Archive for June, 2004
« Previous Entries Next Entries »What the 9-11 Commission Didn’t Report And The New York Times Won’t Tell You
Friday, June 18th, 2004Russia warned the United States on several occasions that Iraq’s Saddam Hussein planned “terrorist attacks” on its soil, President Vladimir Putin said Friday.
“After the events of September 11, 2001, and before the start of the military operation in Iraq, Russian special services several times received such information and passed it on to their American colleagues,” he told reporters.The Kremlin leader, who was speaking in the Kazakh capital, said Russian intelligence services had many times received information that Saddam’s special forces were preparing terrorist attacks in the United States“and beyond its borders on American military and civilian targets.”
“This information was conveyed to our American colleagues,” he said. He added that Russian intelligence had no proof that Saddam agents had been involved in any particular attack.
John Kerry Lies About Reasons For Going To Iraq
Thursday, June 17th, 2004John Kerry, taking advantage of the media spin over the “findings” of the 9-11 Commission, said the report today clearly shows President Bush “rushed to war for a purpose that it now turns out is not supported by the facts.”
“This administration took its eye off of al-Qaida, took its eye off of the real war on terror in Afghanistan and northwest Pakistan and transferred it for reasons of its own to Iraq,” Kerry said. “And the American people are paying billions of dollars now because of that decision. And most importantly, American families and American soldiers are paying the highest price of all.”
Asked what Bush’s true motivation was for attacking Saddam’s government, Kerry said that is a question for the administration.
“It is clear that the president owes the American people a fundamental explanation about why he rushed to war for a purpose that it now turns out is not supported by the facts,” Kerry said. “And that is the finding of this commission.”
This is absolutely sad. Kerry is once again trying to spin the war on terror for his own political gain.
News flash for John Kerry: You are no longer running against Howard Dean.
Back in October of 2002, John Kerry gave a speech regarding his vote to authorize the use of force in Iraq. It didn’t mention Iraq’s ties to 9-11, and there is no mention of Al Qaeda.
Kerry was very clear back in October 2002, but he seems to have conveniently forgotten about what he said back then:
It would be naive to the point of grave danger not to believe that left to his own devices, Saddam Hussein will provoke, misjudge, or stumble into a future, more dangerous confrontation with the civilized world. He has as much as promised it.
…[H]e is a brutal, oppressive dictator guilty of personally murdering and condoning murder and torture, grotesque violence against women and execution of political opponents. He is a war criminal who used chemical weapons against another nation, and of course, as we know, against his own people, the Kurds. He has diverted funds from the oil for food program which were intended by the international community to ease the burden of the Iraqi people. He has supported and harbored terrorist groups, particularly radical Palestinian groups such as Abu Nidal and has given money to families of suicide bombers.
I mention these not because they are a cause to go to war in and of themselves - as the President previously suggested - but because they tell us a lot about the threat of Weapons of Mass Destruction and the nature of this man. We should not go to war because these things are in his past but we should be prepared to go to war because of what they tell us about the future.
It is really sad that Kerry has to keep up this anti-war charade of his. Howard Dean is out of the race, he doesn’t have to pretend like he never supported taking out Saddam Hussein or that he was duped into supporting the war.
In Detroit, Kerry stopped by Fishbone’s restaurant in the city’s Greektown neighborhood, where Mark Ivezaj told him the commission’s findings could take him to victory on Nov. 2.
“Kerry, you got him,” Ivezaj said as the candidate greeted diners. “He lied about Iraq.”
Kerry also said Thursday that, as an American citizen and a senator, he felt misled by the Bush administration on the justification for war in Iraq.
Of course, Kerry’s own words contradict this. Kerry’s lies and contradiction are not going to propel him to victory – they’re just going to plummet him to defeat.
