BASIC OLDER POST: Berger rejected four plans to kill or capture bin Laden at http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1177555/posts

DEMOCRATS: WEAK ON DEFENSE

DEMOCRATS HAVE REPEATEDLY VOTED TO SLASH INTELLIGENCE FUNDING
Do YOU want THEM to take over the Congress?
(EVERY Democrat elected to Congress WILL vote for Nancy Pelosi or some other terrorist-appeaser for Speaker of the House). EVERY Democrat elected to the Senate WILL vote for "cut and run" Harry Reid for Majority Leader and block pro-security judges nominated to the Supreme and appellate courts.

Democrats Have Repeatedly Voted To Cut Intelligence Funding, Even After September 11th:

In 2003, 33 SENATE Democrats Voted To Withhold $50 Million In Intelligence Funding. (H.R. 2658, CQ Vote #287: Motion Agreed To 62-34: R 51-0; D 11-33; I 0-1, 7/17/03)

In 2003, 44 SENATE Democrats Supported An Amendment That Would Have Transferred $300 Million Away From Intelligence Activities. (H.R. 2555, CQ Vote #294: Motion Agreed To 50-48: R 48-3; D 2-44; I 0-1, 7/23/03)

In 1996, 154 House Democrats Voted To Reduce The Total Amount Authorized By The Fiscal Year 1997 Intelligence Authorization By 4.9 Percent. (H.R. 3259, CQ Vote #187: Rejected 192-235: R 37-193; D 154-42; I 1-0, 5/22/96)

In 1995, 40 SENATE Democrats Voted To Slash FBI Funding By $80 Million. (H.R. 2076, CQ Vote #480: Adopted 49-41: R 9-40; D 40-1, 9/29/95)

In 1993, 120 House Democrats Voted To Cut Intelligence By $500 Million. (H.R. 2330, CQ Vote #393: Rejected: 134-299: R 13-159; D 120-14; I 1-0, 8/4/93)

In 1989, 31 House Democrats Voted Against Authorizing Appropriations For Intelligence And Intelligence-Related Activities Of The U.S. Government For The CIA And Related Agencies. (H.R. 2748, CQ Vote #288: Passed 369-31: R 161-8; D 208-23, 10/12/89)

"American supremacy is the greatest threat to the world today." -- George Soros, MoveOn.org's billionaire benefactor
"Now it's our party! We bought it, we own it!"-- Radical leftist Eli Pariser, one of the organizers and leaders of MoveOn.org, referring to the Democratic Party.
"Last fall, the far-Left Nation magazine declared a purge – an exercise at which the Left excels – against any Democrat unwilling to cut-and-run." -- Ben Johnson, 8/9/06 [and, together with all the other left-wing nutcases, they beat Sen. Joe Lieberman, the last of the strong-on-security Democrats, in his Senatorial primary]
Now about that hysteria over "warrantless searches": You can't even WRITE, let alone issue, a warrant to look for patterns in communications, a warrant for the purpose of eventually finding unexpected patterns that might appear out of the blue, like "liquids" mentioned along with "airplanes." It was THIS type of pattern recognition that allowed U.S. Intelligence agencies to alert the British about the latest terrorist airliner plot just before a radical-leftist appellate judge (nominated by Democrat Jimmy Carter -- and confirmed by the Senate ONLY BECAUSE DEMOCRATS WERE IN THE MAJORITY at the time) ruled that terrorist- monitoring is unconstitutional.
"A strict observance of the written laws is doubtless one of the high duties of a good citizen, but it is not the highest. The laws of necessity, of self- preservation, of saving our country when in danger, are of higher obligation. To lose our country by a scrupulous adherence to written law would be to lose the law itself, with life, liberty, property, and all those who are enjoying them with us; thus absurdly sacrificing the end to the means." -- Thomas Jefferson to John Colvin, 1810
"The Senate Select Committee on Intelligence has published a report that makes one wonder if they know who really is the enemy. ... In both houses of the U.S. Congress the committees and sub-committees which used to concern themselves with threats to national security by alien and subversive groups have been closed down. There is, however, a Senate Committee to ride herd on our intelligence gathering agencies to see that they number one, operate lawfully, and number two, effectively. So far they've only concerned themselves with number one." -- Ronald Reagan, June 15, 1977 (when both houses of Congress were controlled by DEMOCRATS)
"In a very real sense, the reason September eleven of '01 happened is because right behind me about five blocks the [Democrat-controlled] Frank Church committee hearings in the early 1970's and the [Democrat] Carter administration later in the 1970's largely destroyed the CIA's operations directorate." -- Tom Clancy on Kudlow and Cramer, 9/2/03
"Actually you can trace our failures in stopping global terror all the way back to Jimmy Carter and Democratic Senator Frank Church." -- Neal Boortz, 9/1/03
"Carter helped to usher in the 'Iranian Revolution' of 1979 by leaning on the [pro- U.S.] Shah of Iran to 'release political prisoners' [which ultimately led to his downfall and his replacement by the Islamofascist mullahs and ayatollahs]." -- Larry Elder, 8/24/06
The first country to steal oilfields developed by western companies with their advanced technology (which gave them rightful ownership) was Iran in 1951. The inaction and silence (and possibly tacit approval) on the part of Prime Minister Attlee [Labor Party] in the U.K., with the acquiescence of President Truman [Democrat] in the U.S. (and the invisible, extremely slow and unnecessarily secretive response on the part of their eventual successors) set the stage for all the other Muslim countries in the middle east to eagerly follow suit, eventually giving to pathetic primitive barbarians the ability to purchase nuclear weapons (let alone computers) and spread unspeakably evil philosophies around the world.
ALWAYS REMEMBER WHO SAID THIS (and why we have his country surrounded): "...Is it possible for us to witness a world without America and Zionism?...you had best know that this slogan and this goal are attainable, and surely can be achieved..." -- Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, "elected" leader of Iran

Now here's something ELSE scary: Nomatter how nice they may be in person, EVERY Democrat in the Congress WILL vote for San Francisco's soft-on- terrorism Nancy Pelosi or some other moveon- beholden liberal for Speaker of the House, 3rd in line for the Presidency.

DEMOCRATS HAVE REPEATEDLY VOTED AGAINST FUNDING FOR OUR TROOPS FIGHTING THE WAR ON TERROR
Do YOU want THEM to take over the Congress?

