War critics astonished as US hawk admits invasion was illegal

[DoYouEverWonder]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,1089158,00.html

Thursday November 20, 2003


International lawyers and anti-war campaigners reacted with astonishment yesterday after the influential Pentagon hawk Richard Perle conceded that the invasion of Iraq had been illegal.

In a startling break with the official White House and Downing Street lines, Mr Perle told an audience in London: "I think in this case international law stood in the way of doing the right thing."

President George Bush has consistently argued that the war was legal either because of existing UN security council resolutions on Iraq - also the British government's publicly stated view - or as an act of self-defence permitted by international law.

But Mr Perle, a key member of the defence policy board, which advises the US defence secretary, Donald Rumsfeld, said that "international law ... would have required us to leave Saddam Hussein alone", and this would have been morally unacceptable.


So according to Perle's twisted logic, yes the war was illegal but it's the law that is at fault not the US. Yeah, right Dick, whatever you say Dick.

[DUreader]

1. Every law prevents the neocons from doing the right thing$

$

[loudnclear]

65. Then there was absolutely no basis for holding Saddam responsible

for breaking any international law!

[Elidor]

2. Stunning, really

No shame at all. He's proud, even. Occluded boob.

[JackSwift]

3. He's half right

the war was illegal. No question about it. In my opinion, only the Security Council could have provided adequate cover. But as they knew that this was about Oil and PNAC, they would have declined in any case.

[DoYouEverWonder]

5. Shouldn't Resolution 1441

be rescinded since it was based on false and forged evidence?

[jamesinca]

61. No it should not be rescinded

It should be followed. Res. 1441 states that if deemed necissary by the Security Council actions up to and including military force may be used.

By the Security Council, not the U.S. These decions were to be made after the reports by Dr. Blix which contained both the state of weapons programs, and the cooperation by the Iraqis. Never once was there a problem stated by Dr Blix that said war was justified! Never once did the U.N. Security Council vote to have a war. Resolutin 1441 has 14 sections and 1 general statement 15 parts in all. As is written the U.S. violated 5 of the 15 parts, Iraq violated none of them. If the resolution is rescinded that would let the U.S. government off the hook for an illegal war. This may be a good time to bring back the text of the entire resolution for all to read and refresh their memories of its content.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Text of UN Security Council Resolution on Iraq: November 8, 2002

United Nations
New York, New York
November 8, 2002


United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and United States of America: draft resolution



The Security Council,

Recalling all its previous relevant resolutions, in particular its resolutions 661 (1990) of 6 August 1990, 678 (1990) of 29 November 1990, 686 (1991) of 2 March 1991, 687 (1991) of 3 April 1991, 688 (1991) of 5 April 1991, 707 (1991) of 15 August 1991, 715 (1991) of 11 October 1991, 986 (1995) of 14 April 1995, and 1284 (1999) of 17 December 1999, and all the relevant statements of its President,

Recalling also its resolution 1382 (2001) of 29 November 2001 and its intention to implement it fully,

Recognizing the threat Iraq’s non-compliance with Council resolutions and proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and long-range missiles poses to international peace and security,

Recalling that its resolution 678 (1990) authorized Member States to use all necessary means to uphold and implement its resolution 660 (1990) of 2 August 1990 and all relevant resolutions subsequent to resolution 660 (1990) and to restore international peace and security in the area,

Further recalling that its resolution 687 (1991) imposed obligations on Iraq as a necessary step for achievement of its stated objective of restoring international peace and security in the area,

Deploring the fact that Iraq has not provided an accurate, full, final, and complete disclosure, as required by resolution 687 (1991), of all aspects of its programmes to develop weapons of mass destruction and ballistic missiles with a range greater than one hundred and fifty kilometres, and of all holdings of such weapons, their components and production facilities and locations, as well as all other nuclear programmes, including any which it claims are for purposes not related to nuclear-weapons-usable material,

Deploring further that Iraq repeatedly obstructed immediate, unconditional, and unrestricted access to sites designated by the United Nations Special Commission (UNSCOM) and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), failed to cooperate fully and unconditionally with UNSCOM and IAEA weapons inspectors, as required by resolution 687 (1991), and ultimately ceased all cooperation with UNSCOM and the IAEA in 1998,

