Barry Crimmins: 'The Snake of the Union'

[displacedtexan]

Mods,
I searched and didn't find this piece posted. Sorry if it is a dupe.


Barry Crimmins: 'The Snake of the Union'

BC offers his 2 cents worth to GWB!
Enjoy!



<snip>

GWB: We have faced serious challenges together -- and now we face a choice. We can go forward with confidence and resolve -- or we can turn back to the dangerous illusion that terrorists are not plotting and outlaw regimes are no threat to us.

BC: George W. Bush is offering us a choice: Four more years of his oppressive regime or Terrorism. Well, W, I am hard pressed to tell the difference.

GWB: We can press on with economic growth, and reforms in education and Medicare -- or we can turn back to the old policies and old divisions.

BC: Old divisions? Four more years of you and there will be fucking moats in this country.

more...

http://www.smirkingchimp.com/print.php?sid=14653

[ewagner]

1. Sad but ohhhh, soooo true

BC: Old divisions? Four more years of you and there will be fucking moats in this country.

[Bozvotros]

2. His rant reminded me of one I did

When Smirk was trying to sell the Iraq War to the US. I posted it on Capital Grill but the thread is apparently gone. I post it below just for pure vanity.

Good evening. Tonight I want to take a few minutes to discuss a grave threat to peace, and America's determination to lead the world in confronting that threat.
The threat comes from Iraq. It arises directly from the Iraqi regime's own actions - its history of aggression, and its drive toward an arsenal of terror.
Eleven years ago, as a condition for ending the Persian Gulf War, the Iraqi regime was required to destroy its weapons of mass destruction - to cease all development of such weapons - and to stop all support for terrorist groups. The Iraqi regime has violated all of those obligations. It possesses and produces chemical and biological weapons. It is seeking nuclear weapons. It has given shelter and support to terrorism, and practices terror against its own people. The entire world has witnessed Iraq's eleven-year history of defiance, deception, and bad faith.

Whaddaya know. That's just about how long you've been in elected office too. But you've had a puppy dog press to hide your past. I'm thinking here of vandalism, drunkenness, failure, corruption and ignorance.

We also must never forget the most vivid events of recent history. On September 11, 2001, America felt its vulnerability - even to threats that gather on the other side of the earth. We resolved then, and we are resolved today, to confront every threat, from any source, that could bring sudden terror and suffering to America.

How about finishing with Al Qaeda then? How about smoking out OBL like you promised.? Or is that too hard?

Members of the Congress of both political parties, and Members of the United Nations Security Council, agree that Saddam Hussein is a threat to peace and must disarm. We agree that the Iraqi dictator must not be permitted to threaten America and the world with horrible poisons, and diseases, and gases, and atomic weapons. Since we all agree on this goal, the issue is: "How can we best achieve it?"

First of all he isn't threatening us with them. Or any other nation for that matter. But don't let facts deter you now.

Many Americans have raised legitimate questions: About the nature of the threat. About the urgency of action - and why be concerned now? About the link between Iraq developing weapons of terror, and the wider war on terror. These are all issues we have discussed broadly and fully within my Administration. And tonight, I want to share those discussions with you. First, some ask why Iraq is different from other countries or regimes that also have terrible weapons. While there are many dangers in the world, the threat from Iraq stands alone - because it gathers the most serious dangers of our age in one place.

Horseshit. We have them, the Soviets have them, I am sure members of Nato have some, the Chinese have them and probably India and Pakistan and Iran too. So this is total bullshit.

Iraq's weapons of mass destruction are controlled by a murderous tyrant, who has already used chemical weapons to kill thousands of people.

As I recall your Daddy gave him those weapons while you were an advisor for him and while you knew he was using them on Iran and when we were already giving him military advice and making sure he had helicopters to deliver it. How come you didn't mention that?

This same tyrant has tried to dominate the Middle East, has invaded and brutally occupied a small neighbor, has struck other nations without warning, and holds an unrelenting hostility towards the United States.