Democrats Have Voted Against Billions In Funding To Support Our Troops In Iraq And Afghanistan:

In 2005, 54 House Democrats Voted Against Over $37 Billion In Funding For Military Operations In Iraq And Afghanistan. (H.R. 1268, CQ Vote #161: Adopted 368-58: R 225-3; D 143-54; I 0-1, 5/5/05)

In 2005, 39 House Democrats Voted Against Over $53 Billion In Funding For Military Operations And Reconstruction In Iraq And Afghanistan. (H.R. 1268, CQ Vote #77: Passed 388-43: R 226-3; D 162-39; I 0-1, 3/16/05)

In 2003, 11 SENATE Democrats Voted Against $87 Billion For Military Operations And Reconstruction In Iraq And Afghanistan. (S. 1689, CQ Vote #400: Passed 87-12: R 50-0; D 37-11; I 0-1, 10/17/03)

In 2003, 115 House Democrats Voted Against $87 Billion For Military Operations and Reconstruction In Iraq And Afghanistan. (H.R. 3289, CQ Vote #601: Adopted 298-121: R 216-5; D 82-115; I 0-1; 10/31/03)

DEMOCRATS HAVE REPEATEDLY VOTED AGAINST WEAPONS USED IN THE WAR ON TERROR
Do YOU want THEM to take over the Congress?

Democrats Have Repeatedly Voted Against Funding The B-2 Spirit (Stealth Bomber):

Democrats Voted Against Funding The Stealth Bomber At Least Eighteen Times, In 1989, 1990, 1991, 1992, 1994, 1995, 1996, And 1997. (H.R. 3072, CQ Vote #203: Rejected 29-71: R 2-43; D 27-28, 9/26/89; H.R. 3072, CQ Vote #310: Motion Rejected 29-68: R 3-41; D 26-27, 11/17/89; S. 2884, CQ Vote #208: Rejected 43-56: R 8-36; D 35-20, 8/2/90; S. 2884, CQ Vote #209: Rejected 45-53: R 9-34; D 36-19, 8/2/90; S. 3189, CQ Vote #273: Passed 79-16: R 37-5; D 42-11, 10/15/90; H.R. 5803, CQ Vote #319: Adopted 80-17: R 37-6; D 43-11, 10/26/90; H.R. 4739, CQ Vote #320: Adopted 80-17: R 37-6; D 43-11, 10/26/90; S. 1507, CQ Vote #174: Rejected 42-57: R 7-36; D 35-21, 8/1/91; H.R. 2521, CQ Vote #206: Motion Agreed To 51-48: R 36-7; D 15-41, 9/25/91; S. 2403, CQ Vote #85: Adopted 61-38: R 7-36; D 54-2, 5/6/92; H.R. 4990, CQ Vote #108: Adopted 90-9: R 34-9; D 56-0, 5/21/92; S. 3114, CQ Vote #216: Rejected 45-53: R 8-35; D 37-18, 9/18/92; S. 2182, CQ Vote #179: Rejected 45-55: R 8-36; D 37-19, 7/1/94; H.R. 2126, CQ Vote #579: Adopted 59-39: R 48-5; D 11-34, 11/16/95; H.R. 1530, CQ Vote #608: Adopted 51-43: R 47-2; D 4-41, 12/19/95; S. 1124, CQ Vote #5: Adopted 56-34: R 42-3; D 14-31, 1/26/96; H.R. 3230, CQ Vote #279: Adopted 73-26: R 50-3; D 23-23, 9/10/96; H.R. 1119, CQ Vote #228: Rejected 209-216: R 60-163; D 148-53; I 1-0, 6/23/97)

Democrats Have Repeatedly Voted Against Funding The F/A-18 Hornet & Super Hornet:

Democrats Voted Against Funding The F/A-18 Hornet & Super Hornet At Least Nine Times, In 1990, 1995, 1996, And 1997. (S. 3189, CQ Vote #273: Passed 79-16: R 37-5; D 42-11, 10/15/90; H.R. 5803, CQ Vote #319: Adopted 80-17: R 37-6; D 43-11, 10/26/90; H.R. 4739, CQ Vote #320: Adopted 80-17: R 37-6; D 43-11, 10/26/90; H.R. 1530, CQ Vote #399: Passed 64-34: R 50-3; D 14-31, 9/6/95; H.R. 2126, CQ Vote #579: Adopted 59-39: R 48-5; D 11-34, 11/16/95; H.R. 1530, CQ Vote #608: Adopted 51-43: R 47-2; D 4-41, 12/19/95; S. 1124, CQ Vote #5: Adopted 56-34: R 42-3; D 14-31, 1/26/96; H.R. 3230, CQ Vote #279: Adopted 73-26: R 50-3; D 23-23, 9/10/96; S. 936, CQ Vote #172: Rejected 19-79: R 1-54; D 18-25, 7/11/97)

Democrats Have Repeatedly Voted Against Funding The Predator Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV):

Democrats Voted Against Funding UAVs At Least Four Times, In 1995 And 1996. (H.R. 2126, CQ Vote #579: Adopted 59-39: R 48-5; D 11-34, 11/16/95; H.R. 1530, CQ Vote #608: Adopted 51-43: R 47-2; D 4-41, 12/19/95; S. 1745, CQ Vote #187: Passed 68-31: R 50-2; D 18-29, 7/10/96; H.R. 3230, CQ Vote #279: Adopted 73-26: R 50-3; D 23-23, 9/10/96)

Democrats Have Repeatedly Voted Against Funding The Tomahawk Cruise Missile:

Democrats Voted Against Funding The Tomahawk Cruise Missile At Least Four Times, In 1990, 1995 And 1996. (S. 3189, CQ Vote #273: Passed 79-16: R 37-5; D 42-11, 10/15/90; H.R. 5803, CQ Vote #319: Adopted 80-17: R 37-6; D 43-11, 10/26/90; H.R. 1530, CQ Vote #399: Passed 64-34: R 50-3; D 14-31, 9/6/95; H.R. 3230, CQ Vote #279: Adopted 73-26: R 50-3; D 23-23, 9/10/96)

Democrats Have Repeatedly Voted Against Funding The LHD Helicopter Carrier:

Democrats Voted Against Funding The LHD Helicopter Carrier At Least Five Times, In 1990, 1995 And 1996. (S. 3189, CQ Vote #273: Passed 79-16: R 37-5; D 42-11, 10/15/90; H.R. 5803, CQ Vote #319: Adopted 80-17: R 37-6; D 43-11, 10/26/90; S. 1087, CQ Vote #397: Passed 62-35: R 48-4; D 14-31, 9/5/95; H.R. 1530, CQ Vote #608: Adopted 51-43: R 47-2; D 4-41, 12/19/95; S. 1124, CQ Vote #5: Adopted 56-34: R 42-3; D 14-31, 1/26/96)

DEMOCRATS HAVE REPEATEDLY VOTED AGAINST CRITICAL DEFENSE FUNDING
Do YOU want THEM to take over the Congress?