Deploring the absence, since December 1998, in Iraq of international monitoring, inspection, and verification, as required by relevant resolutions, of weapons of mass destruction and ballistic missiles, in spite of the Council’s repeated demands that Iraq provide immediate, unconditional, and unrestricted access to the United Nations Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission (UNMOVIC), established in resolution 1284 (1999) as the successor organization to UNSCOM, and the IAEA, and regretting the consequent prolonging of the crisis in the region and the suffering of the Iraqi people,

Deploring also that the Government of Iraq has failed to comply with its commitments pursuant to resolution 687 (1991) with regard to terrorism, pursuant to resolution 688 (1991) to end repression of its civilian population and to provide access by international humanitarian organizations to all those in need of assistance in Iraq, and pursuant to resolutions 686 (1991), 687 (1991), and 1284 (1999) to return or cooperate in accounting for Kuwaiti and third country nationals wrongfully detained by Iraq, or to return Kuwaiti property wrongfully seized by Iraq,

Recalling that in its resolution 687 (1991) the Council declared that a ceasefire would be based on acceptance by Iraq of the provisions of that resolution, including the obligations on Iraq contained therein,

Determined to ensure full and immediate compliance by Iraq without conditions or restrictions with its obligations under resolution 687 (1991) and other relevant resolutions and recalling that the resolutions of the Council constitute the governing standard of Iraqi compliance,

Recalling that the effective operation of UNMOVIC, as the successor organization to the Special Commission, and the IAEA is essential for the implementation of resolution 687 (1991) and other relevant resolutions,

Noting the letter dated 16 September 2002 from the Minister for Foreign Affairs of Iraq addressed to the Secretary-General is a necessary first step toward rectifying Iraq’s continued failure to comply with relevant Council resolutions,

Noting further the letter dated 8 October 2002 from the Executive Chairman of UNMOVIC and the Director-General of the IAEA to General Al-Saadi of the Government of Iraq laying out the practical arrangements, as a follow-up to their meeting in Vienna, that are prerequisites for the resumption of inspections in Iraq by UNMOVIC and the IAEA, and expressing the gravest concern at the continued failure by the Government of Iraq to provide confirmation of the arrangements as laid out in that letter,

Reaffirming the commitment of all Member States to the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Iraq, Kuwait, and the neighbouring States,

Commending the Secretary-General and members of the League of Arab States and its Secretary-General for their efforts in this regard,

Determined to secure full compliance with its decisions,

Acting under Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations,

1. Decides that Iraq has been and remains in material breach of its obligations under relevant resolutions, including resolution 687 (1991), in particular through Iraq’s failure to cooperate with United Nations inspectors and the IAEA, and to complete the actions required under paragraphs 8 to 13 of resolution 687 (1991);

2. Decides, while acknowledging paragraph 1 above, to afford Iraq, by this resolution, a final opportunity to comply with its disarmament obligations under relevant resolutions of the Council; and accordingly decides to set up an enhanced inspection regime with the aim of bringing to full and verified completion the disarmament process established by resolution 687 (1991) and subsequent resolutions of the Council;

3. Decides that, in order to begin to comply with its disarmament obligations, in addition to submitting the required biannual declarations, the Government of Iraq shall provide to UNMOVIC, the IAEA, and the Council, not later than 30 days from the date of this resolution, a currently accurate, full, and complete declaration of all aspects of its programmes to develop chemical, biological, and nuclear weapons, ballistic missiles, and other delivery systems such as unmanned aerial vehicles and dispersal systems designed for use on aircraft, including any holdings and precise locations of such weapons, components, sub-components, stocks of agents, and related material and equipment, the locations and work of its research, development and production facilities, as well as all other chemical, biological, and nuclear programmes, including any which it claims are for purposes not related to weapon production or material;

4. Decides that false statements or omissions in the declarations submitted by Iraq pursuant to this resolution and failure by Iraq at any time to comply with, and cooperate fully in the implementation of, this resolution shall constitute a further material breach of Iraq’s obligations and will be reported to the Council for assessment in accordance with paragraphs 11 and 12 below;