More horseshit. He gave fair warning to Kuwait and your Daddy said "Not our concern." And if he was so hostile to the United States how come your Daddy and Reagan were arming him to the teeth. He became our enemy AFTER the Gulf War. Before it he was practically a CIA asset.

By its past and present actions, by its technological capabilities, by the merciless nature of its regime, Iraq is unique. As a former chief weapons inspector for the UN has said, "The fundamental problem with Iraq remains the nature of the regime itself: Saddam Hussein is a homicidal dictator who is addicted to weapons of mass destruction."

A guy who put as many people to death as you did , shouldn't toss the word "homicidal" around too much. You want to talk addiction too? More dangerous territory for you. And how many WMD did we have at the height of the cold war? Enough to destroy the world several times over. And the overstock of our biological and chemical weapons became a major storage and disposal problem. Much of that technology we exported too. We were Saddam's pusher in his addiction. Admit that, punk.

Some ask how urgent this danger is to America and the world. The danger is already significant, and it only grows worse with time. If we know Saddam Hussein has dangerous weapons today - and we do - does it make any sense for the world to wait to confront him as he grows even stronger and develops even more dangerous weapons?

You want to talk dangerous weapons? Lets talk Pooty Poot. Your soulful ex KGB friend and fragments of his old country are sitting on a whole load of rusty nukes and other WMD. Weapons that could easily be sold or be already sold on the burgeoning black market run by cutthroat mobsters. Or is that all a little too murky and complicated for your pinhead? Is that why you cut back on our funding for programs to dismantle these weapons? And what about the Red Chinese? Have they not invaded other countries, killed and butchered their own people and those in other nations? Tell it to Tibet. But your buddies are too interested in getting a cut on their markets so we can just forget any moral clarity on China, can't we?

In 1995, after several years of deceit by the Iraqi regime, the head of Iraq's military industries defected. It was then that the regime was forced to admit that it had produced more than 30,000 liters of anthrax and other deadly biological agents. The inspectors, however, concluded that Iraq had likely produced two to four times that amount. This is a massive stockpile of biological weapons that has never been accounted for, and is capable of killing millions. We know that the regime has produced thousands of tons of chemical agents, including mustard gas, sarin nerve gas, and VX nerve gas.

95% of which was destroyed in the inspection according to our inspector. What bullshit to make it sound like we never found any of it or any of the sites he was using.

Saddam Hussein also has experience in using chemical weapons. He has ordered chemical attacks on Iran, and on more than forty villages in his own country. These actions killed or injured at least 20,000 people, more than six times the number of people who died in the attacks of September 11th. And surveillance photos reveal that the regime is rebuilding facilities that it has used to produce chemical and biological weapons.

Yeah? Is this like the bogus proof you offered to that sap, Tony Blair that turned out to be pure bullshit? You got proof they are producing these weapons or just rebuilding facilities. You clearly don't give a shit what they are doing or you would have jumped at the chance to let the inspectors in. And you would have provided something like Kennedy had when he had photos of the missiles in Cuba. Got anything like that? I didn't think so.

Every chemical and biological weapon that Iraq has or makes is a direct violation of the truce that ended the Persian Gulf War in 1991. Yet Saddam Hussein has chosen to build and keep these weapons, despite international sanctions, UN demands, and isolation from the civilized world.

Oh, for god sake. Prove it. Prove how big a danger he is. Hell, I could manufacture WMD in my garage if I wanted. Stop acting like this is top secret hush hush technology. Much of it has been around for ninety years. And don't forget your daddy gave him the makings for the anthrax, West Nile, botulism etc. How about owning up to that, you twit.

Iraq possesses ballistic missiles with a likely range of hundreds of miles - far enough to strike Saudi Arabia, Israel, Turkey, and other nations - in a region where more than 135,000 American civilians and service members live and work.