Democrats Have Repeatedly Voted Against Critical Defense Spending Bills:

In 2006, 30 House Democrats Voted Against Over $512 Billion In Defense Funding. (H.R. 5122, CQ Vote #145: Passed 396-31: R 227-1; D 168-30; I 1-0, 5/11/06)

This Funding Included Almost $17 Billion For Military Construction And Family Housing. (H.R. 5122, CQ Vote #145: Passed 396-31: R 227-1; D 168-30; I 1-0, 5/11/06)

In 2006, 52 House Democrats Voted Against Over $67 Billion In Defense Funding. (H.R. 4939, CQ Vote #65: Passed 348-71: R 204-19; D 143-52; I 1-0, 3/16/06)

In 2005, 37 House Democrats Voted Against Over $440 Billion In Defense Funding. (H.R. 1815, CQ Vote #222: Passed 390-39: R 225-2; D 164-37; I 1-0, 5/25/05)

This Funding Included $108 Billion For Defense Personnel And Over $12 Billion For Military Construction And Family Housing. (H.R. 1815, CQ Vote #222: Passed 390-39: R 225-2; D 164-37; I 1-0, 5/25/05)

In 2004, 33 House Democrats Voted Against Over $447 Billion In Defense Funding. (H.R. 4200, CQ Vote #206: Passed 391-34: R 221-1; D 169-33; I 1-0, 5/20/04)

In 2003, 66 House Democrats Voted Against Over $400 Billion In Defense Funding. (H.R. 1588, CQ Vote #221: Passed 361-68: R 223-1: D 138-66; I 0-1, 5/22/03)

In 2002, 56 House Democrats Voted Against Over $383 Billion In Defense Funding. (H.R. 4546, CQ Vote #158: Passed 359-58: R 212-1; D 146-56; I 1-1, 5/10/02)

This Funding Included A 4.7 Percent Pay Increase For Military Personnel. (H.R. 4546, CQ Vote #158: Passed 359-58: R 212-1; D 146-56; I 1-1, 5/10/02)

OVER THE LAST 5 YEARS, DEMOCRATS HAVE REPEATEDLY VOTED AGAINST MISSILE DEFENSE
Do YOU want THEM to take over the Congress?

During The Bush Administration, Democrats Have Voted Against Missile Defense At Least Nine Times:

In 2006, 130 House Democrats Voted To Cut Over $9 Billion Dollars From The Ballistic Missile Defense Program. (H. Con. Res. 376, CQ Vote #155: Rejected 131-294: R 0-229; D 130-65; I 1-0; 5/17/06)

In 2006, 117 House Democrats Voted To Limit The Deployment Of Ground-Based Defense Systems And To Halt The Deployment Of Space-Based Missile Interceptors. (H.R. 5122, CQ Vote #142: Rejected 124-301: R 6-221; D 117-80; I 1-0; 5/11/06)

In 2005, 34 SENATE Democrats Voted To Cut $50 Million From Missile Defense. (S. 1042, CQ Vote #311: Rejected 37-60: R 2-52; D 34-8; I 1-0, 11/8/05)

In 2005, 132 House Democrats Voted To Reduce Funding For The Ballistic Missile Defense Program. (H. Con. Res. 95, CQ Vote #85: Rejected 134-292: R 1-225; D 132-67; I 1-0, 3/17/05)

In 2004, 43 SENATE Democrats Supported An Amendment Offered By Sen. Levin (D-MI) And Voted To Cut $515 Million From The Missile Defense Agency’s Ground-Based Midcourse Interceptors. (S. 2400, CQ Vote #133: Rejected 44-56: R 0-51; D 43-5; I 1-0, 6/22/04)

In 2004, 118 House Democrats Voted To Reduce Funding For The Ballistic Missile Defense Program. (H. Con. Res. 393, CQ Vote #88: Rejected 119-302: R 0-220; D 118-82; I 1-0, 3/25/04)

In 2003, 66 House Democrats Voted Against A Bill That Included Over $9 Billion For The Anti-Missile Defense Program. (H.R. 1588, CQ Vote #221: Passed 361-68: R 223-1; D 138-66; I 0-1, 5/22/03)

In 2002, 56 House Democrats Voted Against A Bill That Included $7.8 Billion For Missile Defense Systems. (H.R. 4546, CQ Vote #158: Passed 359-58: R 212-1; D 146-56; I 1-1, 5/10/02)

In 2002, 156 House Democrats Voted To Block Funding For Space Based Missile Defense Programs. (H.R. 4546, CQ Vote # 145: Rejected 159-253: R 2-206; D 156-46; I 1-1, 5/9/02)

WHEN DEMOCRATS WERE IN CONTROL OF CONGRESS, THEY CUT BILLIONS FROM MISSILE DEFENSE
Do YOU want THEM to take over Congress AGAIN?

