Malaysian airlines: the rise of Al Queada?

Put down the sticky Penthouse ...

http://www.fas.org/news/un/iraq/sres/1441.pdf


Secretary Colin L. Powell
Washington, DC
January 27, 2003
[Video file for: DSL/cable or dial-up ; audio-only file]
Well, good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. Earlier today, in accordance with UN Resolution 1441, Doctors’ Blix and El Baradei provided the United Nations Security Council their 60-day reports on inspection activity in Iraq.
We listened carefully as the inspectors reported that Iraq has not provided the active, immediate and unconditional cooperation that the Council demanded in UN Resolution 1441.
As Dr. Blix said, "Iraq appears not to have come to a genuine acceptance, not even today, of the disarmament that was demanded of it." Let me repeat, because this is the essence of the problem. Dr. Blix said, "Iraq appears not to have come to a genuine acceptance, not even today, of the disarmament that was demanded of it." 1441 is all about the disarmament demanded of Iraq.
The inspectors' findings came as no surprise. For 11 years before 1441, Saddam Hussein's regime refused to make the strategic decision, the political decision, to disarm itself of weapons of mass destruction and to comply with the world's demands.
To this day, the Iraq regime continues to defy the will of the United Nations. The Iraqi regime has responded to 1441 with empty claims, empty declarations and empty gestures.
It has not given the inspectors and the international community any concrete information in answer to a host of key questions: Where is the missing anthrax? This is not just a question of historical curiosity. It is essential for us to know what happened with this deadly material.
Where is the VX? Also not just a trivial question. We must know what happened to this deadly material.
Where are the chemical and biological munitions? Where are the mobile biological laboratories? If the Iraqi regime was truly committed to disarmament, we wouldn't be looking for these mobile labs. They'd drive them up and park them in front of UNMOVIC headquarters for inspection.
Why is Iraq violating the restrictions on ballistic missiles? Why is it violating the ban on missiles with a range of more than 150 kilometers? Where are the credible, verifiable answers to all of the other disarmament questions compiled by the previous inspectors?
Today, we heard that the inspectors have not been able to interview any Iraqi in private. We heard that the inspectors have not been allowed to employ aerial surveillance. Why not? If Iraq was committed to disarmament, if Iraq understood what 1441 was all about, they would willingly allow this kind of surveillance, they would willingly allow people to be interviewed without minders, without fear of retribution.
We have heard that the inspectors have still not received, a full list of Iraqi personnel involved with weapons of mass destruction. If Iraq no longer has weapons of mass destruction, they should willingly give the names of all who were involved in their previous programs to the inspectors for examination and interview.
The inspectors told us that their efforts have been impeded by a swarm of Iraqi minders. Why, if Iraq was committed to disarmament, would they be going to these efforts to deceive and to keep the inspectors from doing their work? Passive cooperation is not what was called for in 1441.
The inspectors have also told us that they have evidence that Iraq has moved or hidden items at sites just prior to inspection visits. That's what the inspectors say, not what Americans say, not what American intelligence says, but we certainly corroborate all of that. But this is information from the inspectors.
And the inspectors have caught the Iraqis concealing "top secret" information in a private residence. You all saw the pictures of that information being brought out. Why? Why, if Iraq was committed to disarmament, as required under 1441, would we be finding this kind of information squirreled away in private homes, for any other reason than to keep it away from the inspectors?
The list of unanswered questions and the many ways Iraq is frustrating the work of the inspectors goes on and on. Iraq's refusal to disarm, in compliance with Resolution 1441, still threatens international peace and security. And Iraq's defiance continues to challenge the relevance and credibility of the Security Council.
The international community's goal was, is and remains Iraq's disarmament. The Security Council and the international community must stand behind Resolution 1441. Iraq continues to conceal quantities, vast quantities, of highly lethal material and weapons to delivery it. They could kill thousands upon thousands of men, women and children if Saddam Hussein decides to use these against those men, women and children, or, just as frightening, to provide them to others who might use such weapons.
Iraq must not be allowed to keep weapons of mass terror and the capacity to produce more. The world community must send a clear message to Iraq that the will of the international community must be obeyed.
Last September, the United Nations acted at the request of the United States. We acted through 1441 with the hope -- the President had the hope, the other members of the Security Council who voted unanimously for this resolution had the hope -- that Iraq would take this one last chance presented to it by the international community to disarm peacefully.
And remember the key elements of that resolution. Iraq has been and continues to be in material breach of all of its earlier obligations. We are giving, the resolution said, one more chance to Iraq. We put a firm list of conditions for Iraq to meet and what they should allow the inspectors to do to assist them in that disarmament. And let's not forget a vital part of the resolution that comes toward the end: there would be serious consequences for continued Iraqi violation of its obligation. Those serious consequences are the lever that was needed to get the inspectors in to get the inspectors to be able to do their work, which was to assist Iraqi in disarmament.
Iraqi intransigence brings us to a situation where we see that regime continuing to confront the fundamental choice between compliance with 1441 and the consequences of its failure to disarm.
Even at this late date, the United States hopes for a peaceful solution. But a peaceful solution is possible only if Iraq disarms itself with the help of the inspectors. The issue is not how much more time the inspectors need to search in the dark. It is how much more time Iraq should be given to turn on the light and to come clean. And the answer is not much more time. Iraq's time for choosing peaceful disarmament is fast coming to an end.

