 |
Posted on 08/28/2002 1:37:35 AM PDT by efnwriter
|
| TO SIGN THIS PETITION CLICK HERE | |
|
Petition to the Federal Government of the United States of America We, the undersigned, demand that the U.S. Government fulfill it's constitutional responsibility to protect its citizens as detailed in Article IV Section 4 of the U.S. Constitution:
A state of war has existed between the government of Iraq, specifically the hostis humani generis terrorist dictator Saddam Hussein, and the United States as proxy for the free world, since the Gulf War, 1990-1991. Although a peace treaty has been signed by the parties, Hussein has never performed on his responsibilities in the peace treaty, thus maintaining a state of war. We demand that the government of the United States cease and desist its failed policy of appeasement concerning Hussein and with all dispatch and all force necessary, rid us of the terrorist Saddam Hussein and his weapons of mass destruction before he can use them in his ongoing war against the Untied States. Failing this is unconstitutional. The Federal government would be remiss in its primary responsibility to protect the citizens of the United States from foreign powers and undeserving of the support of the people. |
Dear Friends, I have just written and signed the above online petition: "We demand that the government of the United States cease and desist its failed policy of appeasement concerning Saddam Hussein and with all dispatch and all force necessary, rid us of the terrorist Saddam Hussein and his weapons of mass destruction before he can use them in his ongoing war against the Untied States." hosted on the web by PetitionOnline.com, the free online petition service, at: I personally think you might agree with what this petition says. If you can spare a moment, please take a look, and consider signing yourself. Best wishes, Jason Rhodes efreedomnews.com
|
Would you sign him up if he were old enough, remember, you're the the pro-war zealot, not I.
If my son were old enough to join the Armed Forces it would not be my decision now would it?
If you have a counter argument then make it. If you are only going to bait me with paternal love, insult me like a sixth-grader calling someone names (zealot, goofy) and try to draw a parallel between Vietnam and Saddam's WMD threats when there is none, based on anti-war emotions from the 1960's-1970's, then we really have nothing to discuss.
But I will try to draw you into a debate and welcome your response if you will stop the ad hominem attacks.
I agree we need to secure our borders as much as possible. However, I cannot name one event in history where a border was actually completely secured. Can you? Terrorists don't need to move armies across our borders - a suitcase dirty bomb or a ziplock bag sized bioweapon can be smuggled in against any present technology or ability to secure our borders and can kill hundreds of thousands. Domestic (American) traitors can be used and sleepers and moles are already here if Saddam's intelligence services are any good at all.
Can you name any defensive posture in history that could not be broken?
I cannot. I believe the facts known in the public sector alone clearly demonstrate that Saddam continues to make war on the US and the free world, has fought and lost 2 wars but continues to have designs on regional hegemony and clearly supports international terrorism (for his own ourposes). Furthermore, the Atta meeting with Iraqi intelligence and Saddam's known ties to al-Qaida demonstrate to me that Saddam had a role in 911. That is why I believe the facts of this situation require that Saddam be attacked and eliminated.
On 911, the battle was brought to our shores. Next time it may be in your neighborhood. So it very well may be your problem. Please take my arguments apart - if you can.
Jason
Since the Iraqi Army has not invaded any of our States, the basis for this petition is invalid. IF the Iraqis' attempt to attack us, we would be justified in attacking them. So far they haven't, probably because they can't.
Now, the people of Mexico and several other Latin American countries ARE invading us. ART. IV Sec. 4 would, in my opinion REQUIRE military action, but that's just my opinion.
I remember something about our intelligence reporting a plot. Was any one ever arrested and/or convicted? All I remember is the plot being reported.
Saddam Shoots at our planes in the no fly zones regularly.
The only reports I've seen stated that the Iraqis "paint" our aircraft regularly, which we generally shoot at them for. Hardly a threat to California ir Florida.
Ramzi Yousef, the mastermind of the WTC bombing in 1993 entered the US on an Iraqi passport, originating his flight from Iraq. His intelligence file in Kuwait was altered by Iraqi officials during the occupation of Kuwait. Abdul Yasin, also involved in the bombing returned to Iraq and is living in Baghdad.7
His file was altered in 1991 for an action he took in 1993? Clarify, please.
In November 2001, two defectors from the Iraqi intelligence services said that Iraq had used Salman Pak, a camp south of Baghdad, to train Islamist radicals in the techniques of terrorism
An Iraqi Lt. general and Captain Sabah Khodada defected from Iraq and emigrated to the US in May, 2001. In separate New York Times interviews, they described Salman Pak, a highly secret terrorist training camp south of Baghdad. The trainees were Iraqi, and non-Iraqi Arabs. The non-Iraqi's were described as Islamic Fundamentalists.
What's your source? That could be some interesting reading!
Mohammed Atta met with Iraqi intelligence just prior to 911.
I've read several articles which debunk the claim about Atta meeting with Iraqi intelligence in Czechoslovakia. I've also read several articles claiming he did. All of the reports I've seen have been inconsistent as to time frame.
As to the Constituional requirement that the Federal government protect each state from invasion, I'll concede that 'invasion' and 'attack' are, in modern terms, identical. But I still contend that the Iraqis are in no position to attack the US now or in the forseeable future. If the Iraqis are so dangerous, you and others who believe as you do should begin harassing Congress for a declaration of war. If the Congress declares war, I'll support it the whole 9 yards. Untill then, I'll press the people calling for war for evidence that it is necessary.
http://www.efreedomnews.com/News%20Archive/Iraq/SpecialReportWaronIraq/W5CommonCause.htm
Re: your statement: If the Iraqis are so dangerous, you and others who believe as you do should begin harassing Congress for a declaration of war
The Petition to the Federal Government is just such an action to voice my and the other signer's opinion to Congress and the executive branch. I have little faith in Congress. Look at the votes in Gulf War I! The margin of votes to go was very thin, and that was with a coalition and a UN sanction to free Kuwait.Congress acts too politically for me, and not necessarily in the nation's interest. Besides, the powers granted by congress to President Bush after 911 already cover using military action against Iraq as do the UN Sanctions. However, I too would like to see a united front by all branches of the government. And about needing to see evidence that war is necessary - I believe Saddam will either use WMD attacks against us or our overseas interests or will pass WMD's on to terrorists like al-Qaida. Once he has nukes, will feel unthreatened to pursue his quest for domination of the middle-east. I do not want to wait for him to take these actions before taking him out.
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.