In The Early 90’s, Democrats Cut Missile Defense Funding At Least Seven Times:

In 1994, 38 SENATE Democrats Voted To Cut $513 Million From The Ballistic Missile Defense Program. (S. Con. Res. 63, CQ Vote #64: Rejected 40-59: R 2-42; D 38-17, 3/22/94)

In 1994, 139 House Democrats Voted To Reduce Funding For The Ballistic Missile Defense Program. (H.R. 4301, CQ Vote #179: Rejected 155-271: R 15-160; D 139-11; I 1-0, 5/18/94)

In 1993, 44 SENATE Democrats Were Successful In Cutting Funds From The Ballistic Missile Defense Program. (S. 1298, CQ Vote #251: Adopted 50-48: R 6-36; D 44-12, 9/9/93)

In 1993, 150 House Democrats Voted To Reduce Funding For The Ballistic Missile Defense Program. (H.R. 3400, CQ Vote #610: Rejected 184-248: R 33-139; D 150-10; I 1-0, 11/22/93)

In 1993, 185 House Democrats Voted To Cut $200 Million In Funding From The Ballistic Missile Defense Program. (H.R. 2401, CQ Vote #414: Rejected 202-227: R 16-156; D 185-71; I 1-0, 9/8/93)

In 1993, 251 House Democrats Were Successful In Defeating A $467 Million Increase In Funding For The Ballistic Missile Defense Program. (H.R. 2401, CQ Vote #413: Rejected 118-312: R 113-60; D 5-251; I 0-1, 9/8/93)

In 1993, 153 House Democrats Voted To Cut $1.5 Billion In Funding For The Ballistic Missile Defense Program. (H.R. 2401, CQ Vote #412: Rejected 160-272: R 6-167; D 153-10; I 1-0, 9/8/93)

During The Reagan Administration, A Majority Of Democrats Voted Against Missile Defense:

During The Reagan And George H. W. Bush Administrations, A Majority Of Democrats Voted Against Missile Defense At Least 14 Times. (S. 1160, CQ Vote #101: Rejected 36-59: R 1-49; D 35-10, 6/4/85; S. 1160, CQ Vote #103: Rejected 33-62: R 28-22; D 5-40, 6/4/85; H.J. Res. 465, CQ Vote #365: Motion Agreed To 64-32: R 49-2; D 15-30, 12/10/85; H.R. 4515, CQ Vote #122: Ruled Non-Germane 45-47: R 7-42; D 38-5, 6/6/86; S. 2638, CQ Vote #176: Motion Agreed To 50-49: R 41-11; D 9-38, 8/5/86; S. 2638, CQ Vote #177: Rejected 49-50: R 10-42; D 39-8, 8/5/86; S. 1174, CQ Vote #248: Motion Agreed To 58-38: R 8-37; D 50-1, 9/17/87; S. 1174, CQ Vote #259: Motion Agreed To 51-50: R 37-9; D 13-41, With Vice President Bush Casting A Yea Vote, 9/22/87; S. 1352, CQ Vote #148: Motion Agreed To 50-47: R 37-6; D 13-41, 7/27/89; H.R. 3072, CQ Vote #202: Rejected 34-66: R 27-18; D 7-48, 9/26/89; H.R. 3072, CQ Vote #213: Adopted 53-47: R 39-6; D 14-41, 9/28/89; S. 2884, CQ Vote #223: Adopted 54-44: R 2-42; D 52-2, 8/4/90; S. 2884, CQ Vote #225: Motion Agreed To 56-41: R 39-4; D 17-37, 8/4/90; S. 2884, CQ Vote #226: Motion Agreed To 54-43: R 37-6; D 17-37, 8/4/90)

DEMOCRATS WOULD HAVE LEFT US HELPLESS AGAINST NORTH KOREA’S MISSILES
Do YOU want THEM to take over the Congress?

If Democrats Succeeded In Cutting Missile Defense The U.S. Would Not Be Able To Defend Itself Against North Korea’s Missiles:

The Wall Street Journal: “The Navy had at least one ship-based Aegis missile-defense system deployed off the Korean coast, with a potential to shoot down a North Korean missile.” (Editorial, “The Taepodong Democrats,” The Wall Street Journal, 7/21/06)

The Wall Street Journal: “The Aegis cruisers have successfully shot down missiles in seven of eight tests in recent years, and could become an important player in protecting allies and U.S. forces against regional missile threats.” (Editorial, “The Taepodong Democrats,” The Wall Street Journal, 7/21/06)

The Wall Street Journal: “The U.S. is also dispatching PAC-3s, a more sophisticated version of the Patriot anti-missile system, to Japan. This kind of capability adds to the credibility of the U.S. deterrent, reassures allies and enhances American influence.” (Editorial, “The Taepodong Democrats,” The Wall Street Journal, 7/21/06)

The Wall Street Journal: “Virtually none of this would exist had Democrats succeeded over the years in their many attempts to kill missile defenses.” (Editorial, “The Taepodong Democrats,” The Wall Street Journal, 7/21/06)
The Wall Street Journal: “[W]ith President Clinton in office, Democrats starved the program of funds.” (Editorial, “The Taepodong Democrats,” The Wall Street Journal, 7/21/06)

-- excerpted from http://www.gop.com/weakandwrong/#demanc

REMEMBER: Nomatter how nice they may be in person, EVERY Democrat in the Congress WILL vote for San Francisco's soft-on-terrorism Nancy Pelosi or some other moveon-beholden liberal for Speaker of the House, 3rd in line for the Presidency.

The takeover of the Democratic Party by soft-on- terrorism appeaseniks is demonstrated by the loss of strong-on-security Joe Lieberman in the primaries. "America's national security is the lowest priority on the Democratic Party agenda." -- David Horowitz
And remember, it was John Kerry who wanted to give nuclear fuel to the fanatic mullahs who run Iran (!)

Please DON'T let the Democrats take over Congress.
So GET TO THE POLLS and VOTE REPUBLICAN this November.

See ABC's 'The Path to 9/11' here:
http://makeashorterlink.com/?G1D8323AD

See "The Anti-Americans" here:
http://FreedomKeys.com/anti-americans.htm

Also see "Hypocrisy on Iraq" here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ePb6H-j51xE

"The Secret History of the Iraq War" here:
http://FreedomKeys.com/secrethistory.htm

"MYTHS AND FACTS ABOUT IRAQ" here: http://www.thetruthaboutiraq.org/myths.htm

And "WHY IRAQ?" here:
http://FreedomKeys.com/whyiraq.htm

"There is something terribly wrong with people seeking to demean and weaken the president in war time, thereby strengthening our country's enemies. As a result of the language and tactics of those opposed to our presence in Iraq, our enemies have been emboldened..." -- Ed Koch, former Democratic Mayor of New York City, here: http://snipurl.com/vsf0

Make a cleaner copy by copying THIS:
http://FreedomKeys.com/demsondefense.htm
and please PASS IT ALONG ^---------->

-

<^{----------------------------}
COPY AND EMAIL
TO EVERYONE
YOU CAN
<^{----------------------------}

Great work, FreeKeys!

