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

Skip to comments.

'You Lied to Us'
New York Times ^ | 6/02/03 | William Safire

Posted on 06/02/2003 12:18:29 AM PDT by kattracks

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-87 next last
To: TontoKowalski
Seriously, there have been some hints that hard evidence exists. I personally believe that State is holding back its release, as it implicates our "Friends" in Iraq's weapons programs. But that's just speculation.

The story about the Marines who found an underground site with radioactivity that jumped off the charts (Torowetha or some name like that) came and went very quickly. There's got to be more to that story. There was speculation that many of Iraq's nuclear scientists had gone to Libya to work in Libya's under-mountain nuclear weapons lab.

There are a lot of suspicious leads and my guess is that we're following them out of Iraq to wherever they lead. Too much publicity about what we've actually found in Iraq will dry up the leads.

Gotta play our cards close to the vest for a while, I think.

21 posted on 06/02/2003 6:05:46 AM PDT by randita
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: poet
Is it possible that one of the reasons for invading Iraq was a personal payback by Bush to punish saddam for attempting to assassinate his father 10/11 years ago.

This is the Dim's campaign theme, for '08 as well as '04.

Hearing this talk you'd think Bush went over there and kicked their asses by himself. He might have I suppose. But why and how did he convince half of the world to join in?

22 posted on 06/02/2003 6:18:19 AM PDT by tsomer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Livinglarge
The Iraqis did not have a functioning nuclear weapons program.

Maybe they didn't...yet. I for one am very happy that we didn't wait for a smoking nuclear gun before we decided to do something about it. Helllloooo?

23 posted on 06/02/2003 7:12:47 AM PDT by alnick ("Never have so many been so wrong about so much." - Rummy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: poet
Is it possible that one of the reasons for invading Iraq was a personal payback by Bush to punish saddam for attempting to assassinate his father 10/11 years ago.

It's not why we took out Saddam, but an assasination attempt against a U.S. President, current or former, is justification in and of itself. Clinton should have taken care of this when it happened.

24 posted on 06/02/2003 7:16:38 AM PDT by alnick ("Never have so many been so wrong about so much." - Rummy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

Comment #25 Removed by Moderator

To: poet
"If he were really serious about destroying terrorism, he should have invaded Iran, Saudi Arabia, North Korea as each of these countries fit Bush's criteria of an enemy"

If you can pull the troops, money and global political support out your anal orifice to implement your genius plan, then we'll take it seriously. For now, it's a great hardship on our people in just Iraq to remain there for just these months. And politically, we stopped just short of making China, Russia and France nuclear protected covert safe havens for anti American terrorists.

26 posted on 06/02/2003 7:50:21 AM PDT by elfman2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: tsomer
"But why and how did he convince half of the world to join in?"

How about promises of Billions of our tax dollars? How many of them placed their men in harms way as we did? In the final analysis, wasn't it verbal support, by and large?
The "police action" was successful with thankfully little loss of American lives.

My biggest complaint against these people (Pres and Congress) is their continual circumvention of the Constitution in the name of a false security, in addition to their spending of close to a Trillion of New spending of our tax dollars in just three years.

Please tell me how the "dem lites" differ from the real dems other than they spend at a slightly difference pace than the real dems. Both parties cater to special interest groups and when it comes time to get re-elected, they throw their so-called "base" a few nuggets to quiet the sheep.

FReegards
27 posted on 06/02/2003 8:15:57 AM PDT by poet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: alnick
"but an assasination attempt against a U.S. President"

You are right, of course, IF he is a sitting President.
28 posted on 06/02/2003 8:18:08 AM PDT by poet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: poet
Please tell me how the "dem lites" differ from the real dems other than they spend at a slightly difference pace than the real dems. Both parties cater to special interest groups and when it comes time to get re-elected, they throw their so-called "base" a few nuggets to quiet the sheep.

Please tell me what voting for a third party, or not voting at all, will do other than electing real dems?

It's not that I totally disagree with you on the Constitutional issues, but considering that in the last presidential election half of the nation voted for "real dems" and half voted for "dem lite" - and IIRC less than 5% voted for "real conservatives".....

I'd like to know if you have a constructive strategy on changing the mindset of the voters, if you have a suggestion about a 'real conservative who could both get elected AND accomplish something, or if you're basically planning on 'taking your ball and going home.'

29 posted on 06/02/2003 8:40:12 AM PDT by Amelia
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Livinglarge
Very suspect evidence, at best.

Recent Iraqi defectors provide additional details of Saddam Hussein’s support of international terrorism through the 1990s. The documentary program “Frontline,” has interviewed former Iraqi intelligence and army officers with first-hand accounts of highly secret installations run by an international terrorist known to Iraqi staffers only as “the Ghost.” 36 “The Ghost” is reportedly Abdel Hussein, the chief trainer at the camp and responsible for conducting assassinations outside Iraq to support Saddam Hussein’s regime. 37 The facility contained a Boeing 707 jet fuselage used to practice hijacking scenarios. UN inspectors independently confirmed the existence of the terrorist training camps. 38

Washington Dispatch

Satellite images of a facility near Baghdad show an airliner that Iraqi defectors say is used to train terrorists in the art of hijacking. Space Imaging, which operates the Ikonos civilian surveillance satellite, was prompted to look for the aircraft in existing photos after a ''Frontline'' television show interviewed two Iraqi defectors who described the hijacker training and the aircraft used for the mock attacks. One of them drew a map of the Salman Pak training area, and Space Imaging was able to find the facility and the aircraft in photographs taken on Apr. 25, 2000, of an area about 15 mi. southeast of Baghdad on the Tigris River. The zoomed-in photograph is a close match to the hand-drawn map, lending credence to the defector's story. He is Sabah Khodada, and said he worked at the secret Salman Pak complex for about six months as an administrator. The facility is run by the Iraqi secret service, and is used to teach assassination, kidnapping, hijacking of airplanes, buses and trains and other terrorist operations, Khodada said. ''This camp is specialized in exporting terrorism to the whole world.''

Iraq's Tie to Al-Qaeda Terrorists, Airline Hijackings

So...these defectors were able to draw a map of the place and then the exact location was confirmed by an independent imaging company, which proves the credibility of the defector's stories...what is suspect about that? Oh and you might be interested in the following link as well with even more info:

Mylroie: Clintonized CIA Blocking Iraq-9/11 Evidence

Terrorists that targeted Israel and not the United States.

Ummm, excuse me but isn't there a war on terrorism going on? Terrorism is terrorism, no matter who the victim. We were justified in taking out Saddam for that reason alone.

The Iraqi government did not control this part of northern Iraq

Oh puhleeeeeze...Saddam kept control of Northern Iraq through Al Qaeda and Ansar al-Islam.

In northern Iraq Tuesday, U.S. special forces rooting out the al Qaeda-linked extremist group Ansar al-Islam seized manuals on the production of deadly poison gases, chemical masks and other documentation in raids on the Islamic militants' camps. The raids in Sargat and elsewhere in Kurdish-controlled northern Iraq also turned up the names of several militants believed to be living in the United States. ABCNEWS' Jim Sciutto, who is embedded with the special forces units, described the documents seized as "significant." Atropine injectors — the antidote for nerve gas — and possible al Qaeda manuals were also taken. Sciutto said the documents included information on how to blow up buildings using diagrams of the U.S. embassies in Tanzania and Kenya, which were bombed by al Qaeda in 1998, killing 224 people. There were also lists of names and phone numbers that U.S. intelligence officials were checking against lists of known al Qaeda operatives, Sciutto said. The raids were launched on Saturday against the Ansar al-Islam positions after missile and bomb attacks, and have been ongoing with the support of local Kurdish fighters. Secretary of State Colin Powell cited Ansar al-Islam as one of the justifications for taking action against Iraq in a February speech to the U.N. Security Council.

ABC News

See also:

Al Qaeda Terrorists Target Iraqi Kurds

And a flashback for you to 1996...

In their struggle for power, KDP and PUK sought aid from Baghdad and Tehran respectively. That increased the tension in the Kurdish area and was negatively viewed by many Kurds. The interference of these countries along with Turkey into the Iraqi-Kurdish political situation could only complicate the Kurdish issue and increase the suffering of the Kurds. In the absence of a national and unified goal among the Kurdish political organizations in Iraq, one would not be surprised in seeing alignment between a Kurdish party and a neighbor state to achieve short-lived goals.

PBS

So yes, Saddam has power in Northern Iraq, albeit through other entitites.

30 posted on 06/02/2003 8:44:25 AM PDT by ravingnutter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: poet; alnick
You are right, of course, IF he is a sitting President.

Alnick is correct regardless. Former President Bush was targeted because of his Presidency, which makes the assassination attempt our business. As a matter of fact, if he'd been targeted merely because he was a U.S. citizen, it makes it our business.