Yes and they have airplanes too. And judging from the Gulf War, they would probably be more accurate than their missiles. Do we not have planes and our own far superior missiles to knock them out of the sky? I thought so. Could the Iraqis more easily smuggle such weapons into New Orleans. Tel Aviv or wherever and detonate it in a harbor or downtown? Yes. So can the bogus boogy man shit about missiles.

We have also discovered through intelligence that Iraq has a growing fleet of manned and unmanned aerial vehicles that could be used to disperse chemical or biological weapons across broad areas. We are concerned that Iraq is exploring ways of using UAVs for missions targeting the United States. And of course, sophisticated delivery systems are not required for a chemical or biological attack - all that might be required are a small container and one terrorist or Iraqi intelligence operative to deliver it.

Yeah. Which makes all your scary bullshit about UAV's pretty stupid huh?

And that is the source of our urgent concern about Saddam Hussein's links to international terrorist groups. Over the years, Iraq has provided safe haven to terrorists such as Abu Nidal, whose terror organization carried out more than ninety terrorist attacks in twenty countries that killed or injured nearly 900 people, including 12 Americans. Iraq has also provided safe haven to Abu Abbas, who was responsible for seizing the Achille Lauro and killing an American passenger. And we know that Iraq is continuing to finance terror, and gives assistance to groups that use terrorism to undermine Middle East peace.

Yada yada. And what about your good buddies, the Saudi's? Care to say a few words about the biggest financiers and exporters of Muslim terror in the world? No. Is that because they are the biggest oil exporters in the world? Yes. So please STFU with this argument.

We know that Iraq and the al Qaeda terrorist network share a common enemy - the United States of America. We know that Iraq and al Qaeda have had high-level contacts that go back a decade. Some al Qaeda leaders who fled Afghanistan went to Iraq.

Al Qaeda hated Saddam. OBL himself asked to off Saddam in lieu of your old man's war. But now you drove them together. You made them buddies for now. But OBL would snuff Saddam in a heartbeat. You know that. Most people should know that. But you don't mention it because you are a lying SOS.

These include one very senior al Qaeda leader who received medical treatment in Baghdad this year, and who has been associated with planning for chemical and biological attacks.

Hell, it was reported that the CIA met with OBL in a hospital where he was being treated for a kidney disease. This is very thin shit you are expelling now. Do you know how lame this is sounding? I didn't think so.

We have learned that Iraq has trained al Qaeda members in bomb making, poisons, and deadly gases.

Prove it. Is this something we tortured out of some hapless peasant we captured? This training is available on the internet and at public libraries for God sake.

And we know that after September 11th, Saddam Hussein's regime gleefully celebrated the terrorist attacks on America.

Gleeful? We invade a country because their leaders get gleeful? You got pics of this glee? You think it is a surprise that Hussein might be pleased that something awful happened to us after we kicked his ass in the Gulf War and about half a million people died in the embargos? This is a big surprise? They were probably gleeful in the tents, palaces and boardroom of your buddies in Saudi Arabia too.

Iraq could decide on any given day to provide a biological or chemical weapon to a terrorist group or individual terrorists. Alliances with terrorists could allow the Iraqi regime to attack America ? without leaving any fingerprints.

Yup. Which is a pretty good reason to proceed very carefully and not force his hand, not stir up more Muslim rage and hate. Saddam wants to stay alive. He knows if he is firmly linked to any attack on America he is dead meat. Hence we have had no, repeat no attacks from him in ten plus years. All this tough talk has probably forced his hand already. Happy? I bet you are. All war all the time is your game plan, isn't it?

Some have argued that confronting the threat from Iraq could detract from the war against terror. To the contrary, confronting the threat posed by Iraq is crucial to winning the war on terror.

