Kay "intel community owes the pres. an apologizy, rather than the pres. owing the American people"

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Democratic presidential candidate Sen. John Kerry said on Sunday the Bush administration, including Vice President Dick Cheney, should be "held accountable" for claims Iraq had weapons of mass destruction.

Kerry, riding a tide of support since a surprising win Monday in the first of the U.S. presidential nominating contests, said U.S. lawmakers should hold hearings on Capitol Hill.

Kerry is a Godless Communist.

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2004/1/20/131219.shtml

What You Don’t Know About John Kerry

Chuck Noe, NewsMax.com
Tuesday, Jan. 20, 2004

With his win in Iowa, Sen. John Kerry could be on his way to the White House. But most Americans are unaware of the real Kerry.

Here are facts and quotations that reveal the character of the new Democrat leader.

· Denouncing America with ‘Hanoi’ Jane: Although Wesley Clark and others have attacked former front-runner Howard Dean as a draft-dodging ski bum, Kerry is far more complex than the simple war hero he portrays himself as.

He became a celebrated organizer for one of America's most extreme appeasement groups, Vietnam Veterans Against the War. He consorted with the likes of “Hanoi” Jane Fonda and Ramsey Clark, Lyndon Johnson’s radical former attorney general.

He attended a seminar bankrolled by Fonda in Detroit in February 1971. Watching 125 self-proclaimed Vietnam veterans testify at a Howard Johnson’s about atrocities allegedly committed by U.S. forces, the man who would be president later said he found the accounts shocking and irrefutable.

Dubbed “The Winter Soldier Investigation,” the protest attracted minimal media attention, according to the Los Angeles Times, because Fonda insisted it be held in the remote Michigan city rather than the less “authentic” Washington, D.C.

Still, the event gave Kerry an idea for a protest that was sure to be a media smash, and he immediately set out to organize one of the most confrontational protests of the war.

Operation Dewey Canyon III began on April 18, 1971, when nearly 1,000 Vietnam veterans and people claiming to be veterans gathered on Washington’s Mall for what they called “a limited incursion into the country of Congress.”

The group staged mock firefights on the steps of the Capitol and Supreme Court and defied U.S. Park Police after the Department of Justice issued an injunction barring it from camping on the Mall.

· Those evil American soldiers: Testifying before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on April 23, 1971, Kerry claimed that U.S. soldiers had “raped, cut off ears, cut off heads, taped wires from portable telephones to human genitals and turned up the power, cut off limbs, blown up bodies, randomly shot at civilians, razed villages, shot cattle and dogs for fun, poisoned food stocks, and generally ravaged the countryside of South Vietnam.”

· ‘We are not the best’: In his testimony, Kerry claimed there was no communist threat and said: “In 1970 at West Point Vice President Agnew said ‘some glamorize the criminal misfits of society while our best men die in Asian rice paddies to preserve the freedom which most of those misfits abuse,’ and this was used as a rallying point for our effort in Vietnam. But for us, as boys in Asia whom the country was supposed to support, his statement is a terrible distortion from which we can only draw a very deep sense of revulsion, and hence the anger of some of the men who are here in Washington today. It is a distortion because we in no way consider ourselves the best men of this country ….”

U.S. Veteran Dispatch noted in 1996: “Kerry's testimony, it should be noted, occurred while some of his fellow Vietnam veterans were known by the world to be enduring terrible suffering as prisoners of war in North Vietnamese prisons. Kerry was a supporter of the ‘People's Peace Treaty,’" a supposed ‘people's’ declaration to end the war, reportedly drawn up in communist East Germany. It included nine points, all of which were taken from Viet Cong peace proposals at the Paris peace talks as conditions for ending the war.”

· Throw as I say, not as I do: On that same day he led members of VVAW in a protest during which they threw their medals and ribbons over a fence in front of the U.S. Capitol.

Kerry later admitted the medals he threw were not his. To this day they hang on the wall of his office.

· Communist stooge: The communist Daily World delightedly published photos of him speaking to demonstrators and boasted that the marchers displayed a banner depicting a portrait of Communist Party leader Angela Davis, on record stating, “I am dedicated to the overthrow of your system of government and your society,” the New American recalled in May 2003.

“By frequently participating in VVAW’s demonstrations, Kerry found himself marching alongside what the Boston Herald Traveler identified as ‘revolutionary Communists.’ While noting that known Reds had openly organized these events, the December 12, 1971 Herald Traveler reported the presence of an ‘abundance of Vietcong flags, clenched fists raised in the air, and placards plainly bearing legends in support of China, Cuba, the USSR, North Korea and the Hanoi government.’"

Vietnam Veterans Against John Kerry says: “As a national leader of VVAW, Kerry campaigned against the effort of the United States to contain the spread of Communism. He used the blood of servicemen still in the field for his own political advancement by claiming that their blood was being shed unnecessarily or in vain.

“Under Kerry's leadership, VVAW members mocked the uniform of United States soldiers by wearing tattered fatigues marked with pro-communist graffiti. They dishonored America by marching in demonstrations under the flag of the Viet Cong enemy.”

Sen. John McCain revealed that his North Vietnamese captors had used reports of Kerry-led protests to taunt him and his fellow prisoners. Retired General George S. Patton III angrily noted that Kerry’s actions had “given aid and comfort to the enemy.”

