The BIGGEST Contradiction Yet to Come from the Bush Team

page: 1
0

log in

join

posted on Jan, 20 2003 @ 05:34 AM
link   
For weeks now, those fancy designed title bars that CNN, FOX and other news agencies have diplayed regarding the U.N. inspectors in Iraq, have been labeled with the words 'Hunt,' 'Hunting for Weapons of Mass Desruction, etc etc.

NOW...

The Administration, begining with Rumsfeld, are NOW saying that the inspectors should not be hunting for weapons of mass desruction. WHAT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

What the heck are they there for?

Continuing the ploy.

So make note, the Bush Administration doesn't want the inspectors to be looking for weapons.
And all those pretty title bars...bull#.



DCtr




posted on Jan, 20 2003 @ 06:01 AM
link   
BBC news 24 ran a short article about this.
America is no longer trying to find weapons of mass destruction, as this would have been impossible (apparently) the inspectors were actually "testing" Saddams regime to see how co operative they would be.

a quick translation goes like this.

they went looking for WMD's so they could invade.
they didn't find any.
So now they are saying that was just a cover story the really objective was to see if saddam was cooperative.
and if he's not then we can invade.

shifting goal posts.



posted on Jan, 20 2003 @ 06:19 AM
link   
Drakke took this from another thread I did, I think the whole situation is disgusting we are being led up the garden path time and time again, like Lupe says shifting the goal posts.


"Immunity for Saddam? would we give it to OBL?

News suggests at the moment with comments from donald rumsfeld supporting the idea that Saddam be granted immunity from prosecution if he comes out of power. Given his vast abuses of human rights is it right that he be given this oppurtunity? would OBL be given that chance if he "revealed" where his terrorist network is hidden around the world. I`m not supporting war but this would seem to be EXTREMELY wrong, why should he get away with the crimes he has commited, why should anyone who has commited the outrageous abuses of human rights like Saddam and OBL be given the chance???


news.bbc.co.uk...

comment from Mr Rumsfeld, "He added however: "But if to avoid a war, I personally would recommend that some provision be made so that the senior leadership in that country and their families could be provided haven in some other country, and I think that that would be a fair trade to avoid a war."

[Edited on 19-1-2003 by cassini]


TN1

posted on Jan, 20 2003 @ 07:41 AM
link   
Something you might Know ,the war has already been planed several years ago !
The US army never left IRAQ !!!
They have been there from the end of the fisrt war !!!
Can i please ask you if this is legal or the was itself??
The UN does not co-operate with the US goverment as you can see !!
Therefore any action of war violates all international laws.
No other country except US and probably UK are willing to go the war !!!
No other country in the world except USA has started a war with several countries in the 20th century!!Plus the fact that it supported illegal goverments like Saddam Housein in the IRAQ-IRAN war, Augousto Pinoset in Chille against the legal and elected president Alliende(Salvador),and of course many others..
Unless they US people come in power the crimes will continue by the illegal govermennt of Bush&Cheyni!!
We are talking about crimes against humanity !!That the USA is far ahead from other countries like Russia or Germany or China ,but in this life everything has its price !!
You know what happened at 11th of September ......
Unfortunately the innocents have paid the price again !!
6,000 deaths !!
What about the every day -deaths of Iraqui people by the bombings ??(Since1991) and everywhere else of course ...
This in my languange is a crime !!!
P.C:There is a conflict between China and Taiwan ,why the USA is not willing to 'help' the Taiwan brothers ( i have nothing against these people)...



posted on Jan, 20 2003 @ 10:20 PM
link   
I am not aware of a post which contains the same subject.

You guys bring up immunity.

This blows my mind.

The case that the Butt Administration is making is that Saddam has weapons and that he intends to use them.

If he were to go into exile, that would be a total bomb of what would be most effective in making sure this never happens again.

Different World centres have invited him to go into exile in there country.
Sure why not.

But who's to say that Saddam will never again try to build weapons again.

Going into exile would only open the possibility that he might comeback. Not in Iraq, but other places.

Maybe he'll hook up with his bro Bin Laden or catch a flight to North Korea and join the SEA OF FIRE campaign.

In point, the entire idea of going into exile is proposterous.
This is becoming way to big of joke. The hypnosis is working.

bla.



posted on Jan, 21 2003 @ 12:17 PM
link   
open your eyes





new topics
top topics
 
0

log in

join