Yes, I know plenty like that--outraged at the thought that the thought that the Klintoons are less than saintly, too.

But there ARE SOME folks who are truly moderate and have more or less open minds. There are even a few liberals with open, more or less objective minds.

THOSE CAN BE influenced by brief well written and documented docs and especially by very fitting cartoons.

Thankfully, the ones I've most found influencable were folks who attended professional conferences in Arkansas and discovered from some trusted colleagues there what scum Billdo and Shrillery are.

But, the recent research listing how many liberals consider Shrillery satanic is also teling and hopeful. We can influence such folks further.

AT LEAST WE CAN TRY and we owe it to ourselves, our Republic and our children as well as to God to try.

imho.

For future reference...

NO2

WHY IRAQ?

____________
NEW: The contrived Plame-Wilson "scandal" finally dies
and: Pre-War Iraqi documents are now being translated
incl.: 2002 document is a request for 5,500 KG of VX Nerve Gas precursor
and: Saddam had his people call the terrorists' people
and: Newly released document links Saddam, al-Qaida
and: Revealing interview with Saddam's General Sada
and: Saddam was actively recruiting terrorists
NEW: Hundreds of WMDs Found in Iraq
and: WMDs: The real scandal

WHY IT WAS WORTH IT

First of all, Saddam Hussein was a dictator who had his Iraqi operatives try to assassinate a former President of the U.S. Those facts alone are grounds enough to retaliate. Second of all, Iraqi intelligence operative Ramzi Yousef was eventually found to be involved in the first bombing of the World Trade Center in 1993, despite the extreme measures Iraq took to hide its involvement (although after that attack, Saddam sheltered Yousef's co-conspirator Abdul Rahman Yasin). Not only were Yousef and Yasin, who had offices in Saddam's Mukhabarat Secret Police Headquarters, involved in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, but Yousef was also involved with Khalid Sheikh Mohammed in the planning of the bombing of 12 American airliners over the Pacific in 1994. Grounds enough again. Thirdly, Iraq fired upon our aircraft enforcing the UN-mandated no-fly zones virtually every day. Ditto. Finally, Iraq kicked the weapons inspectors out and failed to comply with the UN's requirements to specify precisely what they did with their WMDs. Not to retaliate for such outrages is both immoral and an encouragement of more of same.

Saddam's secret police, the Mukhabarat, not only provided aid, comfort and refuge to the most violent worldwide assassins and terrorists, it also supplied financial and logistical support and personnel as aides. See The Secret History of the Iraq War.

In October of 1998, during the Clinton administration, the U.S. House and then the U.S. Senate passed The Iraq Liberation Act, which was signed into law on Oct. 31st, making it the official policy of the U.S. government to seek regime change in Iraq. The Senate vote was unanimous, including every Democrat, even Ted Kennedy.
See: "Hypocrisy on Iraq" HERE.

On 9/11 it was logical to suspect, and even assume, that Iraq was involved in this second World Trade Center attack also. A lot of assuming had to be done since the CIA's Operations Directorate had largely been destroyed by Sen. Frank Church and the Carter administration in the 1970s, driving out most of our really skilled, brave, wise and dedicated operatives (leaving mostly short-sighted, small-minded, butt-covering, turf-protecting outcome-scorning, deskbound bureauweasels instead) and our intelligence capabilities were even further crippled by the Clinton administration in the 1990s (Still, ignorant and politically-motivated people blame the Bush administration for the intelligence failures even though it had only been in office 8 months prior to 9/11).

Besides, there were plenty of other threats from Iraq and from the region in general to counter and defuse anyway. In fact there are several pro-active strategic reasons for the U.S. to take up military positions in Iraq, only one of which is the extremely delicate task of stopping the flow of middle east oil money, even from Saudi Arabia, to international terrorists and terrorist recruiters and trainers (hopefully to be achieved more by intimidation than by actual additional military action) -- without massive disruptions to the American economy. Anyway, copious amounts of proof -- that Iraq still had WMD capabilities and an active interest in WMDs, AND had numerous links with terrorists including Al Qaeda -- have been uncovered in the wake of Operation Iraqi Freedom. Some of that information is covered in the links below.

Even though the 9-11 Commission was badly compromised by the presence of Clinton administration intelligence-crippling "wall" builder Jamie Gorelick on it, its report did, at least, document some of the links and contacts Saddam had had with Al Qaeda and other terrorists, as John Gibson summarizes here.
Saddam's General Says WMDs were flown and trucked to Syria;
VIDEO HERE !
Captured Documents Prove Saddam-Terrorists links
An Iraqi Newspaper Named All 3 9/11 Targets BEFORE 9/11.
Listen to THIS ABC-NEWS audio clip from BEFORE 9/11! SAVE it to disk!
Prominent Democrats (and even Chirac) were also sure of Saddam's WMDs
"The idea that our motive for going to war with Iraq has turned out to be misguided is dead wrong. Saddam not only had weapons of mass destruction and the ability to produce them at short notice, but he also had the will and the motivation to give those weapons to third parties such as al Qaeda to use against the West. The decision to take him out was, and remains, the correct one." -- Mr. Ramsbotham

Now, exactly WHO is lying about Iraq?

>>>"The burden of proof was on Saddam, not the United States. George Bush did not have the burden of proving that Saddam [still] had WMDs. Saddam Hussein had the burden of proving he didn’t have them [any more]. Saddam failed to meet the burden of proof ... and paid the price." -- Neal Boortz.

Remember the SIX MONTHS it took for the U.S. to get a UN go-ahead for Gulf War Part II? Do you really think Saddam didn't use them to hide WMD's? Wanna buy a bridge?
Now GUESS WHO tipped off Saddam's allies 6 months BEFORE WE EVEN WENT TO THE U.N.?