5. Decides that Iraq shall provide UNMOVIC and the IAEA immediate, unimpeded, unconditional, and unrestricted access to any and all, including underground, areas, facilities, buildings, equipment, records, and means of transport which they wish to inspect, as well as immediate, unimpeded, unrestricted, and private access to all officials and other persons whom UNMOVIC or the IAEA wish to interview in the mode or location of UNMOVIC’s or the IAEA’s choice pursuant to any aspect of their mandates; further decides that UNMOVIC and the IAEA may at their discretion conduct interviews inside or outside of Iraq, may facilitate the travel of those interviewed and family members outside of Iraq, and that, at the sole discretion of UNMOVIC and the IAEA, such interviews may occur without the presence of observers from the Iraqi Government; and instructs UNMOVIC and requests the IAEA to resume inspections no later than 45 days following adoption of this resolution and to update the Council 60 days thereafter;

6. Endorses the 8 October 2002 letter from the Executive Chairman of UNMOVIC and the Director-General of the IAEA to General Al-Saadi of the Government of Iraq, which is annexed hereto, and decides that the contents of the letter shall be binding upon Iraq;

7. Decides further that, in view of the prolonged interruption by Iraq of the presence of UNMOVIC and the IAEA and in order for them to accomplish the tasks set forth in this resolution and all previous relevant resolutions and notwithstanding prior understandings, the Council hereby establishes the following revised or additional authorities, which shall be binding upon Iraq, to facilitate their work in Iraq:

– UNMOVIC and the IAEA shall determine the composition of their inspection teams and ensure that these teams are composed of the most qualified and experienced experts available;

– All UNMOVIC and IAEA personnel shall enjoy the privileges and immunities, corresponding to those of experts on mission, provided in the Convention on Privileges and Immunities of the United Nations and the Agreement on the Privileges and Immunities of the IAEA;

– UNMOVIC and the IAEA shall have unrestricted rights of entry into and out of Iraq, the right to free, unrestricted, and immediate movement to and from inspection sites, and the right to inspect any sites and buildings, including immediate, unimpeded, unconditional, and unrestricted access to Presidential Sites equal to that at other sites, notwithstanding the provisions of resolution 1154 (1998);

– UNMOVIC and the IAEA shall have the right to be provided by Iraq the names of all personnel currently and formerly associated with Iraq’s chemical, biological, nuclear, and ballistic missile programmes and the associated research, development, and production facilities;

– Security of UNMOVIC and IAEA facilities shall be ensured by sufficient United Nations security guards;

– UNMOVIC and the IAEA shall have the right to declare, for the purposes of freezing a site to be inspected, exclusion zones, including surrounding areas and transit corridors, in which Iraq will suspend ground and aerial movement so that nothing is changed in or taken out of a site being inspected;

– UNMOVIC and the IAEA shall have the free and unrestricted use and landing of fixed- and rotary-winged aircraft, including manned and unmanned reconnaissance vehicles;

– UNMOVIC and the IAEA shall have the right at their sole discretion verifiably to remove, destroy, or render harmless all prohibited weapons, subsystems, components, records, materials, and other related items, and the right to impound or close any facilities or equipment for the production thereof; and

– UNMOVIC and the IAEA shall have the right to free import and use of equipment or materials for inspections and to seize and export any equipment, materials, or documents taken during inspections, without search of UNMOVIC or IAEA personnel or official or personal baggage;

8. Decides further that Iraq shall not take or threaten hostile acts directed against any representative or personnel of the United Nations or the IAEA or of any Member State taking action to uphold any Council resolution;

9. Requests the Secretary-General immediately to notify Iraq of this resolution, which is binding on Iraq; demands that Iraq confirm within seven days of that notification its intention to comply fully with this resolution; and demands further that Iraq cooperate immediately, unconditionally, and actively with UNMOVIC and the IAEA;

10. Requests all Member States to give full support to UNMOVIC and the IAEA in the discharge of their mandates, including by providing any information related to prohibited programmes or other aspects of their mandates, including on Iraqi attempts since 1998 to acquire prohibited items, and by recommending sites to be inspected, persons to be interviewed, conditions of such interviews, and data to be collected, the results of which shall be reported to the Council by UNMOVIC and the IAEA;

11. Directs the Executive Chairman of UNMOVIC and the Director-General of the IAEA to report immediately to the Council any interference by Iraq with inspection activities, as well as any failure by Iraq to comply with its disarmament obligations, including its obligations regarding inspections under this resolution;

12. Decides to convene immediately upon receipt of a report in accordance with paragraphs 4 or 11 above, in order to consider the situation and the need for full compliance with all of the relevant Council resolutions in order to secure international peace and security;

13. Recalls, in that context, that the Council has repeatedly warned Iraq that it will face serious consequences as a result of its continued violations of its obligations;

14. Decides to remain seized of the matter.

[DoYouEverWonder]

64. Then Bu$hCo should allow UN inspectors

back in the country so they can finish their work.