We have confronted it. We have stifled it. They are boxed in. Saddam is not any more of a threat now than he would be if we go in and try to find and kill him. Probably much less so. Get the inspectors in there. Tighten the screws some more. Do this the right way, with full NATO and UN support and as much as you can find in the Middle East. But doing that wouldn't distract from the cluster fuck you have made of the economy would it? That wouldn't boost your poll numbers, you cowardly deserter.

When I spoke to the Congress more than a year ago, I said that those who harbor terrorists are as guilty as the terrorists themselves. Saddam Hussein is harboring terrorists and the instruments of terror, the instruments of mass death and destruction. And he cannot be trusted. The risk is simply too great that he will use them, or provide them to a terror network.

Yes, you said that. Without proof I might add. And if you are looking at getting jiggy on those who are harboring terrorists, I suggest you start with Pakistan and Saudi Arabia. Pakistan is a couple of years (or months) away from having radical Muslim fundamentalists running the country. How about stepping in there? Wouldn't be prudent?

Terror cells, and outlaw regimes building weapons of mass destruction, are different faces of the same evil.

So are mindless unelected puppets who attempt to dismantle the Constitution and transfer trillions of dollars into the hands of their buddies. Don't forget that.

Our security requires that we confront both. And the United States Military is capable of confronting both.

Is this the same military, Clinton's military that you said was so unprepared to fight? More campaign horseshit huh?

Many people have asked how close Saddam Hussein is to developing a nuclear weapon. We don't know exactly, and that is the problem. Before the Gulf War, the best intelligence indicated that Iraq was eight to ten years away from developing a nuclear weapon; after the war, international inspectors learned that the regime had been much closer. The regime in Iraq would likely have possessed a nuclear weapon no later than 1993. The inspectors discovered that Iraq had an advanced nuclear weapons development program - had a design for a workable nuclear weapon - and was pursuing several different methods of enriching uranium for a bomb. Before being barred from Iraq in 1998, the International Atomic Energy Agency dismantled extensive nuclear weapons-related facilities, including three uranium-enrichment sites. That same year, information from a high-ranking Iraqi nuclear engineer who had defected, revealed that despite his public promises, Saddam Hussein had ordered his nuclear program to continue.
The evidence indicates that Iraq is reconstituting its nuclear weapons program.

And what the hell does reconstituting mean? And what hard evidence do you have that it is anywhere near ready?
Is it as far along as Iran? Syria? As it is in a half a dozen other regimes that you are blithely ignoring to focus on this twisted drama, this cynical distraction from your miserable domestic failures?

Saddam Hussein has held numerous meetings with Iraqi nuclear scientists, a group he calls his "nuclear mujahideen" - his nuclear holy warriors. Satellite photographs reveal that Iraq is rebuilding facilities at sites that have been part of its nuclear program in the past. Iraq has attempted to purchase high-strength aluminum tubes and other equipment needed for gas centrifuges, which are used to enrich uranium for nuclear weapons.

Hell, we gave him some of that shit. Or it got to him while your Pappy was running the show.

If the Iraqi regime is able to produce, buy, or steal an amount of highly-enriched uranium a little larger than a single softball, it could have a nuclear weapon in less than a year.

Therefore thinking people would think you would be investing lots of money and assistance in helping the crumbled remnants of the Soviet empire, dispose of their nuclear missiles and uranium. But people would be wrong.

And if we allow that to happen, a terrible line would be crossed. Saddam Hussein would be in a position to blackmail anyone who opposes his aggression. He would be in a position to dominate the Middle East. He would be in a position to threaten America. And Saddam Hussein would be in a position to pass nuclear technology to terrorists.

Well, a lot of folks are in a position to pass nuclear technology to terrorists. You gonna stop all of them Mr. Macho, Mr. Blew Off His Last Year of Guard Duty? We have enough missiles in the Persian Gulf to decimate his country if he tries to threaten anyone with nuclear weapons. Saddam, as the world saw in 1990, is a gutless coward, concerned about saving his own hide. He wants nukes for the same reasons we say we want them. To make sure no one threatens us with one. And what if he has them already, cowboy? For all we truly know, he could have them. What if he has a couple of crude devices and is waiting for a reason to use them. You gonna give him that reason? MAD worked pretty well for 50 years until your sorry ass showed up.