http://www2.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB...;%20Report.htm

I know he's a Republican, but ...

.. go ahead .. call Powell a "liar"! Originally Posted by LexusLover

You all either "forgot" or want to forget. Which is it?

ReRead!

"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports
show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and
biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his
nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to
terrorists, including al Qaeda members. It is clear, however, that if
left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity
to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to
develop nuclear weapons."
- Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002
Originally Posted by LexusLover

It just keeps coming!

[107th Congress Public Law 243]
[From the U.S. Government Printing Office]


<DOC>
[DOCID: fubl243.107]


[[Page 1497]]

AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF MILITARY FORCE AGAINST IRAQ RESOLUTION OF 2002

[[Page 116 STAT. 1498]]

Public Law 107-243
107th Congress

Joint Resolution



To authorize the use of United States Armed Forces against
Iraq. <<NOTE: Oct. 16, 2002 - [H.J. Res. 114]>>

Whereas in 1990 in response to Iraq's war of aggression against and
illegal occupation of Kuwait, the United States forged a coalition
of nations to liberate Kuwait and its people in order to defend the
national security of the United States and enforce United Nations
Security Council resolutions relating to Iraq;

Whereas after the liberation of Kuwait in 1991, Iraq entered into a
United Nations sponsored cease-fire agreement pursuant to which Iraq
unequivocally agreed, among other things, to eliminate its nuclear,
biological, and chemical weapons programs and the means to deliver
and develop them, and to end its support for international
terrorism;

Whereas the efforts of international weapons inspectors, United States
intelligence agencies, and Iraqi defectors led to the discovery that
Iraq had large stockpiles of chemical weapons and a large scale
biological weapons program, and that Iraq had an advanced nuclear
weapons development program that was much closer to producing a
nuclear weapon than intelligence reporting had previously indicated;

Whereas Iraq, in direct and flagrant violation of the cease-fire,
attempted to thwart the efforts of weapons inspectors to identify
and destroy Iraq's weapons of mass destruction stockpiles and
development capabilities, which finally resulted in the withdrawal
of inspectors from Iraq on October 31, 1998;

Whereas in Public Law 105-235 (August 14, 1998), Congress concluded that
Iraq's continuing weapons of mass destruction programs threatened
vital United States interests and international peace and security,
declared Iraq to be in ``material and unacceptable breach of its
international obligations'' and urged the President ``to take
appropriate action, in accordance with the Constitution and relevant
laws of the United States, to bring Iraq into compliance with its
international obligations'';