President Bush fired back against the “findings” of the 9-11 Commission:
“There was a relationship between Iraq and Saddam and al- Qaeda,” Bush told reporters after meeting with his Cabinet at the White House. “This administration never said that the 9/11 attacks were orchestrated between Saddam and al-Qaeda. We did say there were numerous contacts between Saddam and al-Qaeda.”
…
“Saddam Hussein was a threat,” Bush said when asked about the report. “He was a threat because he had used weapons of mass destruction against his own people. He was a threat because he was a sworn enemy of the United States of America, just like al- Qaeda. He was a threat because he had terrorist connections.”
“The world is better off and America is more secure without Saddam Hussein in power,” the president said.
Hearing Bush say these words, I wanted to cheer. You could hear the firmness in his voice. It’s what he’s been saying all along. John Kerry on the other hand, changed his approach during the primaries to save his campaign.
John Kerry said yesterday in Ohio “When it comes to war and peace, I will tell the truth to the American people.” Well, seems like he’s the one who isn’t telling us the truth right now. Perhaps he needs to go back and reread some of his speeches.
Pre-order Yours Today!
Thursday, June 17th, 2004
Michael Moore Is A Big Fat Stupid White Man
by David T. Hardy, Jason Clarke
Liberals Politicizing Politicization To Their Political Advantage
Wednesday, June 16th, 2004It’s funny sometimes the way the left react to the events of the day. From the first report of Reagan’s failing health to his death and his funeral, they were jumping on the “Bush and the Republicans are going to politicize this” bandwagon.
Just about any accusation or conspiracy theory imaginable was concocted by the left regarding Reagan’s death and the possible political impact it could have for Bush. Some liberals said it would unjustly and untimely help Bush. Some of them convinced themselves it would hurt Bush – because “Bush is no Reagan” and conservatives would ultimately compare the two and find themselves liking Bush less (or something like that) of course, they’d then proceed to demonize Reagan…so who knows what they were thinking.
Simultaneously, the left preemptively accused Bush of politicizing Reagan’s death, demonized Reagan as too conservative and destructive, and then hope to demonize Bush to conservatives by making their own comparisons between the two.
So much for not politicizing Reagan’s death, right?
I was beyond amused today when I read that the Club For Growth received criticism from the Reagan Family for an anti-Kerry ad they put out using President Reagan’s image.
Ronald Reagan’s family is criticizing the use of the late president’s image in a conservative political ad endorsing President George W. Bush.
…
The ad comparing Bush’s war on terror with Reagan’s battle against communism is being run by the conservative interest group Club for Growth starting Wednesday. It shows footage of Reagan at the Berlin Wall, and Bush at ground zero.The ad also said Democratic presidential contender John Kerry was “wrong then, wrong now” on national security.
Before I had the opportunity to check out the liberal reaction to this, Stephen Moore, President of the Club For Growth had come out with the following statement:
“I just concluded a very pleasant conversation with Ms. Joanne Drake, Chief of Staff to President Reagan and Mrs. Reagan. Ms. Drake asked, and I immediately agreed, that in deference to the wishes of the Reagan family, the Club will hold off on airing our latest commercial for one week. Ms. Drake made it clear that she had no problem with the contents of the TV commercial.
…And that settles that.
Of course, the left is bound to jump on this anyways…The Kerry campaign certainly did:
A Kerry spokesman said it’s “pretty sad” that Bush supporters are already politicizing the nation’s farewell to Reagan
The Kerry campaign shouldn’t be making such judgments. You know what I think? I think it’s pretty sad that Kerry supporters were politicizing Reagan’s death before he had even died. I think it’s pretty sad that Kerry “took a week off from campaigning” only to take a cheap shot at Bush after “paying his respects” to Reagan in California. I think it’s pretty sad that Kerry supporters resort to comparing Bush to Hitler. I think it’s pretty sad that Kerry compares himself to John F. Kennedy. I think it’s pretty sad that Kerry thinks he could be a black president.