Some citizens wonder: after eleven years of living with this problem, why do we need to confront it now? There is a reason. We have experienced the horror of September 11th. We have seen that those who hate America are willing to crash airplanes into buildings full of innocent people. Our enemies would be no less willing - in fact they would be eager - to use a biological, or chemical weapon, or, when they have one, a nuclear weapon.

Let's face reality for a while, shall we? Are we total innocents here? We have stood by while lots of brutal regimes killed lots of their own people and the people in other countries. We have, in war time, bombed the shit out of innocent people in Iraq and Afghanistan, in Yugoslavia and Vietnam, in Germany, Italy and Japan. We fronted the Contras millions of dollars and weapons and CIA support to kill tens of thousands of their "enemies." We have dispersed our weaponry and technology to the far corners of the earth, to the vilest dictators on the planet when it served our purposes. Who gives a rat's ass if you die of Anthrax or a thermobaric bomb you clueless boob. Is it OK to drop daisy cutters on wedding parties but too much if someone spreads a little mustard gas around? You make me ill with your simple minded dichotomies and paranoid projection.

Knowing these realities, America must not ignore the threat gathering against us. Facing clear evidence of peril, we cannot wait for the final proof - the smoking gun - that could come in the form of a mushroom cloud.

Just when I think you cannot stoop any lower, be any more duplicious in your scaremongering you toss this out there. Did you forget that we are the only country to use nuclear weapons in a war? The peril we are facing is you. You would use a nuclear weapon. You told Saddam if we have evidence of chemical of biological warfare when we come in to kick his ass, that we would nuke Baghdad. You think that might spur terrorism on just a tad? I do. So would most of the world.

As President Kennedy said in October of 1962: "Neither the United States of America nor the world community of nations can tolerate deliberate deception and offensive threats on the part of any nation, large or small. We no longer live in a world," he said, "where only the actual firing of weapons represents a sufficient challenge to a nation's security to constitute maximum peril."

You are delusional. Was this speech written for six year olds? Kennedy saw nuclear missiles being loaded into silos 60 miles off our coast. While you think, maybe, possibly, perhaps, in time, Saddam might get his hands on a softball of uranium. This is different. Get it through that thick, coke addled brain of yours.

Understanding the threats of our time knowing the designs and deceptions of the Iraqi regime - we have every reason to assume the worst, and we have an urgent duty to prevent the worst from occurring.

Which is why you need to get the hell out of Dodge as soon as possible.

Some believe we can address this danger by simply resuming the old approach to inspections, and applying diplomatic and economic pressure. Yet this is precisely what the world has tried to do since 1991. The UN inspections program was met with systematic deception. The Iraqi regime bugged hotel rooms and offices of inspectors to find where they were going next. They forged documents, destroyed evidence, and developed mobile weapons facilities to keep a step ahead of inspectors. Eight so-called presidential palaces were declared off-limits to unfettered inspections. These sites actually encompass twelve square miles, with hundreds of structures, both above and below the ground, where sensitive materials could be hidden.

Funny how you like to expand territory when it is in Iraq and shrink it down when it is an oil field in a pristine wilderness you want to despoil. The inspectors were doing their job. They were destroying most of his capacity for WMD and we should have gone back in, in force, after they took off to let Clinton do some strategic bombing to help Saddam get his mind right. But let's see. What was your party interested in? Nothing more than exploring exactly where Clinton's trouser trout had been and screaming that he was distracting you when he went after Saddam or OBL. Do you remember now?

The world has also tried economic sanctions - and watched Iraq use billions of dollars in illegal oil revenues to fund more weapons purchases, rather than providing for the needs of the Iraqi people.

