We must not let him repeat horror of 9/11

The Sun (U.K.) ^ | 03/15/03 | Mike Kehoe

[Pokey78]

HERO fireman Mike Kehoe, 35, was famously pictured in the World Trade Center on September 11. Here he explains why we must fight Saddam.

"ANYONE who thinks we shouldn’t go to war with Iraq should cast their minds back to September 11, 2001.

"Three thousand innocent people lost their lives because we had taken a soft stance and not hunted down our most dangerous enemies.

Warning ... Mike Kehoe

"Don’t people remember how we vowed to hunt down every terrorist one by one and bring them to justice?

"It was always going to take time and patience and now the moment is upon us when we need to act.

"I’d rather not go to war. But there really isn’t any alternative. Saddam has stockpiled weapons of mass destruction and he’s not prepared to give them up.

"The man has been given 12 years to disarm and hasn’t complied. He is every bit as evil as Osama Bin Laden.

"Luckily, unlike Bin Laden, we know where he is. All we’ve got to do now is go in and get him.

Hero ... Mike on Sept 11

"This is a worldwide network of terrorists we are taking on. They are sophisticated and operate together because we are their common enemy.

"One of the most important things that kept our country going after September 11 was knowing we were going to war on terrorism.

"The idea that Saddam could be allowed to murder on such a horrific scale does not bear thinking about. He must be stopped."

[Joy Angela]

In TIME OF WAR...

WHY is Hillary Rodham "Do Harm" Clinton
sitting on the Armed Services Committee with access
to Military Secrets???

The Conspiring Clintons
- One in the Senate, One at CBS.

'cause "It Takes a Village to Destroy the US"

[gcruse]

This entire article seems based on the premise that Hussein was behind 9/11. Since there is no proof of that, it's a waste of anger.

[Cicero]

Hussein probably was among the supporters who were behind 9/11. The Czech intelligence service never repudiated their insistence that Mohammed Atta met with an Iraqi intelligence agent in Prague not long before 9/11. For whatever reason the clintonoid in charge of the CIA tried to kill the story, but never did so convincingly.

Advanced terrorism of that sort requires state support. The Saudis supplied the money and Iraq was among those who supplied the expertise.

Moreover, The Sun is referring to the further point that if Saddam is allowed to keep on the way he is going, he is certain to produce another 9/11 in the future.

[wadecollins]

There is no link.

[gcruse]

Since there is no proof he produced this one, our anger should be at those who caused it to come about. The Saudis. I'm beginning to think we are going after Iraq because Saddam tried to kill Bush's father. Nothing else makes Iraq worth all this to the US.

[JoJo Gunn]

I''ve been searching until my fingers and eyes bleed, but damn if I've found that website that has the daily briefings of Bush and his Cabinet, the members of the CIA and FBI and NSA and (insert your unknown Alphabet Agency here). You know, what Garafalo seems to be accessing?

We knew from Day One that this would be an ongoing war, and that the Common Man wouldn't be told everything.

[caspera]

The Taliban was not behind September 11, either. As I recall, we went to war with them.

[Abar]

Don’t people remember how we vowed to hunt down every terrorist one by one and bring them to justice

Doing just that in Seattle, as every Patriot should everywhere.

They're here, in numbers. Their fanaticism is beyond most people's comprehension. They're smart, trained, and motivated. 72 virgins await them tomorrow...or maybe 45 minutes from now.

They've said they will kill us. They have killed us. They will kill us again.

It's time to get in their face, hard. Strength is the only thing they fear.

It's US or them.

The choice is up to US: ACT or succumb.

[gcruse]

Then you're saying the attack on the Taliban was unjustified too? Dang, even I don't go that far. I thought they tracked Al Queda to Afghaninstan.

[gcruse]

We knew from Day One that this would be an ongoing war, and that the Common Man wouldn't be told everything.

By Day One are you referring to 9/11?  Yes, this was going to be a long war and we might not be told everything. However, this was to be a war against terrorism.  Again, Iraq has not been linked to 9/11.

I would feel very odd if we made a habit of invading countries and not telling the Common Man why until later, if ever.  Maybe odd is the wrong word.  :)

[Jolly Rodgers]

I find it amazing that people are so ignorant as to still be spouting the line of false propaganda that tries to link Iraq with September 11th.

[Coto]

Probably why it garners so much air time here.....

[gcruse]

Hey, I get flamed enough for pointing out the lack of connection between 9/11 and Iraq. Suicidal I'm not. ;)

[frosty snowman]

So...was the attack on the Taliban unjustified?

So there should have been NO consequences for the Taliban refusing to hand over OBL and Al-Qaeda? They vowed not to hand over bin Laden since the very evening of 9/11....before any US bomb or bullet fell in Afghanistan. To say the Taliban was neutral between the US and bin Laden is ridiculous. The fact that they harbored the OBL/Al Qaeda thugs who bombed the US Embassies in Africa should have been reason enough to take them down...

The Taliban themselves were not in the 'international terrorist' business, did not promote it or fight it.

They were in the business of harboring international terrorists, and therefore involved in terrorism. To paraphrase GW: "with us, or against us".