In recent years when Kerry has exploited the Vietnam Veterans Memorial for photo opportunities on Veterans Day, some veterans, still outraged by his betrayal, have turned their backs on him.

· The book he doesn’t want you to see: When Kerry ran for election to the U.S. House of Representative in 1972, “he found it necessary to suppress reproduction of the cover picture appearing on his own book, The New Soldier. His political opponent pointed out that it depicted several unkempt youths crudely handling an American flag to mock the famous photo of the U.S. Marines at Iwo Jima,” according to Vietnam Veterans Against John Kerry.

“Suddenly, copies of the book became unavailable and even disappeared from libraries. But the Lowell (Mass.) Sun said of the type of person shown on its cover: ‘These people spit on the flag, they burn the flag, they carry the flag upside down, [and] they all but wipe their noses with it in their efforts to show their contempt for everything it still stands for,’” the New American reported.

Even today it is hard to find this infamous photo and book.

· Friendly with the enemy: Kerry’s fondness for Vietnam’s communist dictatorship, one of the most oppressive in the world, continues.

As chairman of the Select Senate Committee on POW/MIA Affairs, created in 1991 to investigate reports that U.S. prisoners of war and soldiers designated missing in action were still alive in Vietnam, Kerry badgered the panel into voting that no American servicemen remained in Vietnam.

“[N]o one in the United States Senate pushed harder to bury the POW/MIA issue, the last obstacle preventing normalization of relations with Hanoi, than John Forbes Kerry,” noted U.S. Veteran Dispatch.

“But Kerry's participation in the Committee became controversial in December 1992,” reported the nonpartisan Center for Public Integrity, “when Hanoi announced that it had awarded Colliers International, a Boston-based real estate company, an exclusive deal to develop its commercial real estate potentially worth billions. Stuart Forbes, the CEO of Colliers, is Kerry's cousin.”

The “odd coincidence,” according to FrontPageMagazine.com, involved a deal worth $905 million.

Jeff Jacoby, the token conservative columnist at the Boston Globe, notes that Kerry continues his apologia for Vietnam's never-ending atrocities. "Far from taking the lead on the Vietnam Human Rights Bill, he has prevented it from coming to a vote. He claims that making an issue of Hanoi's repression would be counterproductive."

Kerry is also a fan of China’s communist dictatorship. “On May 19, 1994, five years after Tiananmen Square, Kerry spoke on the Senate floor against linking China's Most Favored Nation trade status to its human rights record,” Slate reported.

Kerry said: “China is the strongest military power in Asia. We need China's cooperation. We cannot afford to adopt a cold-war kind of policy that merely excludes and pushes China away.”

Limiting China's MFN status “would make us a bit player in a production of enormous proportions. We possess no stick, including MFN, which can force China to embrace internationally recognized human rights and freedoms.”

· More extreme than Hillary and Kucinich: Among the White House wannabes, long-shot Rep. Dennis Kucinich has the reputation of holding the most left-wing congressional voting record. In fact, this “honor” goes to Kerry.

According to American Conservative Union, Kerry has a lifetime rating of 6 percent, compared to 13 for the demolished Rep. Dick Gephardt, 14 for Sen. John Edwards, 15 for Kucinich and 19 for Sen. Joe Lieberman.

Sens. Hillary Clinton and Tom Daschle score 13 percent. Only the likes of Sens. Teddy Kennedy and Barbara Boxer have more left-wing records than Kerry. In contrast, Sen. John Breaux, one of the upper chamber’s few remaining moderate Democrats, has a 46.

· Drive as I say, not as I do: Like Al Gore and other self-described environmentalists, Kerry has a radical agenda that would devastate the U.S. economy in favor of the likes of communist China, yet he enjoys the gas-guzzling modern conveniences that greens denounce. Kerry, a delegate to the environment-destroying Earth Summit in 1992 (where he met his future wife, left-wing activist Teresa Heinz, the multimillionaire widow of GOP Sen. John Heinz), the Kyoto climate talks in 1997 and the Hague Conference of the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change in 2000, has attacked President Bush for withdrawing from the anti-U.S. Kyoto Protocol. This treaty, which then-President Bill Clinton had signed, would impose severe restrictions on the United States but not Third World polluters that already enjoy huge trade surpluses with the U.S.

However, although Kerry spouts the party line on anti-U.S. ecopolicy, he doesn’t like to practice what he preaches. Kerry was humiliated in April 2002 when photographed attending a rally against energy independence and then heading back to his SUV, the symbol of all that is evil to self-described greens.

· Bone to pick: Bush-hating conspiracy theorists find it alarming that the president, like his father, was a member of the secretive Skull and Bones society at Yale University. Another alum of this club: John Kerry.

· Get out your wallets: One reason Kerry and Edwards did well in Iowa: Losers Dean and Gephardt admitted they'd repeal all of the president's tax relief. However, although Kerry has taken credit for middle-class tax cuts, child tax credit and relief of the marriage penalty, he voted against them, GOP.com disclosed.

"Kerry will have to expend an awful lot of time and money to convince people that he's not the classic Massachusetts liberal," Larry Sabato, a respected political analyst at the University of Virginia, told the Associated Press in December 2002. "And that's going to be tough, because mainly he is."