Oil Revenues assisted by the invaluable help of your VP Dick Cheney who set up offshore subsidiaries to trade with Iraq and rebuild their refineries.

The world has tried limited military strikes to destroy Iraq's weapons of mass destruction capabilities . . . only to see them openly rebuilt, while the regime again denies they even exist.

Which is why we need to get the inspectors back in, something Saddam has said he will do.

The world has tried no-fly zones to keep Saddam from terrorizing his own people . . . and in the last year alone, the Iraqi military has fired upon American and British pilots more than 750 times.

Give me a break. Everytime he tracks one of our planes with his radar the offending installation gets a missile suppository that wipes it off the planet. This is one dumb SOB if what you say is true. I have a feeling some of this firing on our planes was a hand gun held by some drunken yahoo on a bender. You would probably know about that.

After eleven years during which we have tried containment, sanctions, inspections, even selected military action, the end result is that Saddam Hussein still has chemical and biological weapons, and is increasing his capabilities to make more. And he is moving ever closer to developing a nuclear weapon.

So. You insist on repeating yourself endlessly. Shouldn't you just shut up now?

Clearly, to actually work, any new inspections, sanctions, or enforcement mechanisms will have to be very different. America wants the UN to be an effective organization that helps to keep the peace. That is why we are urging the Security Council to adopt a new resolution setting out tough, immediate requirements. Among those requirements, the Iraqi regime must reveal and destroy, under UN supervision, all existing weapons of mass destruction. To ensure that we learn the truth, the regime must allow witnesses to its illegal activities to be interviewed outside of the country. And these witnesses must be free to bring their families with them, so they are all beyond the reach of Saddam Hussein's terror and murder. And inspectors must have access to any site, at any time, without pre-clearance, without delay, without exceptions.
The time for denying, deceiving, and delaying has come to an end. Saddam Hussein must disarm himself - or, for the sake of peace, we will lead a coalition to disarm him.

Yeah. Where is this coalition? I don't see it. Every day hundreds of thousands of people are protesting your bogus jihad against Iraq. And you don't want a coalition. That would tie your hands so you couldn't do whatever it is you have in your dangerously empty head to do.

Many nations are joining us in insisting that Saddam Hussein's regime be held accountable. They are committed to defending the international security that protects the lives of both our citizens and theirs. And that is why America is challenging all nations to take the resolutions of the UN Security Council seriously. Those resolutions are very clear. In addition to declaring and destroying all of its weapons of mass destruction, Iraq must end its support for terrorism. It must cease the persecution of its civilian population. It must stop all illicit trade outside the oil-for-food program. And it must release or account for all Gulf War personnel, including an American pilot, whose fate is still unknown.

How about we end our persecution of our citizens? How about you stop arresting and detaining our citizens without legal representation. How about you start paying attention to the protests which haunt you every place you go and which you shuffle off out of sight and sound? How about we stop all our illicit trade with and end our support for brutal regimes all over the globe. How about you tell this same thing to the Saudi's who are jammed up tight with our weaponry, persecute their citizens and fund terrorist cells all over the world. Or better yet go finally smoke out OBL and tell him. There are ways to get what you say you want done without the blood bath for which you've been begging lo these many months.

By taking these steps, and only by taking these steps, the Iraqi regime has an opportunity to avoid conflict. These steps would also change the nature of the Iraqi regime itself. America hopes the regime will make that choice. Unfortunately, at least so far, we have little reason to expect it. This is why two Administrations - mine and President Clinton's - have stated that regime change in Iraq is the only certain means of removing a great danger to our Nation.

The difference is in how they would go about doing it. Big difference.

I hope this will not require military action, but it may. And military conflict could be difficult. An Iraqi regime faced with its own demise may attempt cruel and desperate measures. If Saddam Hussein orders such measures, his generals would be well advised to refuse those orders. If they do not refuse, they must understand that all war criminals will be pursued and punished.

