I don't care if it's Hillary Clinton saying "Saddam Hussein threw out inspectors"

or george w. bUsh saying "And we gave him a chance to allow the inspectors in, and he wouldn't let them in."

I don't care if it's Ted Koppel saying "all he had to do was say, ‘All right, U.N., come on in, check it out".

FACTS; Saddam Hussein NEVER kicked UN weapons inspectors out of Iraq; not in 1998; not in 2003. Saddam Hussein DID NOT refuse to allow UN inspectors into Iraq in 2003.

I don't care who repeats the lies; lies they in fact are. And it offends me that our government and "media" assume we're all stupid enough to swallow their lies.

And what embarrasses me most (aside from the other fact that most rightwingnuts are stupid and do swallow the lies) is the entire rest of the world knows they're lies being told us and think we're as stupid as those telling us the lies.

to be lied to about getting fucked by these people

Jesus, how scary is that? I guess a large bank account and aides don't help jack shit if you're too busy schmoozing at DC cocktail parties when you should be reading the goddamned reports on your desk. Sorry. This just pisses me off. An idiot like me was able to ascertain the truth by sifting through media stories. And people who do this shit for a living are clueless? No excuse!

We not only deserve the Truth, we are entitled to it -- what the First Amendment is all about.

Hearing that some Democrats go along with Bush lies makes me wonder if we really still are a republic or have descended into empire.

Going by the war and impeachment, it's pretty clear. Roger, America: You're an empire now and we're the serfs to be manipulated and packaged into cannon fodder and chum for the roils and the kleptocracy.

or were to cowardly to stand up to him...over a million has died so far in just george the second`s war

If you accept the Republican lies as fact then you've already lost.

...that, if someone took a poll, a majority of Americans would still claim that Saddam Hussein had something to do with the 9/11 attacks. :eyes:

...hence, his removal. BTW, I'm not referring to whether or not he let inspectors in. That's irrelevant to the empire...

pulled them.

In December 1999 - after one year without inspections in Iraq - resolution 1284 (1999) was adopted by the Council with 4 abstentions. Supplementing the basic resolutions of 1991 and following years, it provided Iraq with a somewhat less ambitious approach: in return for "cooperation in all respects" for a specified period of time, including progress in the resolution of "key remaining disarmament tasks", it opened the possibility, not for the lifting, but the suspension of sanctions.

For nearly three years, Iraq refused to accept any inspections by UNMOVIC. It was only after appeals by the Secretary-General and Arab States and pressure by the United States and other Member States, that Iraq declared on 16 September last year that it would again accept inspections without conditions.

Resolution 1441 (2002) was adopted on 8 November last year and emphatically reaffirmed the demand on Iraq to cooperate. It required this cooperation to be immediate, unconditional and active. The resolution contained many provisions, which we welcome as enhancing and strengthening the inspection regime. The unanimity by which it was adopted sent a powerful signal that the Council was of one mind in creating a last opportunity for peaceful disarmament in Iraq through inspection.


http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/world/transcripts/blix_012703.html

into Iraq. Then I would turn on CNN there is Hans Blixx Live in Iraq. As far as I'm concerned. Once the inspectors were in. Anything that happened before that is irrelevant. We had boot on the ground. We had Saddams full cooperation. That's what really mattered.

called for us to return to the UN and we didn't.

They had access to presidential places and other locations that they had previously been denied. There was no place that was off limits to them. No personel that was off limits to them. He even allowed them to take his scientists out of Iraq for questioning. I call that full cooperation.

I also understand about returning to teh UN. The Cease fire was a treaty with the UN. Not us.

While we now have the technical capability to send a U-2 plane placed at our disposal for aerial imagery and for surveillance during inspections and have informed Iraq that we planned to do so, Iraq has refused to guarantee its safety, unless a number of conditions are fulfilled. As these conditions went beyond what is stipulated in resolution 1441 (2002) and what was practiced by UNSCOM and Iraq in the past, we note that Iraq is not so far complying with our request. I hope this attitude will change.

http://www.un.org/Depts/unmovic/Bx27.htm

The point is, even Blix recognized in retrospect that Hussein was bluffing ... but we should have been practicing diplomacy as well.

Mr. President,

We have now an inspection apparatus that permits us to send multiple inspection teams every day all over Iraq, by road or by air. Let me end by simply noting that that capability which has been built-up in a short time and which is now operating, is at the disposal of the Security Council.

Frankly if anyone needs inspections it's us. The chemical markers found in the anthrax used in the anthrax attacks on Congress said Property of Uncle Sam. That was US Government Anthrax. How did that get out of Aberdeen? We're not even really hard pressed to find out. But hey our mustard gas also stored (burried) in Aberdeen. The barrels corroded and it leaked into the local ground water. We're not exactly responsible with our own WMD's.