Being targeted as an oil company executive, or randomly, might not make it U.S. government business, but under the circumstances, it was, and Clinton should have done something about it.

31 posted on 06/02/2003 8:44:30 AM PDT by Amelia
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Amelia
Clinton should have done something about it.

He did, didn't he? IIRC, he bravely ordered our troops to press the launch buttons on a few Tomhawks...

32 posted on 06/02/2003 8:50:21 AM PDT by RoughDobermann
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: jamesnwu
If you did not see any evidence of Saddam's support for terrorism, you didn't WANT to see it. There was such an abundant amount of evidence presented",

What evidence? The "evidence" presented by people who had an axe to grind so as to get support for their actions?:

"you have to have been turning off the television every time you heard Saddam's name for the months before and the month of the war."

All of a sudden, television news is the final word as respects truth? So, if some "news reader" reads prepared scripts, that becomes the truth? Do you believe anything CNN or the alphabet stations say? Perhaps FoxNews is the final crucible of truth? Why hasn't there been a complete analysis of the mis-named "patriot act" or the "homeland act"? Why aren't they "reporting" on the circumvention of the Constitution by people who swore an oath to uphold same.

Of course they won't do that because they rather give us 6 weeks of the Peterson case or more recently, the Rudolph case. Oh, we have CSpan? How many apolitical people ever see CSpan or even get it on their cable systems?

They want access to the seat of power, therefore, they will cater to those in power and, by and large, will not report stories that are embarrassing to those in power, unless, of course, it's embarrassing to the other guy.

It's still all smoke and mirrors and a crafty politician's mis-direction. I will admit, Bush is a political magician, but, he is still a politician and politicians live by a code of deceit, lies and duplicity. Am I negative, not really, I accept the reality and will never defend the indefensible even if the people I support are wrong. To do so makes you no better than the clinton apologists. I suppose you all know that Judges Estrada and Owens being pushed by Bush are the same two nominated by clinton? Bush a conservative? His party catering for the gay vote? His domestic spending? His embracing the dem's domestic agenda?

No, good people, he is a CINO, but a "compassionate" one. BTW, one of the dictionary definitions of compassionate is "pity".




33 posted on 06/02/2003 8:58:49 AM PDT by poet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: TontoKowalski
And then, the evidence of WMD will be produced.
That is a perfect strategy. We do not need the good will of the world re WMD. We should keep the legitimate evidence secret and use it for politcal gain in the 2004 campaign.
34 posted on 06/02/2003 9:01:46 AM PDT by eBelasco
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: poet
"What evidence? The "evidence" presented by people who had an axe to grind so as to get support for their actions?:"

One side comment. You have set up a scenario where the US cannot prove anything to you because we have an ax to grind. Even if the UN went back in and found weapons, it could be claimed that we planted them there. I am a believer that the government has lied to us on a regular basis, but do you see a way for them to prove anything to you regarding WMD? What do you make of the trucks with the chemical kitchens found two weeks ago?

35 posted on 06/02/2003 9:05:51 AM PDT by breakem
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: poet
"I suppose you all know that Judges Estrada and Owens being pushed by Bush are the same two nominated by clinton?"
Do you have a source/link for this assertion?

Additionally, who, in your opinion, is a viable candidate for the Presidency in 2004? By viable, I mean has a chance to win.

36 posted on 06/02/2003 9:08:11 AM PDT by justshe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: DB
"When a nuke goes off in a city near you, you can tell us all about it."

OK, but you have to promise to hold a seance ala Houdini's wife.
37 posted on 06/02/2003 9:09:47 AM PDT by poet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: poet
This is one registed independant voter who will not vote for him...

I know a lot of well intentioned Perot voters that painfully regret throwing their vote away.

so, which 3rd place loser gets your wasted vote?

38 posted on 06/02/2003 9:15:01 AM PDT by goo goo g'joob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Amelia
"or not voting at all, will do other than electing real dems?"

They are all real dems regardless of the D or R. The main diff is that the dems would slap us in the face all at once with their big government schemes while the Rs will stroke our faces with piece meal implementation of big government. kind of like putting us to sleep and when we wake up we say wha' happened"?
What has happened, good people is, samo, samo. Just a matter of degrees on reaching the same goal.



39 posted on 06/02/2003 9:17:16 AM PDT by poet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: kattracks
I'm extremely surprised that the NYT allowed the publication of this article! Is the NYT now trying hard to to allow the the truth to come out after the Blair incident?
40 posted on 06/02/2003 9:17:55 AM PDT by desertcry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-87 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