That will be cold comfort to the dead and diseased service men and their families. Especially when Saddam disappears as he will.

If we have to act, we will take every precaution that is possible. We will plan carefully - we will act with the full power of the United States Military - we will act with allies at our side - and we will prevail.

I recall the same cock sure bullshit about getting OBL.

There is no easy or risk-free course of action. Some have argued we should wait - and that is an option. In my view, it is the riskiest of all options - because the longer we wait, the stronger and bolder Saddam Hussein will become.

Nope. Nobody says we wait. We go on with the inspections. We ensure world wide support with our resolve and we act in concert with our allies, not shove them around and threaten them like a schoolyard bully. You still have offered no proof that Saddam is getting stronger or bolder. You however are a completely different story.

We could wait and hope that Saddam does not give weapons to terrorists, or develop a nuclear weapon to blackmail the world. But I am convinced that is a hope against all evidence.

Evidence you evidently can't provide.

As Americans, we want peace - we work and sacrifice for peace - and there can be no peace if our security depends on the will and whims of a ruthless and aggressive dictator.

Look in the mirror.

I am not willing to stake one American life on trusting Saddam Hussein.

I am not willing to stake one American life on trusting George W. Bush.

Failure to act would embolden other tyrants; allow terrorists access to new weapons and new resources; and make blackmail a permanent feature of world events. The United Nations would betray the purpose of its founding, and prove irrelevant to the problems of our time. And through its inaction, the United States would resign itself to a future of fear.

Lots of us are pretty scared already. And not of Saddam. We are seeing our future engulfed in war, recession and unemployment. We are seeing our civil rights and legal rights eroded. We are watching you give away the treasury to your contributors and ignoring the plight of working men and woman across our once proud country. You talk of blackmail while you extort us with fears and vague threats against amorphous enemies or inflate outside threats to ludicrous proportions. You promise us mushroom clouds of doom if we don't follow you. Fuck you.

That is not the America I know. That is not the America I serve. We refuse to live in fear. This Nation - in world war and in Cold War - has never permitted the brutal and lawless to set history's course. Now, as before, we will secure our Nation, protect our freedom, and help others to find freedom of their own.

God. I hope so. You got this part right. And to ensure it you must be driven out of office like the brutal lawless tyrant you are fast becoming.

Some worry that a change of leadership in Iraq could create instability and make the situation worse. The situation could hardly get worse, for world security, and for the people of Iraq.

Yeah? Could hardly get worse? I don't think a glassed over Baghdad would inspire a lot of hope and confidence for the Iraqi people. I can think of few things which would inspire Muslim jihad more than a huge bloody war where we take over the Iraqi oil fields and establish a permanent military presence in their backyard.

The lives of Iraqi citizens would improve dramatically if Saddam Hussein were no longer in power, just as the lives of Afghanistan's citizens improved after the Taliban. The dictator of Iraq is a student of Stalin, using murder as a tool of terror and control within his own cabinet, and within his own army, and even within his own family. On Saddam Hussein's orders, opponents have been decapitated - wives and mothers of political opponents have been systematically raped as a method of intimidation - and political prisoners have been forced to watch their own children being tortured.

Just stop it. When your Daddy and his cabinet, now your cabinet, was helping Pinochet and Noriega AND Saddam they didn't give two toots about such things. When regimes favored by us torture and imprison their citizens you look the other way. You can stop scaring the children any time now.

America believes that all people are entitled to hope and human rights - to the non-negotiable demands of human dignity. People everywhere prefer freedom to slavery; prosperity to squalor; self-government to the rule of terror and torture. America is a friend to the people of Iraq. Our demands are directed only at the regime that enslaves them and threatens us. When these demands are met, the first and greatest benefit will come to Iraqi men, women, and children. The oppression of Kurds, Assyrians, Turkomans, Shi'a, Sunnis, and others will be lifted. The long captivity of Iraq will end, and an era of new hope will begin.