"in order to be in the Democratic leadership fraternity ... [you] must conveniently ignore that no matter what 20/20 hindsight may reveal after the fact, reasonable people agree that Saddam had WMDs, used them on his own people, had a legal obligation to prove he'd disposed of them and failed to meet that burden, choosing instead to submit a 12,000-page document of lies. You must flagrantly disregard the inconvenient, but undeniable fact that Saddam could have prevented an American attack if he'd complied with his treaties, cooperated with weapons inspectors and proven he'd disposed of his WMDs as required. By flipping us off instead, he invited the War." -- David Limbaugh

Saddam and al-Qaeda

War opponents in bad faith

The "Saddam Dossier" Archive

Munitions Found in Iraq Meet WMD Criteria
Chemical-weapons platoon still there in 2001
Secrets of Terror: FrontPageMag's interview with Ryan Mauro
Of Course Saddam Had WMDs; The Left Couldn't Care Less

Deroy Murdock's Report on Saddam's Support of Terrorists
The Soviets supplied, helped hide, & publicly denied, Iraq's WMDs
The Iraq Survey Group failed to search WMD sites in southern Iraq

The WaPo(!) says Bush's "leak" was good, Wilson was a liar

5 Witnesses say it was Joe Wilson who outed his wife FIRST
About that trip to Niger of Saddam's nuclear expert

The Untold Story: It was the CIA who set up Joe Wilson & Plamegate
Now WHO is the REAL liar using INTENTIONAL deceit?
Former Senator Zell Miller puts Plamegate in perspective
The CIA's Disinformation Campaign

The phony Niger-Iraq uranium reports came from pre-planned Libyan deception operations (and people fell for it, especially those in the enemedia):
"It is now known absolutely that Libya’s External Security Organization (ESO), under the control of Moussa Koussa, who was the primary link to the US and British intelligence services 'innormalizing' Libya’s relations with the US and Britain, produced and delivered the forged documents to the Italian military intelligence organization, SISMI, for onward passage to the US. At an appropriate time, the Libyans ensured that the fact that the documents was forged was leaked to the Director-General of the UN’s International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), Mohamed El-Baradei, who then attacked the US assumptions on the Iraqi nuclear program by stating that the documents on which the US based its assessments were forged."

Saddam's Nuclear Program had been moved to Libya

Weapons Inspectors Refused to Search Bunkers
Saddam's Other WMD's are in Syria: See: "David Kay, the recently resigned head of an American WMD search team in Iraq, confirmed that part of Saddam's weapons was hidden in Syria, Britain's Sunday Telegraph reported on Jan. 25, 2004. Kay said he had uncovered conclusive evidence shortly before last year's U.S. invasion." HERE

Kay’s testimony was misrepresented to the public
WMDs Smuggled to 3 Sites in Syria
Israeli General: Saddam moved WMDs to Syria 6 weeks before the war
David Kay says he has evidence of such
Kay HAD Syrian WMD Maps

Death to America:The Unreported Battle of Iraq by Ryan Mauro

Nerve gas components found near Baiji
LORIE BYRD'S Roundup of "MUST-READS"
Canadian Reporter Finds Saddam-bin Laden Link
FOUND: a Saddam-Al Qaeda "Smoking Gun"

Saddam had 1.8 tons of low-enriched uranium
The Clinton Administration linked Al-Qaeda with Saddam
MORE Al Qaeda - Saddam links shown here & here
Captured documents reveal Saddam's terrorist training camps
The pre-war Saddam-AlQaeda link needed addressing
SMOKING GUNS ARE STILL BEING SUPPRESSED
(Are they still yielding intelligence?)
Ramzi Yousef worked for BOTH Iraq's Mukhabarat AND Al-Qaeda

A partial list of the WMDs found in Iraq >>> The sources for that list
UNMOVIC head tells Security Council WMD material was moved outside Iraq

Iraqis were taped discussing "evacuating" material prior to a weapons inspection.
Disinformation by Richard Miniter
Why George Bush couldn't have lied
The phrase "Bush lied" is ITSELF a lie.
The Fedayeen - al Qaeda Connection
Fedayeen supervised Al Qaeda training
WMD materials removed from 109 sites

Saddam saw Osama as an asset to be courted
Czech surveillance noted Atta meeting Iraqi official
Ex-Iraqi intelligence officer ties Saddam to al-Qaeda ally

al-Tikriti memo details uranium shipment, Atta's Iraq training
Saddam's stockpiles of WMD raw materials HAVE been found

Al Qaeda-financed WMD factory used peculiar Iraqi bio-weapons formula
UNMOVIC inspectors: Saddam Shipped Out WMDs

New evidence: Saddam's WMD in Lebanon

Saddam had WMD on 'short notice'

9 Iraqi scientists murdered

The Carney Files

The OTHER "Downing Street Memo" of July 2002 (which NEGATES the first one)
See excerpts from The Secret History of the Iraq War HERE
Jordanians say they stopped a major Al-Qaeda attack WITH WMDs mounted from Syria: See THIS, THIS, THIS, THIS and: THIS.
"So, after the fall of Afghanistan at the end of 2001, Zarqawi and other al Qaeda veterans made their way to Iraq, where, secure under the wing of Saddam Hussein, they plotted chemical weapons attacks on countries friendly to the U.S., as well as the murder (successfully carried out) of an American diplomat. And yet, to this day it remains an article of faith on the left that Saddam's Iraq was a kite-flyer's paradise with no connection to international terrorism, no relations with al Qaeda, and, of course, no chemical weapons. Maybe the current trial will reveal where the chemicals assembled for the attack on Jordan came from; maybe it won't. But we don't need any new information to understand that Saddam's regime protected and supported the deadliest of al Qaeda's terrorists." -- John Hinderaker, HERE
See: "IRAQ'S COMPLICITY IN TERRORISM" HERE
Al Qaeda videos found in Iraq weapons raid
Bad Samarratans - caught between Iraq and a hard place
Kuwait foils smuggling of bio warheads from Iraq
Danes think they might have found chemical weapons
Iraqi Missile Parts Found in Holland
"The evidence [of Saddam's moving his WMD to Syria from August to December of 2002 and his collaboration with Al Qaeda] is overwhelming."
-- Yossef Bodansky, Director of the Congressional Task Force on Terrorism and author of The Secret History of the Iraq War
Saddam Possessed WMDs, Had Many Terror Ties
Former advisor says Clinton believed Iraq was behind the 1993 WTC bombing

"Saddam ... maintained secretive weapons programs throughout the 1990s and indeed right up until the day of the invasion, and that he was only waiting for the international community to lose interest or stamina so that he could resume his programs unfettered. This is the well-documented, unrefuted -- and unnoticed -- conclusion of both [chief inspectors] David Kay and Charles Duelfer."
-- Robert Kagan, Washington Post, June 19, 2005

"Duelfer also reported that Saddam asked subordinates how long it would take to develop chemical weapons once sanctions ended. One Iraqi chemical weapons expert said it would require only a few days to develop mustard gas." -- Michael Barone, HERE

Read the book HERE

WorldThreats.com

"The fashionable idiocy that haters must have justifications is one of those ideas that George Orwell said only an intellectual could believe -- because no one else could be such a fool." -- Dr. Thomas Sowell HERE.