[DeathvadeR]

4. Quick,,,,Too the Haque mobile!!!! n/t

[Skip Intro]

6. At what point does the USA say enough!?

I know polls are going against the war/invasion/occupation/armed robbery, but this is just unacceptable, or should be.

Don't the "bush 'patriots,'" at long last, conceed America deserves better than an illegitimate, admittedly illegal invasion based on the lies of a fraudulent regime? Doesn't something - like the very honor of our nation and the lives of those who bravely, unquestioningly fight and die to protect it, rise above party for the dwindling number of bush supporters?

My stomach churns, my head spins, and my patriotic pride turns to shame at witnessing what has become "good enough" for America.

FUGWB!

[La_Serpiente]

7. The next US president

ought to send the entire cabal to the Hague.

[sasquatch]

10. I second that motion

:thumbsup:

[maggrwaggr]

18. I third it!

[Occulus]

21. Fourth it

cite Perle's statement as part of a poll on this topic...

[Military Brat]

27. Fifth!

And give them the same treatment as those at Gitmo.

[kitkatrose]

62. I sixth it,

but do you think the next president will have the guts to do it or will they just "forgive" everyone in the admin? :(

[nolabels]

66. When it gets to that point, it will take more guts to try to pardon

And it may be too late for the Neo-cons

http://www.antiwar.com/ips/lobe112003.html
New Leak Smells of Neocon Desperation
by Jim Lobe
November 20, 2003

This week's blockbuster leak of a secret memorandum from a senior Pentagon official to the Senate Intelligence Committee has spurred speculation that neo-conservative hawks in the Bush administration are on the defensive and growing more desperate.

Both the committee and the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) have asked the Justice Department to launch an investigation of the leak, which took the form of an article published Monday by the influential neo-conservative journal, The Weekly Standard.

(snip)(snip)

The notion that the leak was "friendly" or "authorized" by hawks in the Pentagon or their allies in Vice President Dick Cheney's office – as opposed to an unauthorized leak designed to embarrass the author – is widely accepted here.

The Standard, particularly Hayes and executive editor William Kristol, have acted as a mouthpiece for administration hawks like Feith, his immediate boss, Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz, and their friends in Cheney's office, particularly his powerful chief of staff, I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, since even before the administration's "war on terror," declared after the attacks on New York and the Pentagon on Sept. 11, 2001.
(snip)

[KansDem]

70. Hell, I'd chip in to by them the plane tickets...

ONE WAY, of course. That way, they would be profiled as "suspicious," thereby making it certain they would be subjected to humiliating searches at the airport.

"Invasive body-cavity probing" has a way of bringing ANYONE down a notch or two.

"Now, Sir, please bend over a crack a vertical smile!"

[DoYouEverWonder]

71. You sound like you speak from experience

Welcome to DU.

[arcane1]

8. "luckily", many countries have excempted us from the ICC

at the point of a gun, basically

Perle is a war criminal and belongs on the gallows.

[sasquatch]

9. Have we gone insane

We start a war against another country because they were in violation of international peecekeeping laws. The body that is in charge of those laws say's they arn't breaking their laws. So we say they've made themselves irrelevent to world order and peace. We then say we'll uphold UN laws by breaking them if we'll have to. We say that the war is legal because Iraq's an immenent threat to the United States and Britain. We invade and find no WMD's or a standing army for that matter. Now we admit that it was illegal but it was the right thing to do.

IN WHAT FUCKING UNIVERSE DOES RICHARD PEARLE LIVE IN? WHAT DRUGS IS HE ON? I WANT SOME TOO.

:argh:

[Skip Intro]

11. You don't want any of those drugs, man

Brown acid gone rancid on the criminally insane would be my guess.

[priller]

35. It's a power trip, man

That's what he's hooked on: raw power.

[alfredo]

68. according to Powell, Ambien.

Oxycontin is only for their spokesmen/women.

