can someone confined in a cell with no access to anyone other than his lawyers and the court fork this information over to his buddies? Again, You are an idiot okie.

So tell me why Bush didn't use all available military helicopters? That should turn out well for you...

ROFLMAO..
So the people were trapped at the superdome because they weren't ferried there by the buses? Do you even bother to think?

Uh uh.. sure.. and you have evidence of this how?

How many drivers would have showed up for work if given the choice to drive their family out of New Orleans or drive a school bus filled with strangers? How do you propose the local officials could have forced drivers to show up? Are you a mechanic McG? Can you tell us which buses worked and why it is the responsibility of local officials to force you to work on those buses without pay?

okie wrote:

I am not a lawyer, but it seems like I have heard a few things, that being one of them.

This may be one of the funniest things you've ever posted, Okie.

"I'm not a doctor, but I play one on TV."

I'm sure you, not being a lawyer but having heard a few things, know much more about prosecuting cases than real prosecutors.

A trial in Manhattan will bring enormous media attention and require unprecedented security. But it is unlikely to make New York a bigger target than it has been since February 1993, when Mohammed's nephew Ramzi Yousef attacked the World Trade Center. If al-Qaeda could carry out another attack in New York, it would -- a fact true a week ago and for a long time. Its inability to do so is a testament to our military, intelligence and law enforcement responses since the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks.

In deciding to use federal court, the attorney general probably considered the record of the military commission system that was established in November 2001. This system secured three convictions in eight years. The only person who had a full commission trial, Osama bin Laden's driver, received five additional months in prison, resulting in a sentence that was shorter than he probably would have received from a federal judge.

One reason commissions have not worked well is that changes in constitutional, international and military laws since they were last used, during World War II, have produced great uncertainty about the commissions' validity. This uncertainty has led to many legal challenges that will continue indefinitely -- hardly an ideal situation for the trial of the century.

By contrast, there is no question about the legitimacy of U.S. federal courts to incapacitate terrorists. Many of Holder's critics appear to have forgotten that the Bush administration used civilian courts to put away dozens of terrorists, including "shoe bomber" Richard Reid; al-Qaeda agent Jose Padilla; "American Taliban" John Walker Lindh; the Lackawanna Six; and Zacarias Moussaoui, who was prosecuted for the same conspiracy for which Mohammed is likely to be charged. Many of these terrorists are locked in a supermax prison in Colorado, never to be seen again.

And that someone confined in a cell does not have an attorney with ability to contact his buddies? Who is the idiot? I recall reading or hearing about this already happening, tipping off Osama Bin Laden. Parados, get serious, we are talking about terror networks at war with the West, not your garden variety criminal that held up a liquor store.

I thought Obama and his AG were really really smart? What happened?

It's a simple idea, take buses that do work, send them out to low lying areas before the storm hits and offer rides to people that want them. Obviously the stupid people will not leave, but even if they save 1 person, that would have been a better solution.