Whereas Iraq both poses a continuing threat to the national security of
the United States and international peace and security in the
Persian Gulf region and remains in material and unacceptable breach
of its international obligations by, among other things, continuing
to possess and develop a significant chemical and biological weapons
capability, actively seeking a nuclear weapons capability, and
supporting and harboring terrorist organizations;

Whereas Iraq persists in violating resolution of the United Nations
Security Council by continuing to engage in brutal repression of its
civilian population thereby threatening international peace

[[Page 116 STAT. 1499]]

and security in the region, by refusing to release, repatriate, or
account for non-Iraqi citizens wrongfully detained by Iraq,
including an American serviceman, and by failing to return property
wrongfully seized by Iraq from Kuwait;

Whereas the current Iraqi regime has demonstrated its capability and
willingness to use weapons of mass destruction against other nations
and its own people;

Whereas the current Iraqi regime has demonstrated its continuing
hostility toward, and willingness to attack, the United States,
including by attempting in 1993 to assassinate former President Bush
and by firing on many thousands of occasions on United States and
Coalition Armed Forces engaged in enforcing the resolutions of the
United Nations Security Council;

Whereas members of al Qaida, an organization bearing responsibility for
attacks on the United States, its citizens, and interests, including
the attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, are known to be in
Iraq;

Whereas Iraq continues to aid and harbor other international terrorist
organizations, including organizations that threaten the lives and
safety of United States citizens;

Whereas the attacks on the United States of September 11, 2001,
underscored the gravity of the threat posed by the acquisition of
weapons of mass destruction by international terrorist
organizations;

Whereas Iraq's demonstrated capability and willingness to use weapons of
mass destruction, the risk that the current Iraqi regime will either
employ those weapons to launch a surprise attack against the United
States or its Armed Forces or provide them to international
terrorists who would do so, and the extreme magnitude of harm that
would result to the United States and its citizens from such an
attack, combine to justify action by the United States to defend
itself;

Whereas United Nations Security Council Resolution 678 (1990) authorizes
the use of all necessary means to enforce United Nations Security
Council Resolution 660 (1990) and subsequent relevant resolutions
and to compel Iraq to cease certain activities that threaten
international peace and security, including the development of
weapons of mass destruction and refusal or obstruction of United
Nations weapons inspections in violation of United Nations Security
Council Resolution 687 (1991), repression of its civilian population
in violation of United Nations Security Council Resolution 688
(1991), and threatening its neighbors or United Nations operations
in Iraq in violation of United Nations Security Council Resolution
949 (1994);

Whereas in the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq
Resolution (Public Law 102-1), Congress has authorized the President
``to use United States Armed Forces pursuant to United Nations
Security Council Resolution 678 (1990) in order to achieve
implementation of Security Council Resolution 660, 661, 662, 664,
665, 666, 667, 669, 670, 674, and 677'';

Whereas in December 1991, Congress expressed its sense that it
``supports the use of all necessary means to achieve the goals of
United Nations Security Council Resolution 687 as being consistent
with the Authorization of Use of Military Force Against

[[Page 116 STAT. 1500]]

Iraq Resolution (Public Law 102-1),'' that Iraq's repression of its
civilian population violates United Nations Security Council
Resolution 688 and ``constitutes a continuing threat to the peace,
security, and stability of the Persian Gulf region,'' and that
Congress, ``supports the use of all necessary means to achieve the
goals of United Nations Security Council Resolution 688'';

Whereas the Iraq Liberation Act of 1998 (Public Law 105-338) expressed
the sense of Congress that it should be the policy of the United
States to support efforts to remove from power the current Iraqi
regime and promote the emergence of a democratic government to
replace that regime;

Whereas on September 12, 2002, President Bush committed the United
States to ``work with the United Nations Security Council to meet
our common challenge'' posed by Iraq and to ``work for the necessary
resolutions,'' while also making clear that ``the Security Council
resolutions will be enforced, and the just demands of peace and
security will be met, or action will be unavoidable'';

Whereas the United States is determined to prosecute the war on
terrorism and Iraq's ongoing support for international terrorist
groups combined with its development of weapons of mass destruction
in direct violation of its obligations under the 1991 cease-fire and
other United Nations Security Council resolutions make clear that it
is in the national security interests of the United States and in
furtherance of the war on terrorism that all relevant United Nations
Security Council resolutions be enforced, including through the use
of force if necessary;

Whereas Congress has taken steps to pursue vigorously the war on
terrorism through the provision of authorities and funding requested
by the President to take the necessary actions against international
terrorists and terrorist organizations, including those nations,
organizations, or persons who planned, authorized, committed, or
aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or
harbored such persons or organizations;

Whereas the President and Congress are determined to continue to take
all appropriate actions against international terrorists and
terrorist organizations, including those nations, organizations, or
persons who planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist
attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such
persons or organizations;

Whereas the President has authority under the Constitution to take
action in order to deter and prevent acts of international terrorism
against the United States, as Congress recognized in the joint
resolution on Authorization for Use of Military Force (Public Law
107-40); and

Whereas it is in the national security interests of the United States to
restore international peace and security to the Persian Gulf region:
Now, therefore, be it

Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United
States of America in Congress <<NOTE: Authorization for Use of Military
Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002. 50 USC 1541 note.>> assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This joint resolution may be cited as the ``Authorization for Use of
Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002''.

[[Page 116 STAT. 1501]]

SEC. 2. SUPPORT FOR UNITED STATES DIPLOMATIC EFFORTS.

The Congress of the United States supports the efforts by the
President to--
(1) strictly enforce through the United Nations Security
Council all relevant Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq
and encourages him in those efforts; and
(2) obtain prompt and decisive action by the Security
Council to ensure that Iraq abandons its strategy of delay,
evasion and noncompliance and promptly and strictly complies
with all relevant Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq.

SEC. 3. AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF UNITED STATES ARMED FORCES.

(a) Authorization.--The President is authorized to use the Armed
Forces of the United States as he determines to be necessary and
appropriate in order to--
(1) defend the national security of the United States
against the continuing threat posed by Iraq; and
(2) enforce all relevant United Nations Security Council
resolutions regarding Iraq.

(b) Presidential Determination.--In connection with the exercise of
the authority granted in subsection (a) to use force the President
shall, prior to such exercise or as soon thereafter as may be feasible,
but no later than 48 hours after exercising such authority, make
available to the Speaker of the House of Representatives and the
President pro tempore of the Senate his determination that--
(1) reliance by the United States on further diplomatic or
other peaceful means alone either (A) will not adequately
protect the national security of the United States against the
continuing threat posed by Iraq or (B) is not likely to lead to
enforcement of all relevant United Nations Security Council
resolutions regarding Iraq; and
(2) acting pursuant to this joint resolution is consistent
with the United States and other countries continuing to take
the necessary actions against international terrorist and
terrorist organizations, including those nations, organizations,
or persons who planned, authorized, committed or aided the
terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001.

(c) War Powers Resolution Requirements.--
(1) Specific statutory authorization.--Consistent with
section 8(a)(1) of the War Powers Resolution, the Congress
declares that this section is intended to constitute specific
statutory authorization within the meaning of section 5(b) of
the War Powers Resolution.
(2) Applicability of other requirements.--Nothing in this
joint resolution supersedes any requirement of the War Powers
Resolution.

SEC. 4. REPORTS TO CONGRESS.

(a) <<NOTE: President.>> Reports.--The President shall, at least
once every 60 days, submit to the Congress a report on matters relevant
to this joint resolution, including actions taken pursuant to the
exercise of authority granted in section 3 and the status of planning
for efforts that are expected to be required after such actions are
completed, including those actions described in section 7 of the Iraq
Liberation Act of 1998 (Public Law 105-338).

[[Page 116 STAT. 1502]]

(b) Single Consolidated Report.--To the extent that the submission
of any report described in subsection (a) coincides with the submission
of any other report on matters relevant to this joint resolution
otherwise required to be submitted to Congress pursuant to the reporting
requirements of the War Powers Resolution (Public Law 93-148), all such
reports may be submitted as a single consolidated report to the
Congress.
(c) Rule of Construction.--To the extent that the information
required by section 3 of the Authorization for Use of Military Force
Against Iraq Resolution (Public Law 102-1) is included in the report
required by this section, such report shall be considered as meeting the
requirements of section 3 of such resolution.

Approved October 16, 2002.

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY--H.J. Res. 114 (S.J. Res. 45) (S.J. Res. 46):
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

HOUSE REPORTS: No. 107-721 (Comm. on International Relations).
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 148 (2002):
Oct. 8, 9, considered in House.
Oct. 10, considered and passed House and Senate.
WEEKLY COMPILATION OF PRESIDENTIAL DOCUMENTS, Vol. 38 (2002):
Oct. 16, Presidential remarks and statement.

<all>

Now let's see ... but do you really want to change the subject?

2016 is just around the corner. Originally Posted by LexusLover

Must be repeated for the grade schoolers:

Now let's see ... but do you really want to change the subject?

2016 is just around the corner.

When? Or do you not want to answer that question?

I suppose you want a link, too?

http://hotair.com/archives/2010/10/2...found-in-iraq/

An initial glance at the WikiLeaks war logs doesn’t reveal evidence of some massive WMD program by the Saddam Hussein regime — the Bush administration’s most (in)famous rationale for invading Iraq. But chemical weapons, especially, did not vanish from the Iraqi battlefield. Remnants of Saddam’s toxic arsenal, largely destroyed after the Gulf War, remained. Jihadists, insurgents and foreign (possibly Iranian) agitators turned to these stockpiles during the Iraq conflict — and may have brewed up their own deadly agents.

In August 2004, for instance, American forces surreptitiously purchased what they believed to be containers of liquid sulfur mustard, a toxic “blister agent” used as a chemical weapon since World War I. The troops tested the liquid, and “reported two positive results for blister.” The chemical was then “triple-sealed and transported to a secure site” outside their base. …

Nearly three years later, American troops were still finding WMD in the region. An armored Buffalo vehicle unearthed a cache of artillery shells “that was covered by sacks and leaves under an Iraqi Community Watch checkpoint. “The 155mm rounds are filled with an unknown liquid, and several of which are leaking a black tar-like substance.” Initial tests were inconclusive. But later, “the rounds tested positive for mustard.”

No wonder he wanted his troops to be issued protective gear and masks! Originally Posted by LexusLover

Let me guess ... BT says .. "if we would have only let the inspectors DO THEIR JOB they would have one day found all that shit" ....

.. had the Iraqis done as demanded by the U.N. .. turn it over. You all would have something else to bitch about ... like why didn't Sudan turn over OBL?

You all are spending a lot of time Monday Morning Quarterbacking. 20-20 hindsight?

Is that to distract from the current events? Or are you all just trying to catch up? Originally Posted by LexusLover

Apparently LexiLiar does not know the true definition of "Monday Morning Quarterbacking." It is not MMQ when the correct play was predicted before the game was actually played.

It is apparent that it is an attempt on his part to change his name from LexiLiar in Chief to Distractor in Chief! I suspect he views it as the lesser of two evils!

LL has turned into a babbling lunatic.

LL has turned into a babbling lunatic. Originally Posted by i'va biggen

"Turned into?" No! LexiLiar has always been a "babbling lunatic."

Truthfully, it is nothing more than a massive cover up on LexiLiar's part. It is a futile attempt to cover up the fact that he was on the wrong side of the WMD issue as well as the ill fated and ill advised, spring of 2003 invasion of Iraq from the very beginning. It is especially bothersome to him that he is painfully aware that WTF and I both had these same discussions with him on the ASPD discussion boards, before, during and after the actual invasion itself. He was terribly wrong then and he is even more wrong today.

LexiLiar was, is and will always remain the prototype Darth Cheney Kool Aid Drinker. If that's not bad enough, he's also a chronic LexiLiar! Unfortunately, those are two of his better qualities.

It's all downhill after that!

It is nothing more than a massive cover up on LexiLiar's part. It is a futile attempt on his part to cover up the fact that he was on the wrong side of the WMD issue as well as the ill fated and ill advised, spring of 2003 invasion of Iraq from the very beginning. It is especially bothersome to him that he is painfully aware that WTF and I both had these same discussions with him on the ASPD discussion boards, before, during and after the actual invasion itself. LexiLiar was, is and will always remain the prototype Darth Cheney Kool Aid Drinker.

Over and above that, he lies! Originally Posted by bigtex

It is a shame that Hillary wasn't as smart as you two. I wish she had voted to keep us out of the war.

It is a shame that Hillary wasn't as smart as you two. I wish she had voted to keep us out of the war. Originally Posted by Jewish Lawyer

Is that all you've got, Hillary was wrong about Iraq so it must be ok?

Yes, Hillary was wrong on those issues. When she decides to join in on that particular discussion on this board, I will tell her so!

Meanwhile, she is well positioned to be the next POTUS. Eat your heart out!

Not that any of this should matter to a known Jewish Defector.

It just keeps coming!"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports
show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and
biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his
nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to
terrorists, including al Qaeda members. It is clear, however, that if
left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity
to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to
develop nuclear weapons."
- Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002 Originally Posted by LexusLover

LexusLover....Sen. Hillary Clinton lost the Democratic Presidential bid mainly because of that lie.

Iraq was not a failure of intelligence, it was a failure of our leaders at the time. Clinton among them. She paid the political price. I do not want her to be President because of it.

LexusLover....Sen. Hillary Clinton lost the Democratic Presidential bid mainly because of that lie.

Iraq was not a failure of intelligence ... Originally Posted by WTF

Oh, but it was ...

"Rigorous Analysis, Difficult Topic..., March 28, 2011

"In the Iran and Iraq case studies, Robert Jervis supplies valuable context on the respective analyses and finds that the analysts, based on the information available to them, came up with plausible and reasonable assessments, that happened to be wrong. Further, although he identifies both procedural and factual errors, he is skeptical that changes would have produced significantly better results, due in part to the nature of the respective targets."

http://www.amazon.com/Why-Intelligen...pr_product_top

It is a shame that Hillary wasn't as smart as you two. I wish she had voted to keep us out of the war. Originally Posted by Jewish Lawyer

What difference would that have made?

Pissive assgressive psychobabble.

Oh, but it was ...

"Rigorous Analysis, Difficult Topic..., March 28, 2011

"In the Iran and Iraq case studies, Robert Jervis supplies valuable context on the respective analyses and finds that the analysts, based on the information available to them, came up with plausible and reasonable assessments, that happened to be wrong. Further, although he identifies both procedural and factual errors, he is skeptical that changes would have produced significantly better results, due in part to the nature of the respective targets."

http://www.amazon.com/Why-Intelligen...pr_product_top Originally Posted by I B Hankering

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

Are you SO STUPID that you read the publisher's synopsis of a book, quote it and then believe the backlink to Amazon legitimizes your claim?

What a fucking boob you are, Corpy! You continue to amaze. Over and over and over and over and over..

No, I'm not reading anymore posts. There is no new news that means anything. I did see this on Fox News and I thought it was funny considering how venomous some of the left have been here. Here is one of your heroes. Ed Schultz of MSNBC
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2qLCQbJWdMI

Awwww shucks. You started this game of liar's poker. Just one of the many you favor us with. Maybe if you had the right intelligence (meaning ANY), then maybe you'd STFU once in a while.

What say you, O Senate of Rome?