· Waffling on Iraq: Kerry has the tough job of wooing Howard Dean’s anti-war Democrats despite his support of the war in Iraq. His favorite tactic, claiming the president outfoxed him, doesn’t hold up to scrutiny.

On “Meet the Press” in late August, Tim Russert played a tape of Kerry addressing the Senate in October 2002 with a hard-line speech declaring Iraq “capable of quickly producing weaponizing” of biological weapons that could be delivered against “the United States itself.”

Kerry insisted: “That is exactly the point I’m making. We were given this information by our intelligence community.”

However, as columnist Robert Novak noted, “as a senator, Kerry had access to the National Intelligence Estimate that was skeptical of Iraqi capability. Being tricky may no longer be as effective politically as it once was.”

No doubt Dean, Lieberman, Clark and other rivals will now use these and other details to do to Kerry what the Democrats did to Dean.

"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line."
President Bill Clinton. Feb. 4, 1998.

"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program."
President Bill Clinton. Feb. 17, 1998.

"Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face." --Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998

"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983." --Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998

"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs." Letter to President Clinton, signed by: -- Democratic Senators Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others, Oct. 9, 1998

"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process." -Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998

"Hussein has ... chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies." -- Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999

"There is no doubt that ... Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies." Letter to President Bush, Signed by: -- Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), and others, Dec 5, 2001

"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandate of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and th! e means of delivering them." -- Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002

"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country." -- Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002

"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power." -- Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002

"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction." -- Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002

"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..." -- Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002

"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force -- if necessary -- to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security." -- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002

"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years ... We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction." -- Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002

"He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do" -- Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002

"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction." -- Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), Dec. 8, 2002

"Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction ... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real..." -- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003

"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al-Qaeda members ... It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons."
Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-NY. Oct 10, 2002.

REASONS FOR THE U.S. STRIKES

-- President Clinton, White House statement, August 20:

"Today I ordered our armed forces to strike at terrorist-related facilities in Afghanistan and Sudan because of the imminent threat they presented to our national security....Our target was terror. Our mission was clear: to strike at the network of radical groups affiliated with and funded by Usama bin Ladin, perhaps the preeminent organizer and financier of international terrorism in the world today....Bin Ladin publicly vowed to wage a terrorist war against America, saying -- and I quote -- 'We do not differentiate between those dressed in military uniforms and civilians. They're all targets.'

-- President Clinton, Radio Address to the Nation, August 22:

"The information now in our possession is convincing. Behind these attacks were the same hands that killed American and Pakistani peacekeepers in Somalia, the same hands that targeted U.S. airlines, and the same hands that plotted the assassinations of the Pope and President Mubarak of Egypt. I'm referring to the bin Ladin network of radical groups -- probably the most dangerous, non-state terrorist actor in the world today. We also had compelling evidence that the bin Ladin network was poised to strike at us again, and soon....With that information and evidence, we simply could not stand idly by. That is why I ordered our military strikes last Thursday (August 20). Our goals were to disrupt bin Ladin's terrorist network and destroy elements of its infrastructure in Afghanistan and Sudan. And our goal was to destroy in Sudan the factory with which bin Ladin's network is associated, which was producing an ingredient essential for nerve gas."

-- President Clinton, letter to the leaders of Congress, August 20:

"These strikes were a necessary and proportionate response to the imminent threat of further terrorist attacks against U.S. personnel and facilities. These strikes were intended to prevent and deter additional attacks by a clearly identified terrorist threat. The targets were selected because they served to facilitate directly the efforts of terrorists specifically identified with attacks on U.S. personnel and facilities and posed a continuing threat to U.S. lives."

-- Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, interview on CNN's "Larry King Live," August 20:

"...when the United States is attacked, when our people are taken out, we will stand out unilaterally in self-defense and really let the world know what we believe in."

-- Defense Secretary William Cohen, remarks at Pentagon briefing, August 20:

"In the wake of the tragic and treacherous attacks on our embassies in East Africa and in light of the continuing patterns of specific threats against U.S. citizens and facilities, we've taken these actions to reduce the ability of these terrorist organizations to train and equip their misguided followers or to acquire weapons of mass destruction for their use in campaigns of terror....We had information that led us to believe that Usama bin Ladin and his organization were indeed trying to acquire chemical weapons and to utilize them in future activities."

-- Defense Secretary William Cohen, briefing for key members of Congress, August 21:

"We did not target, specifically, individuals; we targeted training facilities. This is a training camp that is known as Terrorist University. We are determined to take down those facilities and disrupt them to the extent that we can to help minimize the ability of these individuals to wreak their terror upon innocent people. So striking the facilities in themselves is a worthy goal."

-- National Security Adviser Sandy Berger, White House briefing, August 20:

"We have convincing information from a variety of reliable intelligence sources and methods that Usama bin Ladin, with the help of his terrorist allies, is responsible for the devastating bombings on August 7 of the U.S. Embassies in Nairobi, Kenya, and Dar es Salaam, Tanzania. Rarely do numerous sources converge so uniformly and persuasively as they did in the course of our investigation into the responsibility for these terrorist acts. Based on this information, we have high confidence that these bombings were planned, financed and carried out by the organization bin Ladin leads."

-- National Security Adviser Sandy Berger, White House briefing, August 21:

"...I am absolutely certain that had we not done this (military strikes in Afghanistan and Sudan) we would have been the victim of other terrorist attacks in the not too distant future."

-- Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman General Henry Shelton, interview on CBS-TV's "Face the Nation" program, August 23:

"After the attack on the (U.S.) embassies on the seventh of August, we started getting very convincing information from a variety of reliable sources that started quickly pointing toward the Usama bin Ladin network of terrorist groups as being responsible for the attack on the two embassies (in Nairobi and Dar es Salaam). Right after that we also got information that bin Ladin might be planning a gathering of terrorists in his training camp....The combination of those two things...immediately started us looking at military options that might be available to go after the bin Ladin network on the 20th of August. That information continued to pour in, and in a matter of days it became evident that bin Ladin's organization was responsible for it. And that's what drove the attack on the network."

-- U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Bill Richardson, letter to UN General Assembly President Danilo Turk, August 20:

"In accordance with Article 51 of the United Nations Charter...the United States has exercised its right of self-defense in responding to a series of armed attacks against U.S. Embassies and U.S. nationals. My government has obtained convincing information from a variety of reliable sources that the organization of Usama bin Ladin is responsible for the devastating bombings on August 7 of the U.S. Embassies in Nairobi, Kenya, and Dar es Salaam, Tanzania....The bin Ladin organization maintains an extensive network of camps, arsenals, and training and supply facilities in Afghanistan, and support facilities in Sudan, which have been and are being used to mount terrorist attacks against American targets. These facilities include an installation at which chemical weapons have been produced."

-- Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs Thomas Pickering, U.S. Information Agency (USIA) Foreign Press Center briefing, August 25:

"The main purpose of the strikes was not retaliation; it was to prevent further terrorist attacks against American targets which we had reason to believe would take place....In this case, as the United States made clear, it not only had convincing evidence of the linkage to the recent bombings, but it had convincing evidence that there were to be other attacks planned by this organization and its brother and sister organizations around the world to take action against the United States. Those are the circumstances. They speak for themselves."

WHAT THE U.S. STRIKES ACCOMPLISHED

-- Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, interview on ABC-TV's "This Week with Sam Donaldson and Cokie Roberts," August 23:

"We think that what we managed to do was to have some significant impact on the terrorist planning activities in what is a major terrorist camp....The point here was to do something that would disrupt Usama bin Ladin and his organization's ability to conduct additional terrorist activities....We'll have to wait to see whom we got on this. But we did have very good intelligence about the fact that there was going to be a meeting there with the various people that belong to Usama bin Ladin's umbrella organization of terrorists. But the point here was to get at a lot of their command and control and their structure in this camp that has been there for some time. We had very good evidence that this was a very good time to go after the structure. And I think that those raids have been successful."

-- Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, interview on CBS-TV Nightly News program, August 21:

"...we do know, as far as the pharmaceutical firm in Sudan is concerned, that is now non-operational, as far as we've been told. That was a very significant hit."

-- National Security Adviser Sandy Berger, interview on CNN's Late Edition news program, August 23:

"All six of these camps (in Afghanistan) -- these were training camps for terrorists; they've trained thousands of terrorists over the past several years in these camps -- were heavily to moderately damaged. There are six camps; severe damage was done, serious damage was done to all six. The camps themselves have been, I think, rendered ineffective. Anybody who was there obviously suffered some damage. And I think in addition we have made it very clear that those who attack or target the United States cannot do so with impunity."

-- Defense Secretary William Cohen, remarks at Pentagon news briefing, August 20:

"Our plan was to attack these sites (in Afghanistan) with sufficient power to certainly disrupt them, and, hopefully, destroy them....We believe given the targeting that was done, with the capability that was unleashed, it would cause sufficient damage to disrupt them for some time."

-- U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Bill Richardson, interview on the "Fox News Sunday" television program, August 23:

"But most importantly, what we did was send a very strong signal that no nation should provide sanctuary or harbor terrorists. This was primarily the objective, besides protecting Americans and making sure that bin Ladin and his forces did not attack us again, as we had evidence he would."

TIMING OF THE U.S. STRIKES

-- President Clinton, White House statement, August 20:

"With compelling evidence that the bid Ladin network of terrorist groups was planning to mount further attacks against Americans and other freedom-loving people, I decided America must act....We have reason to believe that a gathering of key terrorist leaders was to take place there today, thus underscoring the urgency of our actions."

-- Defense Secretary William Cohen, interview on NBC-TV's "Meet the Press," August 23:

"...we had information that there may be a gathering of terrorists at that location in Afghanistan on that particular date, and that certainly was a factor in our planning....We saw an increased level of activity each day leading up to Thursday (August 20), and that again was convincing evidence to us that the information was accurate....We did not know if he (Usama bin Ladin) would be there or not. He was not our target as such. We were targeting his infrastructure and his network, and we believe that that was a mission accomplished."

-- Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, interview on ABC-TV's "This Week with Sam Donaldson and Cokie Roberts," August 23:

"The point here was to get at a lot of their command and control and their structure in this camp that has been there for some time. We had very good evidence that this was a very good time to go after the structure. I think that those raids have been successful."

-- Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs Martin Indyk, remarks at a briefing for the Middle East press at the Department of State, August 21:

"What we know is that Usama bin Ladin brought together a group of disparate terrorists and organizations for a kind of meeting that had taken place that led to this announcement of this World Islamic Front that appears to have been established back in February. And, as you may have heard, the National Security Adviser said they had information that this group was meeting again yesterday (near) Khost in Afghanistan, which was a reason for the timing of the attack."

POSSIBILITY OF FURTHER U.S. STRIKES

-- President Clinton, Radio Address to the Nation, August 22:

"Our efforts against terrorism cannot and will not end with this strike. We should have realistic expectations about what a single action can achieve. And we must be prepared for a long battle. But it's high time that those who traffic in terror learn they, too, are vulnerable."

-- Secretary of Defense William Cohen, remarks at press stakeout, U.S. Capitol, August 21:

"...(More U.S. attacks are) always a possibility. We have contingency plans that we are developing, and there may be more in the future."

-- Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs Thomas Pickering, USIA Foreign Press Center briefing, August 25:

"We are engaged in a long-term struggle with terrorism. There are times when law enforcement and diplomatic tools are simply not enough....We do not expect that these various initiatives will in themselves end the terrorist threat, but they are important because they clearly show that we are in this for the long haul. We will act unilaterally when we must in order to protect our citizens against imminent threats, but we invite other nations of the world to stand with us in this struggle because all nations are vulnerable to the threat of terrorism, and all citizens of other countries are equally vulnerable, as the history of this particular event makes crystal clear."

-- Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs Martin Indyk, remarks at a briefing for the Middle East press at the Department of State, August 21:

"We fully expect that this will be an ongoing effort to counter the terrorists. We started fighting them yesterday, and we certainly are not going to end our fight against them today....As far as whether we're going to keep on conducting attacks, that will depend on the circumstances. In some cases, as in the case of Libya, we seek to bring terrorist perpetrators to justice through United Nations resolutions in an effort to get Qadhafi to give up two terrorist suspects for trial in an American or Scottish court."

-- Ambassador Robert Pelletreau, former assistant secretary of state for Near Eastern affairs, during a USIA Worldnet "Global Exchange" program, August 24:

"The other aspect is going to be a much more assertive attitude toward terrorist organizations, wherever they are in the world....They are going to have to realize that there is no place that they can have shelter or asylum or can hide....This is not going to be a short-term process....I think this is one of the big issues of the 21st century that we are going to have to face. And Americans are often quite impatient, and they lose focus on a given issue -- they get distracted sometimes. But in this case this has got to be a question of a campaign and an effort that is going to go on, frankly, over many years."

EVIDENCE OF PRECURSOR CHEMICAL PRODUCTION AT KHARTOUM FACILITY

-- Defense Secretary William Cohen, remarks at a Pentagon briefing, August 20:

"What we do know is the facility that was targeted in Khartoum produced the precursor chemicals that would allow the production of a type of VX nerve agent....We do know that he (Usama bin Ladin)...had had an interest in acquiring chemical weapons...that this facility produces the precursors that can result in the production of VX. That was a sufficient connection for us."

-- Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman General Henry Shelton, remarks at a Pentagon news briefing, August 20:

"The intelligence community is confident that this facility is involved in the production of chemical weapons agents, including precursor chemicals for deadly V series of nerve agents like, for example, VX."

-- National Security Adviser Sandy Berger, remarks at a White House briefing, August 20:

"The so-called pharmaceutical plant is part of something in Sudan called the Military Industrial Complex....We know that bin Ladin has been a substantial contributor to that enterprise. We know that bin Ladin and his people have sought to obtain chemical weapons. We know that he has had a particularly close relationship with the government of Sudan. And, therefore, when you put those things together...there clearly is...no question that it was making this chemical that has a name too long for me to pronounce (O-ethylmethylphosphonothioic acid). He (bin Ladin) was an early financial contributor to the Sudanese overall military enterprise, of which this is a part."

-- National Security Adviser Sandy Berger, interview on CNN's Late Edition news program, August 23:

"There's no question in our mind that that facility (in Sudan), that factory, was used to produce a chemical that is used in the manufacture of VX nerve gas and has no other commercial distribution as far as we understand. We have physical evidence of that fact....I can say that I have no question. The intelligence community has no question that that factory was used to manufacture a chemical used in making nerve gas."

-- U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Bill Richardson, interview on the "Fox News Sunday" television program, August 23:

"We have credible, physical evidence that this was a chemical precursor plant (in Sudan). There are some intelligence sources here that are very sensitive. We will not compromise those, but we are ready to debate this issue with anybody."

-- Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs Thomas Pickering, USIA Foreign Press Center briefing, August 25:

"The physical evidence is a soil sample. Analysis of it shows the presence of a chemical whose simple name is EMPTA, a known precursor for the nerve agent VX, and an indicator of a potential to produce VX gas. The substance is not used in commercial applications. It doesn't occur naturally in the environment, and it is not a by-product of another chemical process."

-- Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs Martin Indyk, remarks at a briefing for the Middle East press at the Department of State, August 21:

"The chemical factory in northeastern Khartoum was selected because of clear evidence we have of its involvement in the production of chemical weapons -- physical evidence. The factory was producing a precursor for VX nerve gas....If you think for a moment about the consequences of Usama bin Ladin and his associates getting a hold of chemical weapons, I think you will understand the importance of targeting this factory, as well as the terrorist training bases in Afghanistan."