But I think he knew his end was just and took it like a true believer.

As for us, we've always been sloppy w/our toys, but they are our toys. And just as on the kindergarten playground, we have to stand up to bullies - but we don't have to do more than hold our own ground to earn respect and re-establish civil relations.

I see HRC as more suited to this complicated role as she's demonstrated her capacity to focus on issues and play well w/others.

Don't you mean slaughter and genocide? Play well with others? That's some twisted doublespeak you got going there.

slaughter and genocide is ours.

of Iraq.

Fact: Saddam Hussein never kicked UN inspectors out of Iraq.

If Saddam wasn't allowing them to inspect, causing the US to pull the inspectors, then Saddam *did* trigger the end of inspections in 1999, whether or not he explicitly kicked UN inspectors out.

To be fair, IIRC, Saddam's actions were due to his (correct) opinion that the inspection regime had been corrupted by the US, who was using the inspections to spy on Saddam's regime (beyond the scope of WMDs). And, I believe, the US' leveraging the inspections for spying effectively broke the rules, so Saddam would potentially be in the right for blocking the inspections.

In 2003, Bush pulled the inspectors; in 1999 (1998?), the Clinton administration violated the inspection regime rules by using the inspectors for unrelated spying. True? (I'd need to do some research to get the specific terms and timeline correct.)

I thought the inspectors were pulled out in the late 90's in order to clear the way for resumed bombing missions in Iraq.

That's what I thought. Saddam certainly did not boot them out, ever, that I recall. It NEVER happened.

... though the inspectors hadn't been literally kicked-out of the country ... was restricting or blocking the inspections, in some way.

My recollection is that Saddam was restricting where the inspectors could go, partly because he was accusing the US of having corrupted the inspection team and leveraging it for unrelated spying, and so Clinton took a military response. My memory is that Saddam's accusation of US spying through the inspection teams was later revealed to be accurate.

Saddam accused the US of posing CIA agents as UN inspectors to spy on other areas in Iraq.

Why should Hussein allow them back in? I don't care if another UN resolution was passed demanding Iraq cooperate since they didn't cooperate with Iraq when the US wanted to bomb them for no real reason.

and he destroyed some borderline compliance missiles.

will we no longer be allowed to call her on her lies about Iraq, Iran and imperialism in general?

So far, no joy, but they're working on it.

:applause: :woohoo:

he had the perfect opportunity. So did the esteemed media standing by. They want us to continue believing the LIES.

In December 1999 - after one year without inspections in Iraq - resolution 1284 (1999) was adopted by the Council with 4 abstentions. Supplementing the basic resolutions of 1991 and following years, it provided Iraq with a somewhat less ambitious approach: in return for "cooperation in all respects" for a specified period of time, including progress in the resolution of "key remaining disarmament tasks", it opened the possibility, not for the lifting, but the suspension of sanctions.

For nearly three years, Iraq refused to accept any inspections by UNMOVIC. It was only after appeals by the Secretary-General and Arab States and pressure by the United States and other Member States, that Iraq declared on 16 September last year that it would again accept inspections without conditions.

Resolution 1441 (2002) was adopted on 8 November last year and emphatically reaffirmed the demand on Iraq to cooperate. It required this cooperation to be immediate, unconditional and active. The resolution contained many provisions, which we welcome as enhancing and strengthening the inspection regime. The unanimity by which it was adopted sent a powerful signal that the Council was of one mind in creating a last opportunity for peaceful disarmament in Iraq through inspection.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/world/transcripts/blix_012703.html

This is the context in which HRC voted - to compel Iraq to continue cooperation. Iraq did, and we invaded anyhoo. I know you'll blame her for what * did, but he didn't follow the legislation and go back to the UN.

http://www.defenselink.mil/news/newsarticle.aspx?id=41731

Over the next three weeks, U.N. weapons inspectors tested Iraq's willingness to cooperate. UNSCOM Chairman Richard Butler reported Dec. 15 to U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan.

Butler's conclusions, Clinton said, proved to be "stark, sobering and profoundly disturbing." Instead of living up to its agreement, he said, "Iraq has abused its final chance."

I'm not sure what the OP is reacting to, but the "facts" quoted there are basically wrong. Although Saddam did not "throw out" the inspectors, he refused to let them inspect from 1998 until 2002.

