Posted on 06/11/2004 9:14:18 PM PDT by Mudboy Slim
- I couldn't find anything that verifies your Vangard article.
Is there a link to a mainstream news source?
The U.N. does verify ongoing weapons programs, but not that any had been shipped to other countries. Scrapyards in the Netherlands do have findings of Al Samoud missile parts, however.
Here's the link to the U.N. Doc:
A HREF=http://www.un.org/Depts/unmovic/new/documents/quarterly_reports/s-2004-435.pdf
From the U.N. Report:
III. Compendium of proscribed weapons and programmes
11. One of the issues currently under examination by UNMOVIC in the framework of work on the compendium is the evaluation of Iraq’s procurement network that operated from 1999 to 2002, the period in which inspectors were absent from Iraq.
During this period, Iraq utilized a sophisticated procurement network for the acquisition of foreign materials, equipment and technology. It consisted of State owned trading companies, established and controlled by the Military Industrialization Commission of Iraq, with branches in foreign countries, Iraqi private sector and foreign trading companies operating in Iraq and abroad, multiple intermediaries, chains of foreign suppliers of items and materials, bank accounts and transportation companies. In several instances, the Iraqi State-owned trading companies had shares in foreign trading companies or were closely affiliated with local private trading companies.
12. The prime purpose of the evaluation is to identify whether this network has been used for the acquisition of proscribed single-use or notifiable dual-use items and materials that could have been utilized by Iraq in a biological, chemical or missile programme.
13. The bulk of the data for the evaluation came from the semi-annual monitoring declarations of Iraq, procurement information obtained during the course of inspection activities in Iraq from November 2002 to March 2003, notes of interviews and discussions with Iraqi officials and electronic files retrieved through the forensic computer exploitation carried out at facilities and establishments involved in procurement. The computer files alone constitute some 12,000 pages of procurement documents, most of which are in Arabic. The following are preliminary findings of the ongoing examination.
14. In general, from 1999 to 2002 Iraq procured a variety of dual-use biological and chemical items and materials, including chemicals, equipment and spare parts.
To date, UNMOVIC has found no evidence that these were used for proscribed chemical or biological weapon purposes. Although some of the goods may have been acquired by Iraq outside the framework of mechanisms established under Security Council resolutions, most of them were later declared by Iraq to UNMOVIC in its semi-annual monitoring declarations.
15. However, in several instances Iraq provided misleading declarations regarding the suppliers and sources of the items and materials as well as procurement channels, claiming that they had been purchased on the local market. It appeared that they had been procured outside Iraq through private trading companies operating both in and outside of the country. There is much evidence that from 1999 to 2002 Iraq procured materials, equipment and components for use in its missile programmes. In several instances, the items procured were used by Iraq for programmes, such as the production of Al Samoud 2 missiles, that were determined by UNMOVIC in February 2003 to be proscribed. This can be illustrated by the acquisition of at least 380 SA-2 missile engines for Iraq's prime missile establishment by an Iraqi Government-owned trading company controlled by the Military Industrialization Commission through a local Iraqi trading company and a foreign trading company. UNMOVIC is currently analysing documents available to it in order to establish the source of the engines procured through the local trading company and of any additional SA-2 engines (or other missile-related items) that might have been procured by Iraq since 1999.
16. The same Iraqi governmental trading company was involved, through a contract with two foreign private companies, in procuring components and equipment for the manufacture and testing of missile guidance and control systems, including inertial navigation systems with fibre-optic and laser ring gyroscopes and Global Positioning System equipment, accelerometers, ancillary items and a variety of production and testing equipment.
The list of items sought includes several that were not declared or shown to UNMOVIC during the course of its inspections. One Iraqi trading company was also involved in the procurement, through private trading companies, of different pieces of missile-related production equipment and technology. Several foreign private subcontractors were responsible for the 6S/2004/435 implementation of specific parts of the general contract. UNMOVIC is in the process of assessing the possible applications of items and technology outlined in that contract.
17. UNMOVIC is trying to identify the extent to which these contracts have been fulfilled and what has actually been delivered to Iraq as well as the sources of items,
materials, components and technology.