-- State Department Deputy Spokesman James Foley, State Department briefing, August 24:

"That facility may very well have been producing legitimate pharmaceuticals. That in no way contradicts our assertion that that facility was also producing precursor CW -- chemical weapons -- precursor elements. It is true that the facility was once approved by the Iraq sanctions committee as a source of pharmaceuticals provided to Iraq under the oil-for-food program. But again, that approval, which occurred in January of this year, in no way alters the fact that the facility was also producing those precursor elements."

LEGAL BASIS FOR THE U.S. STRIKES

-- Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, interview on ABC-TV's "This Week with Sam Donaldson and Cokie Roberts," August 23:

"We believe that we have a legal right to self-defense and that is what we have stated. Under Article 51 of the UN Charter, we have a right to self-defense. As the United States of America, we have the right to self-defense when our people have been killed and when others have been maimed. And we see this as a long-term struggle with terrorism."

-- U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Bill Richardson, letter to the President of the UN Security Council, August 20:

"In (carrying out these attacks), the United States has acted pursuant to the right of self-defense confirmed by Article 51 of the United Nations Charter. The targets struck, and the timing and method of attack used, were carefully designed to minimize risks of collateral damage to civilians and to comply with international law, including the rules of necessity and proportionality."

-- U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Bill Richardson, interview on "Fox News Sunday," August 23:

"Under Article 51 of the United Nations (Charter), we have the right of self-defense to take this action because our interests were being threatened and compromised."

-- Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs Martin Indyk, State Department press briefing, August 21:

"In bombing the terrorist camps in Afghanistan and the chemical weapons factory in Sudan, the United States was exerting its right of self-defense under article 51 of the United Nations Charter. We not only had conclusive evidence of Usama bin Ladin's associates' responsibility for the bombings in Tanzania and Kenya, but we also had strong information from many sources of his intentions to attack more U.S. Embassies and interests around the world."

LONG-TERM NATURE OF THE FIGHT AGAINST TERRORISM

-- President Clinton, Radio Address to the Nation, August 22:

"Our efforts against terrorism cannot and will not end with this strike. We should have realistic expectations about what a single action can achieve. And we must be prepared for a long battle. But it's high time that those who traffic in terror learn they, too, are vulnerable....As we close ranks against international threats, we must remember this: America will never give up the openness, the freedom and the tolerance that define us. For the ultimate target of these terrorist attacks is our ideals, and they must be defended at any cost."

-- Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, interview at U.S. Capitol, August 21:

"I think what we really have to understand now is that the terrorist threat is a longer-term one and it's a global one. We will maintain, along with other civilized countries in the world, a sustained effort to deal with what is an increasing terrorist threat....This is, unfortunately, the war of the future. We're all dedicated to making sure that Americans, whether they are at home or abroad, as well as other innocent people in other countries, do not have to live their lives under the threat of those who believe that taking down innocent people is some form of political expression."

-- Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, interview on ABC-TV's "This Week with Sam Donaldson and Cokie Roberts," August 23:

"We see this as a long-term struggle with terrorism. I think unfortunately...this is something that we're going to be dealing with at the end of the century and into the next one. We need to have a lot of cooperation from others. But as we made very clear this week, we will take unilateral action when we think that our national interest has been threatened."

-- Defense Secretary William Cohen, interview on NBC TV's "Meet the Press" program, August 23:

"...the American people...can be sure that if we are attacked, they certainly are going to see a response....this is not a one-time event, as President Clinton and Secretary Albright have indicated. This is a long-term engagement. We intend to take down that terror network to do what we can to ensure that the American people and our friends are safe from the threat of terrorism."

-- National Security Adviser Sandy Berger, interview on CNN's Late Edition news program, August 23:

"We have been after bin Ladin and his network for a number of years, in a number of ways. Some of his associates, Ramzi Yousef, for example, who was affiliated with the World Trade Center (bombing), we finally arrested; brought back to justice; (he) was convicted....I think that it is important to see this as a long term effort, a long term struggle. We have knowledge, we know that these groups essentially have declared war on the United States. It is going to take a sustained, determined, systematic effort for us to go after these groups, and we intend to do that.

DISRUPTING BIN LADIN'S FINANCIAL NETWORK

-- President Clinton, Radio Address to the Nation, August 22:

"I'm determined to use all the tools at our disposal. That is why I have just signed an executive order directing the Treasury to block all financial transactions between the bin Ladin terrorist group and American persons and companies. We'll urge other governments to do the same. We must not allow sanctuary for terrorism -- not for terrorists or for their money. It takes money -- lots of it -- to build the network bin Ladin has. We'll do our best to see that he has less of it."

-- Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs Thomas Pickering, briefing at the Washington Foreign Press Center, August 25:

"We intended to pursue our anti-terror policy using all the tools and all of the resources at our command. On the same day as our military strikes, the president signed an executive order directing the Treasury Department to block all financial transactions between Usama bin Ladin's terrorist network and American persons and companies, and he urged other governments to do the same. And yesterday, Secretary Albright announced a new United States-United Kingdom plan to go forward with a trial in the Netherlands, before Scottish judges and applying Scottish law, of the two Libyans suspected of bombing Pam Am Flight 103 nearly 10 years ago."

-- U.S. Ambassador Robert Pelletreau, former Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs, interview on USIA Worldnet Global Exchange, August 24:

"If you have, as you understand Mr. bin Laden has, investments in a number of countries, and the ability to mobilize large financial resources in support of some terrorist action, that is one of the areas that we have to go after. And we have to start doing it at home. We have to start by making sure that our own laws and our own framework will do the maximum possible to prevent this from happening in our country, and him making use of facilities available in our country. Then we have to go out and expand this cooperation internationally...and I believe that we will see this happening over the months ahead."

U.S. RECORD OF BRINGING TERRORISTS TO JUSTICE

-- President Clinton, White House statement, August 20:

"America has battled terrorism for many years. Where possible, we've used law enforcement and diplomatic tools to wage the fight. The long arm of American law has reached out around the world and brought to trial those guilty of attacks in New York, in Virginia, and in the Pacific. We have quietly disrupted terrorist groups and foiled their plots. We have isolated countries that practice terrorism. We've worked to build an international coalition against terror. But there have been and will be times when law enforcement and diplomatic tools are simply not enough, when our very national security is challenged, and when we must take extraordinary steps to protect the safety of our citizens."

-- President Clinton, Radio Address to the Nation, August 8:

"In recent years we have captured major terrorists in the far corners of the world and brought them to America to answer for their crimes -- sometimes years after they were committed. They include the man who murdered two CIA employees outside its headquarters. Four years later we apprehended him halfway around the world, and a Virginia jury sentenced him to death. The mastermind of the World Trade Center bombing who fled far from America -- two years later, we brought him back for trial in New York. And the terrorist responsible for bombing a Pan Am jet bound for Hawaii from Japan in 1982, we pursued him for 16 years. This June we caught him....Some serious acts of terror remain unresolved, including the attack on our military personnel at Khobar Towers in Saudi Arabia; the bombing of Pan Am 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland; and now, these horrible bombings in Africa. No matter how long it takes or where it takes us, we will pursue terrorists until the cases are solved and justice is done."

-- National Security Adviser Sandy Berger, White House press briefing, August 20:

"We have strengthened a number of our laws with respect to terrorist organizations. We have intensified our intelligence capability, our counterterrorism capabilities in other areas. In the last five years we have apprehended about 40 terrorists that were around the world and brought them to justice -- some after periods as long as 12 years. So we will continue that effort and continue to carry on this battle against the scourge of terrorism."

-- Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs Thomas Pickering, State Department press briefing, August 21:

"We have fought this threat for many years and in many ways, including diplomacy, the rule of law and serious actions such as we have taken yesterday. We have also had several successes -- some are published, some are not -- apprehending terrorists wherever possible and putting them on trial, thwarting planned attacks and isolating state sponsors of terrorism. But as the President said yesterday, there are times when law enforcement and diplomatic tools are simply not enough."

SUPPORT FROM CONGRESS FOR THE U.S. STRIKES

-- Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich (Republican, Georgia), August 20:

"We have not yet gotten assessments of the damage, but I hope that it's been very decisive and I think it's very important that we sent the signal to countries like Sudan and Afghanistan that if you house a terrorist, you become a target."

-- Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott (Republican, Mississippi), August 20:

"Based on intelligence provided to me Wednesday, the Administration has very reliable information linking the terrorist Usama bin Ladin and his bases to the cowardly attacks on our embassies in Kenya and Tanzania. Our response appears to be appropriate and just. As I said in my State of the Union response in January: 'Despite any current controversy, this Congress will vigorously support the President in full defense of America's interests throughout the world.'"

-- Representative Lee Hamilton (Democrat, Indiana), senior Democrat on House International Relations Committee, August 20:

"I support the action that the President took earlier today. I think the target of terrorism is America and Americans, and this represents a new phase in our effort against terrorism. We must take steps that we have not taken in the past....We are not attacking Islamic countries, we are attacking Islamic extremists who murder people. This should in no way be seen as an attack against Islam."

-- Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Jesse Helms (Republican, North Carolina), August 20:

"Today's U.S. military actions in Sudan and Afghanistan were clearly designed to strike at the heart of a terrorist network that has the blood of American citizens on its hands, and which was planning further attacks on U.S. nationals. It is my strong hope that these operations have been successful....There must be no refuge for terrorists who murder innocent American citizens. Sooner or later, terrorists around the world will realize that America's differences end at the water's edge, and that the United States' political leadership always has, and always will, stand united in the face of international terrorism."

-- Senator John McCain (Republican, Arizona), August 20:

"Today's military action against Usama bin Ladin's terrorist infrastructure in Afghanistan and Sudan is a welcome response to the August 7 terrorist attacks against the American Embassies in Kenya and Tanzania. I know I speak for all Americans in supporting the U.S. service members who took part in this operation, and in hoping that the strikes clearly signal our will to retaliate against terrorists who target American citizens abroad.

"Foreign terrorists must not doubt that political differences at home do not weaken our resolve to use all means at our disposal to defend our national security interests. We must attack terrorism at its source in order to deter it from our own shores...."

-- Senator Sam Brownback (Republican, Kansas), August 20:

"The United States will not be intimidated by terrorist activities and threats. Terrorists must know that if they attack U.S. citizens, we will respond with deadly force. Those who would harm the security of the United States and its citizens have no place to hide."

-- Senator Chuck Hagel (Republican, Nebraska), August 20:

"I support the President's actions. Terrorism is the scourge of our time and we must deal with it swiftly, forcefully, and without mercy. Today's military strikes were a response to the killing of hundreds of innocent civilians in the bombings in Kenya and Tanzania, and to the continued threats against U.S. Embassies around the world. While today's strikes sent a clear message to the world's terrorists and those who harbor them, they will not end this threat. We must prepare ourselves for a long fight against terrorism.