More horseshit. All bets will be off the table. We will be over there and that country will be in chaos till the end of time or until another dictator rises up. One more helpful and considerate to your little empire, no doubt.

Iraq is a land rich in culture, resources, and talent.

Iraq is a land rich in oil. Which is what this is all about. That and some kind of sick twisted Freudian drama involving you and your dad. Do us a favor. Get some serious psychiatric help.

Freed from the weight of oppression, Iraq's people will be able to share in the progress and prosperity of our time.

Yeah, right. We had to destroy their country to save them. Here, my brother, have a Snicker's bar and a can of spam. Now go rebuild your country in peace. But remember we'll be here watching you.

If military action is necessary, the United States and our allies will help the Iraqi people rebuild their economy, and create the institutions of liberty in a unified Iraq at peace with its neighbors.

How. Care to elaborate? Care to share the love with us? How exactly we will do this? How much money, time and energy we will put into this? Or are we just gonna take it out in trade? Read oil.

Later this week the United States Congress will vote on this matter. I have asked Congress to authorize the use of America's military, if it proves necessary, to enforce UN Security Council demands. Approving this resolution does not mean that military action is imminent or unavoidable. The resolution will tell the United Nations, and all nations, that America speaks with one voice and is determined to make the demands of the civilized world mean something. Congress will also be sending a message to the dictator in Iraq: that his only choice is full compliance - and the time remaining for that choice is limited.

Good God, is there one person left on the planet who doesn't know that time is limited? You haven't shut up about it for months now. Only the voices of our allies and a few brave members of Congress have stayed your pasty fist.

Members of Congress are nearing an historic vote, and I am confident they will fully consider the facts and their duties.

We can only hope so. And that is to tie your hands and gag you till you remember it is Congress that declares and sends us to war and that you will follow the conditions they give you. .

The attacks of September 11th showed our country that vast oceans no longer protect us from danger. Before that tragic date, we had only hints of al Qaeda's plans and designs.

Hints? Hints? What we now know is that only the willfully blind couldn't have seen what was coming. There were smoking guns and warnings all over the place and somebody took a whole month off to talk to his cows and cut brush. .

Today in Iraq, we see a threat whose outlines are far more clearly defined - and whose consequences could be far more deadly. Saddam Hussein's actions have put us on notice - and there is no refuge from our responsibilities.

This from a man who sat talking about goats to school kids while he knew the attacks were taking place and then took a day long refuge in a bunker in Nebraska at the first sign of danger. .

We did not ask for this present challenge, but we accept it. Like other generations of Americans, we will meet the responsibility of defending human liberty against violence and aggression. By our resolve, we will give strength to others. By our courage, we will give hope to others. By our actions, we will secure the peace, and lead the world to a better day.

And the best action I can think of right now is to ensure those lofty goals is to have the resolve and courage to see to it that your party is driven from power this November.

Thank you, and good night.

Bite me.

[Karenina]

3. You get props from here!!!

:thumbsup: :toast: :thumbsup:

I visualize the *dauphin being asked pointed questions and contradicted in a public forum. UNGLAUBLICH that he has not to date been required to do so. He's a FUCKING EMPLOYEE who needs to answer to his bosses!!! A lousy one, at that.

[meow2u3]

4. What a patriotic American should choose

GWB: We have faced serious challenges together -- and now we face a choice. We can go forward with confidence and resolve -- or we can turn back to the dangerous illusion that terrorists are not plotting and outlaw regimes are no threat to us.

BC: George W. Bush is offering us a choice: Four more years of his oppressive regime or Terrorism. Well, W, I am hard pressed to tell the difference.


Any patriotic American worth his or her salt would choose to take his/her chances with the foreign terrorists (at least they're honest about their intent of death and destruction to Americans) over the oppressive regime squatting in the White House. The Bushies don't even have the decency to be honest about their intentions to kill and destroy the livelihoods of average Americans! :grr: