posted on Jan, 13 2004 @ 02:03 PM
"....International Tribunal is just around the corner, huh?
Maybe, maybe not, but highly doubtful.
Yes, the current policy was that instituted by the prior administration in the Iraq Liberation Act....read it, closely.
The contingency planned and continued planning of the "Policy of Regime Change" mandated by the ILA signed by the then president, Bill Clinton.
As qouted by the Washinton Post:
"President Clinton has said that getting rid of Saddam is a major U.S. objective."
This is and has been US FOREIGN POLICY since the ILA.
"According to Tuesday's Wall Street Journal, "The 1998 Iraqi Liberation Act was passed by an unanimous Senate and a near-unanimous House,"
after which Mr. Clinton certified it as the law of the land with his signature.....
According to a report in Newsweek just three months ago, after Clinton signed the Iraqi Liberation Act, "the U.S. government convened a conference
with the [Iraqi National Congress] and other opposition groups in London to discuss 'regime change.'"......
In Jan. 1999, Secretary of State Madeleine Albright even appointed a special representative for transition in Iraq, Frank Ricciardone, who reportedly
had "a mandate to coordinate opposition to Saddam."
Said Albright at the time: "He will be assisted by a team that will include both a military and a political adviser with extensive on-the-ground
experience in the region . . . With the aid of Frank Ricciardone and his team, we will persist in helping the Iraqi people re-integrate themselves
into the world community by freeing themselves from a leader they do not want, do not deserve and never chose."....
Two months later, the Clinton administration's plans for a post Saddam Iraq were already well underway, with State Department spokesman Jamie Rubin
explaining to reporters: "What we're trying to do . . . is strengthen an Iraqi opposition movement that can lay out solid plans for the post-Saddam
recovery in all sectors of national life."
Link: (as already posted and obviously not read)