Anyone still wanna believe that many "Mainstream" U.S. Muslims aren't preaching a hateful agenda, in their schools and in their Mosques? Check this story out at Fox News:
http://www.foxnews.com/printer_friendly_story/0,3566,46610,00.html
"U.S. Islamic Schools Teaching Homegrown Hate"
Wednesday, February 27, 2002
By Kenneth Adelman
NEW YORK — "Can it be true? That Islamic schools in the United States teach hatred towards American Christians and Jews?
The Washington Post on Monday revealed that one such school outside Washington, D.C., uses textbooks teaching 11th graders that "the Day of Judgment can't come until Jesus Christ returns to Earth, breaks the cross and converts everyone to Islam, and until Muslims start attacking Jews."
Other accredited Islamic schools in America have world maps on classroom walls that exclude Israel. Some such schools promote class discussions that portray Usama bin Laden as "simply the victim of … prejudice" against all Muslims in America.
These astonishing facts were broken by Post reporters Valerie Strauss and Emily Wax in their front-page piece, too tepidly entitled, "Where Two Worlds Collide: Muslim Schools Face Tension of Islamic, U.S. Views ...."
http://www.foxnews.com/printer_friendly_story/0,3566,46610,00.html
"Mainstream" U.S. Muslims"
If by using the word "mainstream" , you mean moderate, or want people to think that this is the majority of muslims in this country .... you're wrong. Yes, Saudi $$ is here and so are wahhabi. They Are NOT moderate, as evidenced by the teachings in the article.(duh). These are extremists, radicals.
Dubyuh's "Gonna Win California!!"
(To be sung to Led Zeppelin's "Goin' to California")
Spend my days justa FReepin' fer Right,
Smoked my stuff an' drank...all my wine.
Made up my mind, make a new start,
Goin'ta California with Dutch Reagan in my heart.
Limbaugh told me there're Lib'rals out there...
Right'll open their eyes...RAT Powers, they don't care!!
LeftWing dazzles but RATS' Soul is Maimed!!
Never let Press tell ya the Parties're all the same.
Hohh...DemRATS are Reds, Left's Med'yuh won't say,
RATS wonder how Left's "Heroes" could ever follow "Willaaaay!!"
RATS' Elites an' their minions start to tremble an' shake,
When children in LA...begin to awake...WATCH OUT!!
We FReep 'cuz Left's Hate fer what's Good's like a Punch to MY Nose...
But Truth's startin' to flow, I think Slick might be sinkin'!!
Slick, we'll INDICT...RE-IMPEACH...Fight RATS' Slime!!
Help FReep everywhere...folks, Truth's Path Runs Straight and Right!!
The HildaBeast's without her King...
Left says they'll Save the World..."Left LIES!!" MUD sings!! La la la la.
Slick's Left's Nightmare 'cuz RATS' Power's all gone...
Tryin'a find RAT-Saviors who'll never, never, never be born.
Help US Build that World Shinin' Proudly and FRee!!
Tellin' my FRiends, "It's not that hard, folks...Please help US FReep!!"
Mmm-ahh~ahh.
Ahh~ah~ahh-ah~ahh.
Ahh~ah~ahh-ah~ahh.
Ahh~ah~ahh-ah~ahh.
Ahh~ah~ahh.
Wanna bet...MUD (12/31/2002)
"Virginia’s aggressive push this year also represents a subtle shift in philosophy from last year, when the Cavaliers went to the wire with several high-profile national prospects but lost out on most of them at the last minute to schools such as Michigan, Southern Cal and Miami. Virginia’s recruiting class of 2004 was not as highly regarded as its previous classes.
This class, though, could be well on its way to being U.Va.’s best ever. “I’ve kept up with how Virginia is stacking this class,” Robinson told the Daily Progress of Charlottesville. “There’s a lot of big names becoming part of the program, and I wanted to become part of the great class of 2005 recruits.”
Fuller has kept up as well. “Everybody he’s picked so far, everybody I’ve met, is great,” Fuller said. “When you see other good players, who want to do well, you want to be on the same team with them. I really think we’re going to be a national contender team.”
WahooWah...MUD
"Third party fever seems to attack conservatives on a cyclical basis, something like a cicada rising, only a bit more frequently. After the moderate Republicans turned on Barry Goldwater in 1964 and helped cause his defeat, after the liberal GOP establishment defeated Ronald Reagan in 1976, and after more moderate candidates won the nomination over more right-leaning ones in 1988 and 2000, leading conservatives have called foul and sought the third party route.
They could not have been more wrong in 1964. Senator Goldwater's defeat was the best thing politically that ever happened to conservatism. It led to the conservative dominance of the party platform, rules and a large majority of candidates for at least the next three decades. Governor Reagan overcame the supposedly all-powerful establishment just four years after he was supposedly read out of the GOP forever and became a two term president who moved the whole world's agenda toward the right. As far as the two later experiences, conservatives had their challengers both times and since when has whining become us? In a party where conservatives represent a large majority of voters, we could not unify on a candidate and the moderates won. Was that their fault or our own?
An American party is simply a framework for political organization. Its primary voters, activists and candidates fill in the rest--walls, ceiling, floors, platforms, rules, candidates, funding and participation. The U.S. winner-take-all electoral system encourages two major parties, one staking out the left and one the right of the political spectrum. The groups representing philosophical tendencies and material interests divide up into two broad sets of players, decide what particular ideologies and officeholders will contest with the other side through primaries, and then the two battle it out in November to see which wins. The nomination process is when the conservatives and moderates fight it out to get the bonus votes of the partyline voters in the general election. Whichever faction secures the nomination sets the tone for the next four years. After the nomination, it is too late since third parties cannot win.
Sure, conservatives will be weak at the 2004 Republican convention. Conservatives could have united behind Steve Forbes in 2000 but they choose not to do so. No one challenged George W. Bush for the nomination in 2004 and that is how the system works. No other way makes sense and conservatives need a fair system when it is their turn. Paleoconservatives argue that conservatives are doomed to always play second fiddle to the moderates since they have the money and, therefore, conservatives should start a third party. Ronald Reagan proved that financing was not a barrier if the right is united. Our time will come again and it is in our interest to preserve the two party system until we get our own act together.
In the meantime, the battle goes on. Rep. Patrick Toomey took on the White House, a savvy long-time moderate Republican senator with a 3-to-1 spending advantage, the whole Pennsylvania GOP establishment including a popular fellow conservative senator and kept the incumbent to 50.8 percent of the primary vote. As one reporter put it, Toomey "was brazen enough to suggest the party is deserting the antispending, antitax beliefs that helped bring it to power in Congress 10 years ago." Rather than the defeat of conservatism, Toomey looks more like Goldwater as the precursor of the next wave of revival for the principles of limited government that made this party so successful. Toomey himself may be just between jobs as the potential next governor of his state.
The same Republican primary in Pennsylvania also saw a conservative challenger to Rep. Bill Schuster, the son of a long-serving archetypal big-spending Republican, almost overcoming long odds and a massive spending advantage. Long time conservative activist and former GOP nominee for governor, Bill Sizemore, reports nearby the defeat by an underfunded conservative challenger of what he calls a Republican-In-Name-Only who supported a large tax increase in liberal Oregon. In South Carolina, five big-spending Republican lost primaries, including the House leader. In North Carolina, the speaker of the state House is being challenged by a conservative who is receiving the support of most of the Republican contributors and activists in the state and who is widely expected to upset the long time incumbent.
Senate primaries in 2004 represent an incredible opportunity for conservatives to win nominations especially in Southern states trending Republican. Open seats in Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, Colorado, North Carolina and South Carolina all could lead to the election of conservatives more willing to fight the establishment. Jim DeMint has just won a critical primary in South Carolina. He is a one man army who could make all of the difference in the world in a Senate where one person can make an enormous impact. Think how we miss the leadership of Jesse Helms and Phil Gramm. Jim has proven himself in vote after vote, ideological battle after battle. He has a record that only a few dozen can equal and none can exceed. It is easy to espouse conservative principles when everyone is going with you; it is difficult if the party legislative leadership or the White House is pushing for a bad bill that they think is necessary. Jim DeMint is not afraid to say no to his friends when necessary. In the Senate, that attitude makes the difference between just a vote and a leader for conservative principles.
Another potential nominee who can make a difference is former Congressman Tom Colburn, who is running for a Republican Senate seat in Oklahoma, in a difficult multi-candidate primary. Some of the other candidates are sound but Tom was the one Congressman every conservative in Washington knew would always stand up for the right thing. He even took a term limit pledge and had the strength of character to actually step down and give another person a chance at his House seat. Paul Weyrich tells the full story about why his election is so critical for conservatives. David Vitter in Louisiana and Bob Schaffer in Colorado are other candidates who could make a big difference.
The Club for Growth specializes in targeting primaries where conservatives are challenging moderates for legislative office and can provide many more examples of races critical for conservatives (www.clubforgrowth.org). The conservative Congressmen who led the fight to defeat the unpopular $8 trillion unfunded Medicare drug bill are planning a joint fundraising committee to help conservatives who can make a difference to win public office, especially in higher office, after they have proved they have the guts to go against their leadership in the House when matters of principle are at stake.
Conservatives looking for opportunities to advance their agenda can find many outlets for their energies in primaries within the Republican Party. The third party route drains effort from the more critical battle to return the party of the right to the principles of 1964 and 1980 that have made it great.
Donald Devine, Editor."
Interesting opinion...MUD
Third Parties are mathematically flawed in an American system (as opposed to a European Parliamentary system).If you don't have the votes to take over one of the 2 main Parties, after all, then how do you expect to win nationally?!
Either you have the votes to win 50.1% of one of the 2 Parties, or else you have no prayer of having enough votes to win nationally.
FReegards...MUD
The math says different.You'll have the votes to take over one of the two Parties *before* you'll have the votes needed to win an entire national election.
So in our system, it's a two Party game.
-Maybe. Maybe not. Of course there are moderare Muslims-
Muslims that don't read or actually follow the Qur'an, which is full of hateful quotes by Muhammad, who advocated violence towards Jews and Christians alike.
Take a look at the "Prophet" Muhammad's quotes below.
He is after all, the founder and spiritual guide for the Islamic religion:
After moving to Medina, Muhammad began to have conflict with the Jews and pagans in the area. Muhammad commanded his followers to:
"kill any Jew that comes under your power"
From Guillaume, op cit, page 369:
"The Apostle (Muhammad)said, "Kill any Jew that falls into your power." Thereupon Muhayyisa b. Masud leapt upon Ibn Sunayna, a Jewish merchant with whom they had social and business relations, and killed him. Huwayyisa was not a Muslim at the time though he was the elder brother. When Muhayyisa killed him Huwayyisa began to beat him, saying, (to his brother, a Muslim) "You enemy of God, did you kill him when much of the fat on your belly comes from his wealth?"
Muhayyisa answered, (TO HIS OWN BROTHER):"Had the one who ordered me to kill him ordered me to kill you I would have cut your head off."
This story is also supported in the Sunan of Abu Dawud, Book 19, Number 2996:
Narrated Muhayyisah:
"The Apostle of Allah said: If you gain a victory over the men of Jews, kill them."
So Muhayyisah jumped over Shubaybah, a man of the Jewish merchants. He had close relations with them. He then killed him. At that time Huwayyisah (brother of Muhayyisah) had not embraced Islam. He was older than Muhayyisah. When he killed him, Huwayyisah beat him and said: O enemy of Allah, I swear by Allah, you have a good deal of fat in your belly from his property.
This murder was committed upon Muhammad's command. Note that this Muslim murderer would have killed a family member at the drop of a hat. Muhammad was no better than a bigoted criminal boss, ordering his men to wantonly murder Jewish people. Hitler did this."
MUHAMMAD'S EARLY TERRORIST ACTS
"Yes, Saudi $$ is here and so are wahhabi. They Are NOT moderate, as evidenced by the teachings in the article.(duh). These are extremists, radicals."
- Wahhabism is the dominant sect of the Islamic religion, which most closely follows the teachings of the "Prophet" Muhhamad.
Wahhabism is also strongest in Saudi Arabia, home of Mecca, a place where Muhammad amassed a 10,00 man army and conquered his foes. It's no small irony that Muslims pray toward Mecca, Saudi Arabia, instead of towards our kind and loving God in Heaven.
Lost WalletA guy was traveling through Mexico on vacation when, lo and behold, he lost his wallet and all identification.
Cutting his trip short, he attempts to make his way home but is stopped by the Customs Agent at the border.
"May I see your identification, please?" asks the agent.
"I'm sorry, but I lost my wallet," replies the guy.
"Sure, buddy, I hear that every day. No ID, no crossing the border," says the agent.
"But I can prove that I'm an American!" he exclaims. "I have a picture of Ronald Reagan tattooed on one butt cheek and a picture of George Bush on the other."
"This I gotta see," replies the agent. With that, Joe drops his pants and bends over in front of the agent. ! "By golly, you're right!" exclaims the agent. "Go on home to Boston."
"Thanks!" he says. "But how did you know I was from Boston?"
The agent replies, "I recognized the picture of John Kerry in the middle."
So, how're you going to blame this one on Clinton?
Not true. Wahhabism is far from the dominant sect of Islam, and it cherry-picks information from Muhammad's teachings to further its own agenda.
Hmm. I still owe you a response from the last thread...there's a lot to respond to, but I'll try to get to it soon.
And how do you know Simpson never said this? If it's a lie, I would think Simpson would speak up and say so, and I haven't heard a peep from him yet.
Like I said, you'd haveta be extremely naive to believe this krap, but I guess what makes SlickWillie tolerable to the masses of the DemonRAT victim class is their Willfull Ignorance, 'cuz nobody could be THAT STOOOOOPID without doing it on purpose, imho!!
So your response to Simpson's analysis is, basically, "That's stupid!" Why is it so stupid, exactly? Because Clinton, your personal anti-Christ, said it?
Oh, Mud, Mud, Mud. We've still got a lot of work to do with you to help you see the light. I'm going to have to cut back your medication soon. =)
The wahhabi are Not moderate, and they are Not mainstream.
They are a small sect, who unfortunately have a lot of money behind them. They do Not speak for the majority, although they would like the U.S. and other countries to Think they do.
The only cherry picking is by those who choose to omit the Qur'an verses and Islamic Hadiths, that speak of the violence and murder condoned by the "Prophet" Muhhamad.
As to comparisons to the violence in the Old Testament?
Christians are told to follow the the teachings in the New Testament, the teachings of Jesus, who never hurt anyone.
Jesus said many times that there would be false "Prophets" but that we would know them by their works.
Well, I think I can tell a false "prophet", when see one, and Muhhamad fits that description just like a walking, quacking, web footed creature fits the description of a duck.
To deny that Muhammad was a barbaric, murderous thug, is like denying Hitler was the same. It's naive, and it's no more bigoted to critisize the "Prophet" Muhammad, Islam, and the Koran, than it is to critisize Hitler, Nazisim, and Mein Kampf.
Both founder's ideologies taught hatred, violence, and murder.
Please don't get me wrong. I don't hate moderate (peaceful) Muslims, but I hate their intolerant, misogynistic, death cult every bit as much as I hate the Nazis.
Below is an excellant editorial by an ex-muslim, please read it when you get a chance:
Regards
Thanks for the reply, FRiend.
I'll take your word for it about Wahhabism not being a majority sect.
Please see Post #237, and read the linked testimonial by an ex- muslim. It's well worth the read.
Regards
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1152209/replies?comment=237
Don't even THINK about patronizing me, Lib'ralBOT...yer undying devotion to such a lowrent inconsequential character as Der SchleekMeister tells me everything I need to know about yer own lack of a core.
MUD
BTW...NO WAY Alan Simpson was correctly quoted, and I'm sure his denial will be shortly forthcoming. Slick Willie's a lying sheyster, it's what he does....yet the MORONS on the Left continue to believe his lies, over and over and over again!! Absolute MORONS believe things that are demonstrably and provably FALSE!!
The DemonRAT Base is MORONIC!!
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.
