Posted on 11/17/2004 8:43:36 AM PST by snarkpup
Though Lynn Woolsey, the North Bay's representative in the House, feels "honored" to be re-elected by over 70 percent of area voters, like many Democrats, she's disappointed with the results of last week's presidential election.
(Excerpt) Read more at arguscourier.com ...
But who woulda thunk that Rummy would run up the white flag with the ACLU at the gates??
Well, losing side or not, she and the ACLU seem to have done a great job persuading the Pentagon to drop its sponsorship of the Boy Scouts.
IMHO, that decision cannot be allowed to stand.
The Pentagon is still infected with clintonoids, timeservers, and CYAers. Whoever was responsible for settling with the ACLU as they did should be put out to pasture.
"like many Democrats, she's disappointed with the results of last week's presidential election."
Get over it already democraps!
My understanding is that there never was any such sponsorship, and the Pentagon just reiterated its standing policy.
[BARF..................]
SMART SECURITY AND PRESIDENT BUSH'S SECOND TERM -- (House of Representatives - November 16, 2004)
[Page: H9699] GPO's PDF
---
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Woolsey) is recognized for 5 minutes.
Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, George W. Bush will lead the United States, and the free world, for another 4 years. With the weight of the Presidential contest behind him, it is my sincere hope that he will take this opportunity to shun the aggressive, unyielding, and unilateral approach to world affairs that has bedeviled his first term and ostracized the United States from our allies. Instead, Mr. Speaker, the President must lead the country in a new, stronger and safer direction, one that makes use of aggressive diplomacy and the rule of law to accomplish what needs to be done. The point has never been clearer that, in the vast majority of situations, negotiations work; and the recent developments in Iran are a perfect example. The Bush administration's approach to Iran's pursuit of nuclear weapons has consisted of little more than saber-rattling and aggressive posturing. While the U.S. has attempted unsuccessfully to flex its muscles, three European countries have banded together to achieve real results. The United Kingdom, France, and Germany announced earlier this week that they had reached a deal to prevent the development of Iran's nuclear program for the purpose of creating nuclear weapons. In exchange, the three European powers promised that Iran would not face U.N. Security Council sanctions. The promise will be upheld because France and the U.K. are both permanent members of the Security Council and can veto any sanctions against a fully compliant Iran. To be sure, it will take months, if not years, to assure that Iran does not pose a nuclear threat to the rest of the world, but the consequences of these negotiations are significant.
By engaging Iran in direct talks, instead of a political wrestling match, three European powers were able to achieve tangible results. Negotiations worked, while U.S. aggression has not.
There has to be a better way to respond to the threats America faces, a better way than the chest-thumping aggression that was adopted by the first-term Bush administration. That is why I have introduced H. Con. Res. 392, a SMART Security Platform For the 21st Century. SMART stands for sensible, multilateral, American response to terrorism. SMART security treats war as an absolute last resort. It fights terrorism with stronger intelligence and multilateral partnerships. It controls the spread of weapons of mass destruction with uncompromising diplomacy, strong regional security arrangements, and vigorous inspection regimes. SMART security defends America by relying on the very best of America, not our nuclear capabilities but our capacity for multinational leadership and our commitment to peace and freedom around the world.
Mr. Speaker, President Bush should view the example of Iran as a lesson in how to engage so-called ``rogue nations'' over the next 4 years. He no longer has a reelection campaign to worry about, and there is nothing to stop him from using smarter alternatives when conducting America's foreign policy.
What kind of world will the President leave when he steps off the global stage in the year 2008? A world at war for the foreseeable future, or a world at peace, guided by the smart choices of diplomacy and engagement? The choice is in his hands.
I know we in the GOP are not complaint free (*COUGH*1994*cough), but I clearly remember complaints and disappointments registered toward the object of complaint, NOT at people, system, or election. But also, instead of issuing a litany of complaints, we actually took action (like recapturing the House and never letting go).
Canada is calling you Lynn...answer the call, pack your crap and go.
Iran could face UN sanctions for its nuclear program
Iran's chief nuclear negotiator Hassan Rohani referred to demands from the International Atomic Energy Agency to freeze all work on uranium enrichment as "illegal".
"Iran will not accept any obligation regarding the suspension of uranium enrichment," Rohani said at a news conference on Sunday. "No international body can force Iran to do so."
Over the weekend, the United Nations' nuclear watchdog, IAEA, had unanimously adopted a joint US-European resolution giving Iran two months to stop producing enriched uranium or face referral to the Security Council.
Iran digs its heels in
According to Reuters news agency, the resolution agreed to by the IAEA's board of governors called on Iran to freeze all activities related to uranium enrichment and to grant full and prompt access to the IAEA's inspectors, as well as provide them with any further information needed, by Nov. 25.
Iran responded by saying that if the issue were referred to the Security Council for possible sanctions, it would respond by blocking snap checks of its atomic facilities. Hassan Rohani, head of Iran's supreme national security council, added that were the case to go to the Security Council, Iran would also consider withdrawing from the Nuclear Non- Proliferation Treaty, which it signed in 2003.
"If they want to send Iran to the Security Council, it is not wise, and we will stop implementing the Additional Protocol," he said. The Additional Protocol to the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty calls for snap nuclear checks by IAEA inspectors.
A "peaceful" nuclear program
Tehran has said it wants to secure its own source of fuel for power stations so that it is not dependent on other countries and stresses that Iran has a legal right to develop nuclear power. Rohani insisted that no institution had the authority to deprive a country of a peaceful nuclear energy program.
But experts also say that enrichment is an integral step in the production of atomic weapons, and Washington has long harbored suspicions about the Islamic country's aims for developing its nuclear capacity. The US believes that oil- rich Iran, which the Bush administration described as a member of the "axis of evil," has no need for nuclear reactors, even for civilian programs.
Criticism from EU
The threatening posture from Tehran marks a turn-around from last October, when the country agreed to more stringent inspections and signed the Additional Protocol. At the time, Iran also consented to the suspension of uranium enrichment activities. In return, Britain, France and Germany, promised to help develop technology for a civil atomic energy plant.
But last week, the European Union abandoned its policy of "constructive engagement," after the bloc's Big Three joined forces with the United States and decided to issue a deadline for Tehran to comply with international demands dispel concerns about nuclear activities.
"The EU calls on Iran to heed the content of the resolution adopted by IAEA's board of governors, in particular with regard to the necessity to suspend fully all its enrichment related activities," the head of the Dutch delegation told a meeting of members of the IAEA on behalf of the EU.
Tehran insists it abided by the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and allowed spot inspections proving the intention behind its nuclear program was civilian in nature. Officials in Tehran also point out that the suspension of enrichment was not a legal requirement but a voluntary measure.
In November, the IAEA board of governors will meet to review Iran's alleged nuclear weapons program. The country has until then to answer all outstanding questions.
Isn't Woolsey the one that was on Welfare years ago?
Ms. Woolsey is not the North Bay's only representative in the House. She covers Marin County and southern Sonoma county. Northern Sonoma County and Napa County are represented by Mike Thompson of the 1st Congressional District.
Mike Thompson is one of the congresscritters who made their treasonous to Baghdad before the war. I'll take Woolsey over Thompson.
she needs to go to the sorry.com website to get all the sympathy she needs.
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.