Someone might want to get the word to Secretary of State Colin Powell. There is nothing quoted from Powell in this article. Looks like more "anonymous sources" BS to me. Why not try using info that can actually be subtantiated.
I have reread section C and paragraph 12 in particular 12. Decides that Iraq shall unconditionally agree not to acquire or develop nuclear weapons or nuclear-weapons-usable material or any subsystems or components or any research, development, support or manufacturing facilities
Not true Read UN resolution 687, section C, I don't think there can be debate on this. Some of the items that IAEA found were possible components for nuclear warheads. Tubes, fertilizer chems and the machinery have civilian use.
The edcuators, lawyers, rights advocates and other educated elites in Iraq are hoping for a Bush victory. Link
Sorry this was a double post (my computer locked up mid post - please delete)
T_B the IAEA sealed and kept track of dual purpose items as they could have WMD application, but also had possible non WMD application You are apparently unclear on "dual use" which is neither here nor there. Any and all items that had any remote connection to nuclear devises, research, support, et. al.
Reality: Kerry says Bush, not troops, is responsible. Only Bush supporters have suggested the troops are at fault What Kerry said: “George W. Bush who talks tough and brags about making America safer has once again failed to deliver. After being warned about the danger of major stockpiles of ex
1) I don't trust Kerry to be an effective leader in foreign policy. Nor do I, for a number of reasons. Unilateral talks with N. Korea, as he has advocated, is a repeat of the failed Clinton policy. Putting US troops under UN command has shown itself to be an utter failure (see Somalia and Black Hawk do
Also, there are credible arguments that assert Bin Laden may be in Iran (much of his family and some of his buddies are). Link DUBAI, July 15 (AFP) - Hundreds of alleged members of Al-Qaeda, including 18 of its top leaders, and other terror groups are living in Iran, some under tight security, Asharq Al-Awsat newspaper reported Thursday. "More than 384 members of Al-Qaed
BTW Arab News reports this (site is REALLY slow, might take a re-load or two) Link snip Maj. Austin Pearson, speaking at a press conference at the Pentagon, said his team removed 250 tons of TNT, plastic explosives, detonation cords, and white phosphorous rounds on April13 ,2003 , - 10 days after US forces first reached the Al-Qaqaa site. “I
I think it's significant the video doens't give hints to his whereabouts Well here's one possibility (Intelligence trying to verify?) Link NEW DELHI, October 25: Fugitive Al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden has been spotted i
Thanks, T B, Welcome Daiwa (I'm sure it won't matter to some, it's amazing to me the ability to filter out only what they want to see and discard the rest, significant events get glossed over and debate rages about the minutiae) <TABLE cellpadding=8 width="95%" align=center bgColor=#FFF394 clas
So maybe only 150 tons of WMD component high explosive was removed, doesn't change the fact that this is a serious issue The real question here is, Why didn't the IAEA remove and destroy the material if they found and documented it prior to Jan 2003?
Who is in a better position to say whether Iraqi's were capable of looting these explosives? Charles Duelfer (who was there THIS year) From the Duelfer Report:
After numerous unsuccessful litigation attempts and plenty of whining and complaining from the liberal wing of the Democrats regarding the 2000 election, it appears the Democrats under Terry McAuliffe's tutelage, and with the help of ACORN, have decided on a new tact. First they made certain their Candidate would take the most recently popular stance and portray it as "thoughtful" and "complex". Secondly, they determined to offer little or no plan spe
I linked to the source of my info I didn't find anything but a subscribe screen there.
Instead of creating a "voter test," maybe it would be better to shorten the campain season, say to 4 months, outlaw ALL political contributions, and have the networks give the candidates free but limited air time to get their message out T_Bone one thing I'll say for you (even though you are commonly o
In short, I am not sure what more the left wants. How about power? Clinton's first 4 years were a debacle, the administration was way too left for the general public. Fire Jocelyn Elders, Les Aspin and hire David Gergen (this was brilliant by the way) and th
First, why does this nonsense even make it on these posts? This is about as important as the fact that Jr. High kids elected Bush and the Nickelodeon viewers elected Kerry. From the Pew Research Group: Journalists at national and local news organizations are notably different from the general public in their ideology and attitudes toward political and social issues. Most national and local journalists, as well as a plurality of Ame
You never can be sure unless you investigate. So you agree that Kerry running around blathering about this is a shoot from the hip response?
The vast majority of "endorsements" dont add up to a pile of dogcrap My dogs object to that! Seriously though, I agree. Our local paper just endorsed Kerry, then went on to criticize him for "having a Senate record of little distinction and less to indicate he can make good on the many promises he has
Lets be clear on the UN report we are discussing. Is it the 17th quarterly report of UNMVIC? The post under discussion was the 17th (what was posted). while making you ju
as for the "home town paper", the Boston Globe would be his hometown paper, not some conservative junk paper with 5,000 readers. In 1972 when Kerry started his political career he lived in Lowell Mass. It is currently a town of over 100,000 and the Sun (paper which endorsed Bush) has a circulation of o
No no, nothing against Texas, just his hometown. Here's some irony, Bush's hometown paper endorsed Kerry and Kerry's hometown paper endorsed Bush. So I guess you agree that only a raving hick ville paper would endorse Kerry?
Still, I would kick myself in the ass real hard if I voted for a 3rd party and Bush won by one vote It's possible, we could have exactly the opposite of what happened last year. Bush could win the popular vote and Kerry the electoral. That would be irony.<b