The problem is the bill as written. Had Leiberman, Gephardt and the other Democratic co-sponsors not stated that they were voting for the IWR cutting off all negotiating power, a better bill could have given Bush the backing he needed - but withheld the authority to go to war. They tried to define conditions that had to be met before going to war, but Bush was the one that was to interpret them. With an honest President, an honest administration or an media that would monitor the President, this might have been enough. But as several people who voted it have said - because of how it was used it was a terrible vote and it was wrong. I don't think it caused the war, Bush did - but it has allowed Bush and his still complicit media to say that he had bi-partisan support.

There should have been a VERY VOCAL outcry from Democrats now saying they voted for that reason in January 2003. At minimum that would have made it clear they were really against the invasion.

to finish. She gave a bullshit answer about the US having their decision made by the UN, but the Levin Amendment never said that.

Never mind president. I now question her competency to serve as Senator.

~PEACE~

In trying to rationalize your own failure, you become the firewall for war criminals.

Impeachment really is the panacea. Only truth heals.

---

however, before we invaded, he agreed to unlimited access and also entrance of the US military without resistance if the US would give him safe exit from the country (exile).

That's just fact.

http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=1750

http://www.mediamonitors.net/gowans36.html

I agree that we need to state the truth - just as you did here. The timeline of when the inspectors were in and what they were doing has been incredibly muddled - by people with agendas. It's not tough to understand. They were in until Bill Clinton demanded they leave before he bombed Iraq in 1998 and they stayed out until November 2002, after the IWR vote, though they were already negotiating the terms of the inspections (which SH had agreed in concept to allow) when there was the vote. They were kicked out by Bush in March 2003 before he invaded.

I am amazed by the number of intelligent people who have told me Bush would not have invaded had he been able to get the inspectors in. Even less well know is the Downing Street Memos, which I don't even need a definition of here becasue it is common knowledge.

destroying those missiles?

that is fed to them from the boob-tube.

The inspections process was manipulated by Clinton and the Bushes from the very beginning.

but when I find Dems doing it -- goddamn, I am insulted and disgusted beyond belief.

After 7 years of almost constant lies from Bush Co., my tolerence for bullshit -- especially from members of my own party -- has gone down to just about zero. You either speak to me truthfuly or I have no interest in whatever crap you are trying to peddle.

And it was Ms. Clintons' insistance on continuing just such bullshit peddling as you mentioned that kept me from voting for her today. Her lack of courage and honesty were simply too much for me.

... and, if so, was she referring to 2003 or 1998? Also, if 1998, do you have a link for if/why the inspectors left Iraq? (IIRC, Saddam wanted them out because the US was using the inspection regime to spy on Saddam.)

Thanks.

... through the inspectors.

“We bombed them for days in 1998 because Saddam Hussein threw out inspectors.”

Hillary seems to be channeling Bush in that statement, much like she was channeling Condi Rice, during the same debate, when Hillary was dancing around the meaning of the Iraq resolution, referring to it as "going to the resolution, not to war", when the title of the resolution, itself, indicated its meaning (just like the infamous August PDB).

... but didn't want to include his name without checking.

Bingo..! Here ya go...

He (Ritter) has said U.S. intelligence agents used the weapons inspectors as a cover for spying and destroyed the inspection teams' credibility.

http://archives.cnn.com/2002/WORLD/meast/09/08/ritter.iraq

Thanks for the nudge. (I should've just googled it, given it took all of 30 seconds to confirm.)

Regards...

still having WMDs (and he never had nuclear) was a bullshit story. Scott was extremely vocal about it.



I don't know if you are aware of this little known, little mentioned transcript about Iraq and WMDs. One of Saddam's son-in-laws who defected from Iraq was named Hussein Kamel. He had been the person literally in charge of WMDs (chemical, bio and possible nuclear). He was deposed and declared that all WMDs had been destroyed at the end of the first Gulf War. This was in 1995. When he returned to Iraq, he was executed. This transcript was on the Internet well before we went to war. Probably years before we went.

http://middleeastreference.org.uk/kamel.html

Bush cut short the inspections, bypassed the UN, and invaded because the inspectors weren't finding all of the imaginary WMDs. If you listened to the inspectors, it was because we weren't giving them any useful intelligence. Probably because we had no useful intelligence.

because the invasion was on the way. Up until that point they were bulldozing ballistic missiles that had a range marginally longer than limits laid out in earlier UN resolutions. That, and the fleet of 'drones' (balsa wood RC airplane models)...

The ends justify the means. It's exactly why both of them are not fit to lead this nation.

I agree with you 100% more if it was possible. I'm really getting put out by being compared with bushco, to be honest. Not here but like you say the rest of the world. If only they knew how we felt they would probably be trying to beat the damn door down right there beside us.

To Add: an enthusiastic rec