[htuttle]

12. Exquisite timing, Richard...

Given that Bush is out of the country -- in Britain, where they actually might care about this sort of thing -- especially in Parliament.

[sasquatch]

22. I wonder if him and Dubya will have fun in the Hague?

I hope they get used to the term "gevangis bitch". That's dutch for Prison Bitch.

[colorado_ufo]

39. Hmmmm . . . timing is everything -

What is going on here? These people seem to routinely throw one another under the bus, but never without an ulterior motive. It was only a few short weeks ago that even Cheney played the sacrificial lamb.

This makes me extremely nervous. I hate surprises, and our country seems to suffer nasty surprises when * is out of the White House and at some other location. The mainstream coverage of the British protestors just exacerbates the situation.

Please eveybody - tell me I'm wrong!

[maggrwaggr]

13. Perle to the world: "So sue me!"

There's a saying "It's easier to apologize than get permission"

That's what we're seeing now.

[belle]

40. Except for they're not actually apologizing; but otherwise, yeah...

[truthisfreedom]

14. what happened to perle's mind? did something snap?

has he come unhinged? this is not proper behavior for bushco. has he broken from the script? is he ad libbing? what strange things will we hear next? that keeping the secrets about the energy meetings was "illegal?" is this some sort of strategery?

[DoYouEverWonder]

19. Maybe the Hollinger investigation

is freaking him out? If justice is served he should get nailed in that little fiasco.

[priller]

34. I think you may have missed the point

It's not that he thinks we did anything WRONG in invading Iraq, that was a GOOD DEED. No no, the wrong was on the side of international law. This is just another blatant attempt by Perle to dismantle anything that resembles cooperation between nations, anything that stands in the way of the rule of sheer power.

[Name removed]

15. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[maggrwaggr]

17. wow! LOL! You said what I didn't want to say!

Yes, it's morally wrong to NOT kill anyone who doesn't agree with you.

Did I say that out loud?

[maggrwaggr]

16. I can't get over this. By this logic I can do whatever the hell i want

and blame it on "morals."

It's morally wrong to let George W. Bush keep killing people, so ...

Gee, I can think of several ways to stop him. All morally justifiable now. Think the secret service would let me off the hook?

[truthisfreedom]

23. that mentality is at the very foundation of rethug thinking. consider the

judge in Alabama, moore, who took the law into his own hands. they are morally above all law in their own minds. it's a religious thing, you understand, and that makes it "right." actually, perle, and moore... it's called anarchy. lawlessness. your self-righteousness will be your party's undoing.

[AlabamaYankee]

29. You Nailed it, truthisfreedom

It's the rationale of the "Saved". Since they have been saved by Jesus, they are free from sin, and therefore can do no wrong, especially since they are doing God's work as His elect. This of course is Hubris, Blasphemy,and a number of other deadly sins, but that doesn't matter to them.

To those of us who are more thoughtful Christians, it's painful to see our faith bludgeoned like that.

[not systems]

32. Anarchy.

Don't blame anarchy for this crime.

It is a fascist mindset that believes in the innate right of
the chosen few to rule by will alone.

Perle is not an anarchist but a member if a class who
believes laws are for others.

[moondust]

58. It's Osamathink.

Formerly Hitlerthink.

[IndianaGreen]

24. Perle rationalizes the war as a criminal rationalizes crime

"I want something from you, I will take it and kill you if you get in the way!" We have 2 million people behind bars for thinking that way.

[aquart]

38. It never occurs to them

That if they can do whatever the hell they please, so can the rest of us, baby. So can the rest of us.

What new and wonderful precedents have they set?

You can invade a sovereign nation which has NOT attacked you in any way.

You can hunt and kill a head of state.

You can murder the children of a head of state.

I'm sure some future president, if we ever have any, will thank you for these gifts, George.

What happens if you're cursed while you're in Hell? Does it get hotter?

[DivinBreuvage]

20. They're getting bolder

The enemies of Nicholas II did the same. The Nazis did the same. I'm sure you can think of other examples, but those are two I'm familiar with.

That's how they always do. They test the waters for a while and grow bolder when Nemesis ignores them.

Françoise

[DivinBreuvage]

25. Also, he's laying the groundwork for the future.

Notice he didn't say "the war is illegal". He said: "I think in this case international law stood in the way of doing the right thing." I expect we'll see this noble catch phrase repeated by the talking heads and the radio call-in crowd in the months to come.