"Those who wish America ill and who would resort to cowardly and despicable acts against American citizens must know that we will hunt them down. We will take the necessary actions to protect our citizens and preserve our civilization."

-- Senator Alfonse D'Amato (Republican, New York), August 20:

"If people think the Congress is not going to be totally supportive of the commander-in-chief, they're just mistaken. This may serve notice that, whatever our local disagreements, we stand with our commander-in-chief, and he was absolutely proper and forceful."

-- Representative Dan Burton (Republican, Indiana), August 20:

"I take the action for what it was -- to stop the terrorists and to make them pay for what they did. And that was the right thing to do. That's coming from one of the president's severest critics."

-- Representative Ike Skelton (Democrat, Missouri), senior Democrat on House National Security Committee, August 20:

"We just had to do it, we just had to....We're quite sure the attacks in Africa came from these two places, and we had to strike back."

-- Senator Charles Robb (Democrat, Virginia), August 21:

"Anyone who provides safe harbor for terrorists ought to take a look at what happened this time around....This is only Phase One of an operation that will continue."

WORLD LEADERS' STATEMENTS ON U.S. ACTIONS

Prime Minister Tony Blair (UK):

"The atrocities this month in Nairobi, Dar es Salaam, and Omagh have shown the pain and suffering terrorism can bring to innocent people. I strongly support this American action against international terrorists. Terrorists the world over much know that democratic governments will act decisively to prevent their evil crimes."

Chancellor Helmut Kohl (Germany):

"The German Federal Government decisively condemns all forms of terrorism. Terrorism can only be defeated through cooperation and consistent, determined actions by all states.

"The Federal Government therefore supports all measures to combat this scourge of the international community. This applies especially to the US response against organizations in Afghanistan and Sudan that have been linked to the terrorist attacks against U.S. Embassies in Kenya and Tanzania.

"The Federal Government is united with President Clinton and the international community in the determination that common actions to combat terrorist actions and attacks must be carried forward with commitment and on the foundation of existing international conventions."

Prime Minister Lionel Jospin (France):

"We expressed our indignation and our compassion and our solidarity in the face of the bombings in Dar es Salaam and in Nairobi. We said we took note of the fact that the American authorities had hit a number of targets, citing the right of legitimate defense of nations which are themselves attacked, by virtue of international law, and in fact I believe we also say clearly we must give determined and firm responses against terrorists, wherever they hit from."

Prime Minister Keizo Obuchi (Japan):

"I believe firm measures should be taken against acts of terrorism following the bombings of two American Embassies in Africa. Although details of the U.S. military operation are not yet fully known, Washington's resolute stance toward terrorists is understandable."

Foreign Minister Wolfgang Schuessel (Austria):

"The EU, which considers the fight against international terrorist activities as its foremost important political task, will use all its means available to effectively combat acts of terror wherever they take place and whatever motives they are related to."

Foreign Minister Lena Hjelm-Wallen (Sweden):

"Terrorism is one of the world's great security challenges....Terrorism must be fought with determination and around the world, and within the system of international law. This underlines the need to intensify further international cooperation against terrorism."

Foreign Minister Van Aartsen (Netherlands):

"We do not yet know all the details, but from what Secretary of State Madeleine Albright said, I am convinced that the United States had adequate reasons and sufficient evidence."

Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu (Israel):

"We in Israel support the American action fully because...it really is an act of self-defense against ruthless terrorists who need no pretext to kill people, as they did in Nairobi and Tanzania and will do so again unless they are hit -- and hit conclusively and repeatedly."

Presidential Press Secretary Sergei Yyastrzhembskiy (Russia):

"Russia and the United States are in the same boat as far as combating global terrorism is concerned. We will understand the grief being felt over the loss of American lives, primarily in Kenya. There is no doubt that we have coordinated, and will continue to coordinate, the fight against global terrorism."

Deputy Prime Minister Bulent Ecevit (Turkey):

"Terrorism is the gravest danger facing the world and humanity today. Turkey is one of the countries that suffers most from terrorism, which has gained an international dimension. We must view with understanding the sensitivity that the US administration has shown in response to the attacks carried out against the US Missions and Embassy buildings which, according to international law, have immunity in all respects."

Foreign Ministry Spokesman Zhu Bangzao (China):

"China's position of condemning all forms of terrorist activities is clear and specific. We stand for handling the explosions in Kenya and Tanzania according to the United Nations Charter and the guiding principles of international law. The international community should strengthen its coordination and cooperation in rebuffing international terrorist activities so as to eliminate the source that generates international terrorism and to safeguard world peace and stability."

Foreign Minister Jan Kavan (Czech Republic):

"International terrorism cannot be tolerated...it must be fought...international terrorists must know that they are punishable."

President Yoweri Museveni (Uganda)

Museveni expressed his strong support for the U.S. actions against terrorism. He stated the one reason why Uganda does not have diplomatic relations with Sudan is because of its terrorist behavior -- as evidenced by the massacre of Atiak (Northern Uganda), the kidnap and defilement of the Abuke Girls School (Northern Uganda), and the recent Kichwamba incident (Western Uganda) where more than 30 students were incinerated and others kidnaped.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.