Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Canada Believes Saddam Had WMD
CNews ^ | May 11, 2004 | STEPHANIE RUBEC,

Posted on 05/15/2004 9:44:50 PM PDT by FederalistUSA

Canada Believes Saddam Had WMD

In a speech this week that has received precious little media attention (especially considering the frenzy surrounding Abu Ghraib), Canadian Prime Minister Paul Martin announced that he believes Saddam Hussein possessed biological, chemical and nuclear WMD, which have now fallen into terrorist hands. "The fact is that there is now, we know well, a proliferation of nuclear weapons, and that many weapons that Saddam Hussein had, we don't know where they are," Martin told university researchers and business leaders in Montreal on Sunday. "That means terrorists have access to all of that."

Saying that the threat leveled against the West is even greater now than in the aftermath of September 11, 2001, Martin continued, "I believe that terrorism will be, for our generation, what the Cold War was to generations that preceded us," he said. "I don't think we're out of it yet." Equally bold, Martin took direct aim at his predecessor, consummate braying Jacque-ass Jean Chrétien, who infamously identified the root of terrorism and the 9/11 attacks as poverty. "The cause of terrorism is not poverty," rebutted Martin, "it is hatred."

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/05/12/politics/12syri.html?ex=1085112000&en=38c2627888103552&ei=5006&partner=ALTAVISTA1 Wednesday, President Bush enacted sanctions against Syria for its collaboration with terrorist insurgents against the U.S.-led reconstruction of Iraq. Calling the "unusual and extraordinary threat" posed by Syria a "national emergency," Mr. Bush said of the Syrian Accountability Act, "Despite many months of diplomatic efforts to convince the Government of Syria to change its behavior, Syria has not taken significant, concrete steps to address the full range of U.S. concerns." Syria, you recall was the source of WMD recently recovered in Jordan -- WMD that Syria did not have the capability to produce -- WMD which, we suspect, originated in Iraq.


TOPICS: Canada; Foreign Affairs; Government; News/Current Events; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: wmd
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-22 next last

1 posted on 05/15/2004 9:44:50 PM PDT by FederalistUSA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: FederalistUSA

".......President Bush enacted sanctions against Syria for its collaboration with terrorist insurgents against the U.S.-led reconstruction of Iraq. Calling the "unusual and extraordinary threat" posed by Syria a "national emergency,..........."


Translation: Syria, if I win the election, you're next!


2 posted on 05/15/2004 9:51:12 PM PDT by Gator113
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Gator113
Translation: Syria, if WHEN I win the election, you're next!
3 posted on 05/15/2004 9:53:24 PM PDT by TADSLOS (Right Wing Infidel since 1954)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: FederalistUSA

And in the mean time Canada still will not send troops to help us out in Iraq AND CONTINUES to provide sanctuary to two U.S. military deserters.


4 posted on 05/15/2004 9:55:04 PM PDT by CWOJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FederalistUSA
Hussein possessed biological, chemical and nuclear WMD, which have now fallen into terrorist hands. "The fact is that there is now, we know well, a proliferation of nuclear weapons, and that many weapons that Saddam Hussein had, we don't know where they are..."

...and the hell of it is, we don't know where they are (they WERE in Syria; now, who knows?) precisely because the U.N., France, Germany, Russia, all dragged their feet sufficiently long (4 months), when we could have invaded in November, 2002 and sealed it all in. But nooo-o-o-o-o; now that we KNOW the U.N. will NEVER acquiesce in ANY military solution, it would be the height of irresponsibility for any president to EVER seek their approbation again, especially with so much on the line. The U.N. is worthless; they're WORSE than worthless; they're a menace.

5 posted on 05/15/2004 9:55:38 PM PDT by Migraine (my grain is pretty straight today)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FederalistUSA

I don't care what Canada says, even after the USA has 4 or 5 more states.


6 posted on 05/15/2004 10:04:53 PM PDT by SevenDaysInMay (Federal judges and justices serve for periods of good behavior, not life. Article III sec. 1)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FederalistUSA

Seems to me that the new leadership in Canada under Paul Martin is coming around to the fact that the previous leadership of Chretien was WRONG regarding the War On Terror. Canada is now officially admitting to the grave danger of terrorists and WMD falling in the wrong hands. That seems to be also a tacit admission that Canada was wrong not to follow Bush's lead against terrorism.

This change of policy within the same liberal party brings new danger. I saw a FreeP thread that Al-Queda is now threatening Canada too. Canadians have thought all along that they wouldn't be in danger if they don't join Bush's coalition against terror. That's going to change now. It would be too easy for Al-Queda to attack in Canada. There are already terrorist cells hiding in the country, waiting to attack the US. The government of Canada is finally waking up. What horrible event will it take for the rest of Canadians to wake up too?


7 posted on 05/15/2004 10:05:40 PM PDT by plushaye
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Migraine

IMHO, what the US knows about WMD in foreign hands will probably never be, nor should be public knowledge. I don't know why this has been played and condoned on our political arena.


8 posted on 05/15/2004 10:07:14 PM PDT by Cvengr (;^))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: plushaye

I have not kept up with Canadas leaders much.
When did Paul Martin get elected?


9 posted on 05/15/2004 10:09:15 PM PDT by GottaLuvAkitas1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: plushaye
"What horrible event will it take for the rest of Canadians to wake up too?"

Someone to spray paint crude comments in English on the Parliment building WITHOUT providing a french translation.

10 posted on 05/15/2004 10:10:28 PM PDT by CWOJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: GottaLuvAkitas1
When did Paul Martin get elected?

Prime Ministers in Canada don't get elected.
It is the party that gets elected.

11 posted on 05/15/2004 10:12:19 PM PDT by Allan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: GottaLuvAkitas1

He didn't get elected. Jean Chretien retired and Paul Martin was chosen as his successor. The new national election is June 28. It's Martin vs Stephen Harper of the newly combined Reform party/Conservative party.


12 posted on 05/15/2004 10:14:53 PM PDT by plushaye
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: plushaye

To clarify my above comment, it's the Liberal Party (lead by Martin) vs the Conservative/Reform (lead by Harper) party. The party with the most candidates gets to be the ruling party, and the leader becomes the Prime Minister. Right now Martin's Liberal Party is still tipped to get the most seats.


13 posted on 05/15/2004 10:17:51 PM PDT by plushaye
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: GottaLuvAkitas1

He wasn't elected as PM. He instead was elected as leader of the Liberal Party, when it was clear Jean Chretien would tank in the party elections. When Chretien resigned as Prime Minister, Martin was immediately appointed by the GG.


14 posted on 05/15/2004 10:34:21 PM PDT by El Conservador ("No blood for oil!"... Then don't drive, you moron!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: FederalistUSA

"I believe that terrorism will be, for our generation, what the Cold War was to generations that preceded us," he said. "I don't think we're out of it yet."

and who's umbrella did ya'll sit under during that time...this is laughable.....what's this "we" crapola??...please no posts about a measly handful of snipers in Afghanistan.


15 posted on 05/15/2004 10:40:40 PM PDT by teldon30
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #16 Removed by Moderator

To: Officious Pedant
We and the Israelis have knowledge of convoys going from Iraq to the Bekka Valley eons ago. This was well reported as happening in the weeks before our initial assault last year. Where ya been doofus?

Nam Vet

17 posted on 05/15/2004 11:06:17 PM PDT by Nam Vet (The Trolls keep coming.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Officious Pedant

Welcome to FR.


18 posted on 05/15/2004 11:10:21 PM PDT by Watery Tart (We?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

Comment #19 Removed by Moderator

Comment #20 Removed by Moderator


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-22 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson