Posted on 01/16/2003 4:49:02 AM PST by ejdrapes
GRIM TRUTH ABOUT TO EMERGE IN IRAQ EVERYBODY seems to know the apparently smart things to say about Iraq these days. You can get through any conversation or chat show by pulling a solemn face or adopting a serious tone and saying: "Well, the government hasn't made its case on weapons of mass destruction and there's no clear link between Saddam and al-Qaeda and, anyway, we need another UN declaration." Those who have been getting through the past month by saying this are in danger of looking foolish in the extreme a few weeks from now. But that's what often happens to people who allow their thinking to be done for them. On the weapons issue, for example, it is perfectly obvious that the Iraqi regime has something to hide. The UN resolution on disarmament quite clearly requires Saddam to prove that he has disarmed. It is not a matter of waiting for the inspectors - in a country the size of Texas - to ask the right question. Instead, the Ba'athists insultingly handed over a bunch of unsorted documents, which even Hans Blix (the man who once certified Iraq as "exemplary" and North Korea as clean) was forced to say were full of unexplained gaps. (On the very same day as the document dump, Saddam Hussein made an insane speech in which he called for a united front with the forces of jihad, and expressed support for the pro- al-Qaeda forces in Kuwait.) The only disclosure worth having has been about the amazing scale of the previous Iraqi attempt to acquire nuclear weapons; an attempt that was much closer to fruition than we had thought by the time of the last Gulf War. Of course, they lied about it then, too. I can add some further detail, which is somewhat better than anecdotal. A very senior former inspector, who is a highly-regarded international civil servant, told me that he had been offered his own personal Swiss bank account by a top official in Saddam's government, on condition that he produced a favourable report. HE declined the offer, which he later discovered had been accepted by some junior members of his staff. The Iraqis later tried to poison his food, which he had to have flown in from Bahrain thereafter. I doubt that Hans Blix has taken any bribes but his past leniency is notorious and it is an open secret that the Russian and French delegates to the UN, both friendly to Iraq, lobbied very hard to have him awarded the job. This was after they had vetoed the reappointment of Rolf Ekeus, who had conducted very efficient inspections in the period immediately after 1992. However, the United States and several Iraqi dissident groups have sources of their own on the whereabouts of some key sites, and the time is approaching when Blix and Saddam will be put to the test. If I were you, I would watch out for the discovery that Saddam Hussein has been using cellars and tunnels underneath mosques to hide his weaponry: a disclosure that might have its effect in the Muslim world and at the United Nations. And when the regime falls, which it will do in any case, there will be some other uncoverings that will astonish the world. Secret prisons, mass graves, bizarre sites and maniac palaces... just you wait. On the question of Saddam's links to terrorism, attention is now beginning to focus on the Ansar-al Islam group in northern Iraq. This gang, which has clear and demonstrable connections with al-Qaeda, is made up of Arabs who have recently fled Afghanistan. They are concentrated in the Kurdish areas which have declared their independence from Saddam's rule, and they spend all their time trying to destroy the leadership of the autonomous Kurdish zone. Now, why on earth would they want to do that? It doesn't seem like the highest priority of a holy war. Saddam's other connections, to the suicide bombers in Palestine - and to the recently deceased Abu Nidal and his network of assassins - are so well known that one hardly needs to repeat them (though they appear to have escaped the attention of the Anglican bishops, whose most recent statement applies the presumption of innocence to Saddam in a really quite touching fashion). Indeed, those who speak in the name of religion appear to go quite silly when confronted with this pagan Caligula who makes his people worship him and builds mosques dedicated to himself - and probably to other things. BRITISH Muslim leaders have referred to Iraq as a "Muslim country", which it is not. It is the home of some of the world's oldest Christian populations, and the place of innumerable pre-Christian and pre-Islamic treasures and was, until a few decades ago, the home of a enormous Jewish population. Those who speak about the importance of "multiculturalism" in their own case should not forget it when it comes to others. They should also be careful about identifying their sacred texts with the cause of a worldly despot. Finally, what is all this about waiting for the UN? Everybody is in favour of observing the rules and procedures of international law, and the Security Council has voted unanimously so far. To speak of the need for another resolution is to put the cart right in front of the horse. We don't know what will be revealed before any intervention takes place but some revelations would be enough in themselves to make a case for war. In such a case one would hope that Clare Short, for example, would criticise any Russian or Chinese or French veto that obstructed the will of the majority. Especially since she seems to be saying at the moment that she'd be in favour of intervention just as long as she had more people on her side... The Prime Minister is quite right to be impatient with arguments like this, from speakers who more or less admit that they have no minds of their own.
Jan 16 2003
Christopher Hitchens
You slimy Brit, get your own third-rate dilapidated "empire" to do the fighting if you're that damn eager for blood. And leave America out of it!
And thank you for adding the honesty and intelligence of C. Hitchens to our information storehouse. It won't change the minds of the anti-war, anti-America crowd, but it sure might give pause to elected officials on the left who would sell their souls in order to thwart the efforts of President Bush.
Helen Thomas and Jimmy Carter.
Ah! More words of wisdom. Good to see which side you're on, Justin.
Saying tha Hitch is "on our side" is a bit of a stretch. He is a proud far left liberal but he has what most liberals lack.... intellectual honesty. Believe me Hitch has written some things about Bush that would curl your hair.
BWAHAHAhahaha(gasp)Can I throw in Katie and Matt and Ellen Ratnor?
This link is the real grim truth that is coming to the Iraqi thugs in Iraq who might survive after Soddomite quits wasting oxygen: (USA prepares rebuild plan for post-conflict Iraq Janes.com ^ | 13 January 2003 | Kim Burger)
This is a Janes article not some drugged out word smith working for the NY Slimes trying to write an article to scare us away from what needs to be done in Iraq now, during the brief but deadly for the Islamofascist thugs who control Iraq and after Uncle Soddomite is not wasting oxygen anymore by breathing.
I assume Scott Ritter accepted.
Hey, no, we WANT to go!
Bomb! Bomb! Bomb! Bomb Saddam!
Hey, Hey, whadda ya say! Let's get his b***s and fight!
Have you enlisted for this war yet? If not, shut your hypocritical mouth.
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.