The war in Iraq was illegal, but in that case they were able to gimmick up a justificatory facade. They may not be able to do so next time, so it's best to have us all aware of the fact that sometimes we Americans just have to bend or even break the rules to get the job done.

I don't know how the 2004 elections will go. I really don't. But between things like this quote, Bush's brand new statement that the US will continue to fight wars alone if it must, and one alert DUer's discovery which appears to indicate that the draft is planned to be in place by June 2005, it really seems sometimes like these folks have gone off, or are getting ready to go off, the deep end.

Françoise

[belab13]

36. we're in it deep already, but it could quickly spin out of control

to the detriment of the entire world. It remains to be seen who will stand up to these sociopaths. I'm not entirely sure whether it's now possible within the structure of our compromised political system. Great posts freedom frog.

[bvar22]

26. STOP BUSH*....

...before he kills again!!!!

These people hold themselves above the law.

40,000 dead Iraqis,
100,000+ maimed Iraqis,
400 dead US Soldiers,
1000+ maimed US soldiers

...but the slime balls who lied and demanded this war don't see these human beings....None of these casualties are from the upper crust, elite, top 1%....so they don't count!!!!

MORE TAX BREAKS FOR THE CEOS AND THE RICH!!!!WHOOPEE!!!!

[Dirk39]

28. "I think in this case international law stood in the way...

...of doing the right thing"
You're my kind of guy Perle. That's exactly, what I told those stupid cops after robbing a bank, at least I don't own a bank, I just robbed it! P.M. me for details, Richy!
Hello from Germany,
Dirk

[Rose Siding]

30. Why ever would he say this

Was he just dizzy from the perpetual spinning or are the waters of absolute power being tested?

[PurityOfEssence]

31. Did you see this smug goombah on C-span?

It got ridiculous after awhile, since all of his responses to anyone asking a hostile question started with the same riff of dismissing the person's question as incoherent. Each riposte was a sad attempt to marginalize the caller's intelligence and sanity before dodging the question. Such sameness is not the stuff of a truly adept weasel. He's relied on dealing in the shadows and having the upper hand for too long; let's see how he does under fire.

He doesn't look too healthy, either, but I hope he lives to see his indictment and merciless hounding.

There's also something violently galling about his honey-sweet faux-refined diction: he presents himself as an eminently cultured man of peace and wisdom with much the same unctuousness as that twinkly-eyed puritan Ken Starr. Eeeeevil.

[TheLastMohican]

57. I think his statement is an admission of defeat of Zionazis

The Zionists showed their teeth too early and too obviously, and people of the world didn't like what they saw and that includes americans and britons from all walks of life (remember the most numerous demonstrations against war were in these two countries).
The Zionazis decide that it was high time to announce openly who is in control of the world and politics around the globe but their policy backfired on them - you can't subjate the whole world with a military force no matter how strong it is. The troops got bogged in Iraq, there is a looming war with Syria and Iran, and North Korea smokes a nuclear pipe here and there, while there are other countries big and small which don't really appreciate the "macho approach" of handling international politics.
Their house of cards is coming apart and all of them Perle, Wolfie, Rummy, Cheney and the rest of the motley crew know that before they die they should go out with a Bang like a true kamikazee.
They will not go down quietly.
A world war is knocking on our door (a war not similar to those that have already been fought), an explosion here and explosion there, some tension here and there, some shooting here and some shooting there, some hacked internet sites, some hi-fi tech wars, they've been planning for this all along (watch that RAND corporation "think-tanks" and other shit-tanks to get a better idea).

[priller]

33. Nothing new, this is the Ollie North defense

North was completely unapologetic for his crimes, because he said he was serving a "higher purpose", in his opinion.

Like the Blues Brothers, these idiots believe they are "on a mission from God", so any lie, any deception, any crime, is okay if it serves that end.

[aquart]

37. You never hear them talk about the "rule of law" anymore.

Kinda miss it, actually.

[greyl]

41. If he's claiming that a post-conventional ethic

was being followed in the admin that gave them the moral authority to invade Iraq, he's still full of shit. Abortion clinic bombers claim similar moral imperatives when they attempt to skirt responsibility, but the logic isn't really post-conventional at all and just doesn't hold up to reason.

From a global perspective, Perl and the bush admin were wrong legally, bad ethically, and incorrect logically. The perspectives that view value in the Invasion are from the dim eyes of those that will profit financially, Toby Keith fans, and professional consumers with no mind to invest beyond the studying of ikea catalogs. -and the like.

[rman]

42. Perle is saying the US is above the law, that international law is immoral

He'll get away with it, and the government will once more get away with overtly contradicting itself.

[Cronus Protagonist]

43. "The ends justify the means" - typical pug thinking (eom)

Click Here To See Fair & Balanced Buttons, Stickers & Magnets

[DoYouEverWonder]

44. So when the hell

will people who love peace and justice and respect the rule of law put an end to their madness? Or will the terrorist have to do it for us?

[Capt_Nemo]

45. This guy is an evil mother****er, but Tony Blair is worse than him

Strange as it might seem. And here's why:

"I think Perle's statement has the virtue of honesty," said Michael Dorf, a law professor at Columbia University who opposed the war, arguing that it was illegal.

Compare that with Blair's utterly disgusting diet of spin and lies
used to forward the same evil agenda...

Besides that the problem with the US is that the mindset of a
majority of its people has nothing but contempt for the rule of law
for they know that down the road it's a threat for their "way of
life". In this I'm in complete agreement with Dorf when he says:

"And, interestingly, I suspect a majority of the American public would have supported the invasion almost exactly to the same degree that they in fact did, had the administration said that all along."

That is why the GOP has been winning elections one after another
and why they will - unfortunately - probably win come Nov. 2004

[teryang]

46. WMD, greet us with jubilation, blah, blah, blah

How can this sleazy fraud even get air time on the networks? He and his corrupt cronies should already be in jail awaiting trial for criminal conspiracy to defraud and making false official statements. But the Congress swallows his shit, hook, line and sinker.

This reminds me of Cheney's statement that lawyers have their uses. They have absolutely no respect for the rule of law, it conflicts with the corporatist non-ethic. They are trying to incite more violence deliberately. This is what you get when you encourage the rule of brute force.

[Name removed]

47. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

48. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Capt_Nemo]

50. hey SC, I wanted to have some fun with this guy

now you spoiled it! ;-)

Seriously mods: off with the freeper's head!

[Socialist Christian]

51. Lmao <nt>

[Capt_Nemo]

49. So when are you going to enlist to fight Dumbya's wars?

...Or are you afraid of traveling by hellicopter? :evilgrin:

[Socialist Christian]

52. He will Probably when they find those weapons of mass distraction <nt>

[Capt_Nemo]

53. and the Saddam-OBL link! LOL!

[moondust]

54. Nab 'em while they're in the UK and send them to the Hague!

How conveeenient!

[BiggJawn]

55. Damn those pesky Laws, anyway!

Get in the way of Perle and the rest of the PNACer's World Domination plans,Now the Law is causing Jacko to cut his Vegas cruising expedition short, and El Gushbo had to hide in rehab because he might get pinched (even yet!) for gobbling mass quantities...

Man, these damn Laws just cut WAY into a Neo-Con's fun, don't they?

How about letting Milosevic have Perle for a new roomie?

[Socialist Christian]

56. I guess this makes him a criminal <nt>

[iam]

59. NEVER

vote for a christian for President, he has his finger on the button that will bring back Jesus.

[chiburb]

60. "Frog Marching To The Hague" is how Atrios puts it...

Do you think Perle, Rummy, and Rove are practicing now?

http://atrios.blogspot.com/

[BadGimp]

63. Raise your hand if you were surprised by this admission

.....

that's what I thought

[peterh]

69. Yes…very surprised….yet…

It shouldn’t be at all shocking, given the past history of this administration in how it regards the U.N., the international court, the disregard for accepted law on the high seas, scrapping or ignoring various treaties…….yes, I’m surprised in the admission, but hardly shocked that they knowingly violated international law. Heck, in their minds, if an international body or individual country were to slap penalties or sanctions on us, they would just laugh at them.

[grasswire]

67. never mind

edited --- and a big kick.

[Fleshdancer]

72. Makes me want to commit a crime just to use the "Perle Defense"

"well gee Judge, I killed my neighbor because he was bound to try to kill me sooner or later. Those pesky laws just got in the way of doing what was right."

I want what Perle is smoking. On second thought, no I don't.