It just amazes me how liberals screamed over the possibility that Reagan’s death could somehow become politically advantageous for Bush, decrying politicization of Reagan’s death, but found it okay to politicize it themselves.
They Collaborated Before They Didn’t Collaborate? Or Something?
Wednesday, June 16th, 2004Okay, so the ever-so-wonderfully-objective-and-non-partisan 9-11 Commission is now saying there was no connection between 9-11 and Iraq.
Granted, I never considered a link between the two to be a prerequisite for taking out Saddam’s regime, this report just doesn’t quite hold to me…
Bin Laden made overtures to Saddam for assistance, the commission said in the staff report, as he did with leaders in Sudan, Iran, Afghanistan and elsewhere as he sought to build an Islamic army.
While Saddam dispatched a senior Iraqi intelligence official to Sudan to meet with bin Laden in 1994, the commission said it had not turned up evidence of a “collaborative relationship.”
Okay, so they were in contact, but they weren’t collaborating? What is that supposed to mean? Are we supposed to believe that while they were talking their was absolutely no assistance or some mutually beneficial arrangements made? Did Saddam’s regime just say “Thanks, but no thanks?” I don’t buy it.
“Bin Laden is said to have requested space to establish training camps, as well as assistance in procuring weapons, but Iraq apparently never responded,” the report said. “There have been reports that contacts between Iraq and al-Qaida also occurred” after bin Laden moved his operations to Afghanistan in 1996, “but they do not appear to have resulted in a collaborative relationship,” it said.
“Two senior bin Laden associates have adamantly denied that any ties existed between al-Qaida and Iraq,” the report said.
Well, now that settles it… Two senior bin Laden associates have “adamantly denied” ties… Great! Now I’m convinced… How silly of me to have doubted this before…
While you’re contemplating this, order a copy of The Connection : How al Qaeda’s Collaboration with Saddam Hussein Has Endangered America, by Stephen F. Hayes.
It’s Wictory Wednesday
Wednesday, June 16th, 2004Content courtesy of Blogs For Bush
_______________________________________
There are only about 10 weeks left to the Republican national convention. After that, you can’t donate to the Bush campaign because of campaign finance laws. If you want to make a contribution, now would be a good time.
Today is Wictory Wednesday. Every Wednesday, over one hundred bloggers ask their readers to volunteer and/or donate to the Bush 2004 campaign.
If you’re a blogger, you can join Wictory Wednesdays simply by putting up a post like this one every Wednesday, asking your readers to volunteer and/or donate to the Bush campaign. And then e-mail wictory@blogsforbush.com so that you’ll be added to the Wictory Wednesday blogroll, which will be part of the Wictory Wednesday post on all participating blogs:
Makin’ My Way Down The Bookshelf…
Tuesday, June 15th, 2004It’s been a while since I’ve talked about my latest book reads, so here’s a list of some books I’ve finished recently.
- “Shut Up & Sing” - Laura Ingraham
- “Applied Economics” - Thomas Sowell
- “Affirmative Action Around The World” - Thomas Sowell
- “The Visions of the Annointed” - Thomas Sowell
- “Misunderestimated” - Bill Sammon
- “Rewriting History” - Dick Morris
I am currently reading “The Quest for Cosmic Justice” by Thomas Sowell.
Confirming What We Knew All Along…
Tuesday, June 15th, 2004TWISTED: LA Times Poll Had Sample With 38% Democrats, 25% Republicans
Tue Jun 15 2004 10:13:47 ETSen. John Kerry “has taken big lead,” according “to an L.A. Times poll.”
But the Times poll that showed Kerry “beating Bush by 7 points” has created a controversy over whether the poll’s sample accurately reflects the population as whole, ROLL CALL reports on Tuesday.
“Not counting independents, the Times’ results were calculated on a sample made up of 38 percent Democrats and 25 percent Republicans — a huge and unheard-of margin,” ROLL CALL claims.
Developing…
« Previous Entries Next Entries »