It's a war of IDEOLOGY||

||"We are in a fight to the death."||

||Death-Worshippers

The "Fatwa" is a Fat Lie||||Saudi Hate Ideology Fills American Mosques -- Story||

||Required Reading

The ONLY issues that must be settled before ANY others: 1. Do you want the axis of evil to continue developing and spreading nuclear weapons? & 2. Do you want lots more of the world's oil reserves and oil income to fall into the hands of Muslim terrorists? Hmm? Everything ELSE at this time is just fighting over deck chairs on the Titanic.
"When the planes flew into the World Trade Center, that was iron-clad proof. When the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor, that was iron-clad proof. We cannot wait for iron-clad proof in a nuclear age." --Thomas Sowell, HERE
"... when you see a rattlesnake poised to strike, you do not wait until he has struck before you crush him."-- FDR
"If you hate my guts and have designs to hurt me, and I see you building a cannon aimed at my house, I am not going to wait for you to finish construction." --Walter E. Williams
"It's obvious to me that this country is rapidly dividing itself into two camps: the wimps and the warriors. The ones who want to argue and assess and appease, and the ones who want to carry this fight to our enemies and kill them before they kill us." -- Sen. Zell Miller

If it had turned out that our soldiers took prisoners from Abu Ghraib cell blocks 1A and 1B (dangerous and incorrigible prisoners) and tortured them, I'd have been furious. But it turned out they only irritated, stressed and humiliated them, so I'm not. But GUESS WHAT? The parts of the Geneva Convention WE signed do NOT cover terrorists, spies, saboteurs, non-signers, common criminals nor combatants out of uniform anyway. See-THIS.

This is al-Qa'eda Rule 18: 'You must claim you were tortured'

"We did NOT find cases of torture." -- James Schlesinger, Abu Ghraib Commission

What G.W. should have said about why we attacked Iraq

I would have been much happier if G.W. had the intellectual clarity and moral courage to have told the American people after 9-11:

"I will ask Congress for either an overt declaration of war, or at least a tacit one through the approval of its funding, not only on the stateless terrorists who perpetrated this heinous act, but on all nations who harbor and/or help them, the worst among these including Syria, Iran, Libya, and Saudi Arabia. No country should be allowed to get away with any such thing ever again, whether they harbor terrorists, support terrorists, or actually come under the control of terrorists or terrorist sympathizers. And we cannot allow those countries with nuclear weapons or huge streams of oil income to remain vulnerable to terrorist takeover, for that would surely lead to Armageddon. We should not attack most of those countries right now for various strategic, tactical and economic reasons, but what we can do is scare the living crap out of them by showing we're not just going to lob a few cruise missiles somewhere and go home. What we can and must do is to pick an illegitmate government -- any rigidly totalitarian government other than Afghanistan's -- somewhere in their neighborhood and effect a complete and total demonstration of what will happen to THEM if they don't cooperate fully in tracking down and stopping these terrorists once and for all. Iraq not only fills that bill, but it just so happens to be one whose leader has attempted to assassinate an American ex-president, and one for which the Congress has already passed a law, The Iraq Libertation Act of 1998.
"Finally, if any government anywhere STILL sponsors, nurtures or harbors terrorists which endanger the United States, or combines weapons of mass destruction with any barbaric or insane ideology, we will stop at nothing to bring that government and that threat to a complete and permanent end."

Update: The transcript of the President's 2005 Veteran's Day Speech is HERE.

As the Wall Street Journal editorialized, "The more we show we're serious about challenging states that harbor terrorists the more Pakistan and other nations are likely to cooperate with Washington in tracking down and turning over the terrorists." And indeed they have.

As bad as the U.S. has gotten over the years, becoming more and more twisted by a government of the politicians, by the politicians, and for the politicians, it is still blindingly obvious that it's a lot more humane and civilized than anything those Muslim fundamentalists or Baathist control freaks can even think about, let alone have to offer. If anyone's pacifism has its roots in, or amounts to, beliefs that "all cultures are equal," they hold their views as blind idealogues, not far-sighted defenders of liberty.

If anyone still doubts that I believe any legitimate country has the right to do any damn thing to any illegitimate country any damn time it needs to, I would refer him to this: "Just as an individual must act unapologetically to preserve his life, so must America. America must proudly proclaim its right and intention to protect its citizens, their liberty and their property. It must meet any threat with retaliation that pre-empts loss of American lives." HERE -- and to this: "Any doctrine of group activities that does not recognize individual rights is a doctrine of mob rule or legalized lynching... A nation that violates the rights of its own citizens cannot claim any rights whatsoever. In the issue of rights, as in all moral issues, there can be no double standard." -- Ayn Rand, here

THE BUSH DOCTRINE

"I never regarded WMD as the main reason to go to war. The real reason to go to war was (1) to establish a military and democratic presence in the Arab world (which we've done); (2) to make an example of Saddam to intimidate other Arab leaders (which we've done); and (3) to cut off Saddam as a source of support -- both existing and potential -- for terrorists, which we've also done. The WMD was a nontrivial issue, and required for playing the UN game (which I always regarded as a mistake) but not, to me, the most important issue."
-- Glenn Reynolds, HERE

"The objective is to scare the hell out of the world, generally, and Islam in particular. By means of a minimal effort at wreaking maximum havoc upon Iraq in a very short span of time, the United States will demonstrate to her enemies and allies alike that she is not only the pre-eminent world power, she is in fact an inconquerable power. The anticipated benefits in the Islamic world will be either an immediate rounding-up of terrorists, or swift regime-changes followed by an immediate rounding-up of terrorists." -- Greg Swann, HERE

In October of 1998, during the Clinton administration, the U.S. House and then the U.S. Senate passed The Iraq Liberation Act, which was signed into law on Oct. 31st, making it the official policy of the U.S. government to seek regime change in Iraq. The Senate vote was unanimous, including every Democrat, even Ted Kennedy.

"For states that support terror, it is not enough that the consequences be costly; they must devastating." -- George W. Bush, Dec. 11, 2001

Despite the insistence of various Democrats, butt-covering diplomats and other vacillators that it had to be due to years of international cooperation in (fruitless) sanctions and diplomacy, Libyan leader Moammar Gaddafi made it clear that he decided to disarm due to our terminating the regime in Iraq, NOT Afghanistan: "I will do whatever the Americans want because I saw what happened in Iraq, and I was afraid," Gaddafi told Italy's Prime Minister Berlusconi here& HERE. Gaddafi urges rogue states: 'Follow my lead!' HERE.

"Why is it that when the NYT and Judy Miller mis-reported the WMD threat, they made 'mistakes,' but when Bush turns out to (arguably) be wrong on the exact same topic and in exactly the same way, he told 'lies?'" -- Dave Gamble

"When nuclear weapons were an elite club of five relatively sane world powers, progressive opinion was convinced the planet was about to go ka-boom and the handful of us who survived would be walking in a nuclear winter wonderland. Now anyone with a few thousand bucks and an unlisted Islamabad number in his Rolodex can get a nuke, and the left is positively blasé." -- Mark Steyn

"Any material element or resource which, in order to become of use or value to men, requires the application of human knowledge and effort, should be private property -- by the right of those who apply the knowledge and effort." -- Ayn Rand
"In other words, letting the Saudis take over our oil companies' oil fields in the '40s and '50s and the Arabs and Persians everywhere else every other time were ENORMOUS mistakes of epic proportions. They should serve as the greatest demonstration of how mysticism, altruism, cultural agnosticism and moral relativism, which supplied the feeble rationalizations for doing so, are TOTALLY inimical to Western Civilization and its very existence, and why they must be rejected once and for all. Enabling the paying of billions of dollars in unearned royalties to those who finance, if not actually believe in, primitive barbarism and manifest mysticism is unspeakably evil, nauseating and tantamount to treason taken to the most extreme degree imaginable." -- B.R.

"Mysticism -- as a cultural power -- died at the time of the Renaissance. ... As to altruism -- it has never been alive. It is the poison of death in the blood of Western civilization ..." -- Ayn Rand, HERE.

The perfidy of the UN

THANKS TONS!
TIME TO INVEST
IN MORE INK
OUR REPUBLIC
AND OUR CHILDREN
ARE WORTH IT

I sure appreciate your great work, FreeKeys.

God's best to you and yours this weekend.

I'm still amazed how everyone's forgotten how he sold state secrets to the Chinese for campaign money

Or pardonned all those criminals, or the Lincoln bedroom visits for campaign funders, or about 30 other sleazy acts.

Great Stuff!

That should leave a few lash marks.

You are correct.

Look at the responses from across the political spectrum with slashing attacks against the Clintoons and his administration and their lack of handling Ben Laden

This thread will have a lot of harsh reality links before it fades away. Then these links can be used as weapons against the Clintoons and their clowns.

You're welcome. I hope you and everyone puts it to good use!

Damn, I wish that bastard Clinton could get impeached all over again and this time for these real and devastating high crimes and misdemeanors.

Thanks for the ping! :-)

BTTT

bttt

I hope so. Given the brain dead state of so many liberals, I don't know how many we can influence but it doesn't take many to put the election in our column. But we MUST do it.

Our republic and families and lives depend on it.

Thanks tons.

AMEN! AMEEN! AMEN!

In 1989, 31 House Democrats Voted Against Authorizing Appropriations For Intelligence And Intelligence-Related Activities Of The U.S. Government For The CIA And Related Agencies. (H.R. 2748, CQ Vote #288: Passed 369-31: R 161-8; D 208-23, 10/12/89)

DEMOCRATS HAVE REPEATEDLY VOTED AGAINST FUNDING FOR OUR TROOPS FIGHTING THE WAR ON TERRORDo YOU want THEM to take over the Congress?

DEMOCRATS HAVE REPEATEDLY VOTED AGAINST WEAPONS USED IN THE WAR ON TERRORDo YOU want THEM to take over the Congress?

DEMOCRATS HAVE REPEATEDLY VOTED AGAINST CRITICAL DEFENSE FUNDINGDo YOU want THEM to take over the Congress?

OVER THE LAST 5 YEARS, DEMOCRATS HAVE REPEATEDLY VOTED AGAINST MISSILE DEFENSEDo YOU want THEM to take over the Congress?

WHEN DEMOCRATS WERE IN CONTROL OF CONGRESS, THEY CUT BILLIONS FROM MISSILE DEFENSEDo YOU want THEM to take over Congress AGAIN?

DEMOCRATS WOULD HAVE LEFT US HELPLESS AGAINST NORTH KOREA’S MISSILESDo YOU want THEM to take over the Congress?

BTTT

BTTT

BTTT

DEMOCRATS HAVE REPEATEDLY VOTED AGAINST FUNDING FOR OUR TROOPS FIGHTING THE WAR ON TERROR
Do YOU want THEM to take over the Congress?

DEMOCRATS HAVE REPEATEDLY VOTED AGAINST WEAPONS USED IN THE WAR ON TERROR
Do YOU want THEM to take over the Congress?

DEMOCRATS HAVE REPEATEDLY VOTED AGAINST CRITICAL DEFENSE FUNDING
Do YOU want THEM to take over the Congress?

OVER THE LAST 5 YEARS, DEMOCRATS HAVE REPEATEDLY VOTED AGAINST MISSILE DEFENSE
Do YOU want THEM to take over the Congress?

WHEN DEMOCRATS WERE IN CONTROL OF CONGRESS, THEY CUT BILLIONS FROM MISSILE DEFENSE
Do YOU want THEM to take over Congress AGAIN?

DEMOCRATS WOULD HAVE LEFT US HELPLESS AGAINST NORTH KOREA’S MISSILES
Do YOU want THEM to take over the Congress?