Publish to Newswire
Add an EventFrom the Open-Publishing Calendar
From the Open-Publishing Newswire
Indybay Feature
"We will not leave the future of peace and security of America in the hands of . . .
"We will not leave the future of peace and the security of America in the hands of this cruel and dangerous man," Mr. Bush said in announcing the deal in the White House Rose Garden.
IDIOT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
IDIOT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
'Sell Out'
Gephardt Posture Irks Some in Party
by Susan Milligan
Thursday, October 3, 2002 in the Boston Globe
WASHINGTON - President Bush was in the Rose Garden, laying out the details of a resolution against Iraq as Republicans stood loyally behind him. But there was another face in this familiar picture yesterday: House Democratic Leader Richard A. Gephardt, standing beside a president who is aggressively raising money to block the Democrats from winning a majority in the House. http://www.commondreams.org/headlines02/1003-01.htm
Irked? Let House Democratic Leader Gephardt hear what you think:
E-Mail: HDLWebPage [at] mail.house.gov
Phone: (202) 225-0100
THE CONGRESSIONAL RESOLUTION
Bush Strikes Deal for House Backing on Action in Iraq
By ELISABETH BUMILLER and ALISON MITCHELL
WASHINGTON, Oct. 2 — President Bush reached an agreement today with House leaders on a proposal authorizing him to use force against Iraq, a deal that Democrats acknowledged cleared the way for approval of a joint Congressional resolution supporting action against Saddam Hussein.
"We will not leave the future of peace and the security of America in the hands of this cruel and dangerous man," Mr. Bush said in announcing the deal in the White House Rose Garden.
http://www.nytimes.com/2002/10/03/politics/03IRAQ.html
US Hardline on Iraq Leaves Full-Scale Invasion a 'Hair-Trigger' Away
by Julian Borger in Washington, Ewen MacAskill, and Ian Black in Brussels
Thursday, October 3, 2002 in the Guardian/UK
Washington last night revealed its intention to use UN weapons inspections as a possible first step towards a military occupation of Iraq by sending in troops, sealing off "exclusion zones" and creating secure corridors throughout the country.
In a leaked proposal for a UN resolution drafted by the US with help from British officials, the Bush administration is seeking to transform the inspections process into a coercive operation. The resolution would place a full-scale invasion of Iraq on a hair trigger, authorizing UN member states "to use all necessary means to restore international peace and security" if Iraq does so much as make an omission in the weapons inventories it presents to the security council. http://www.commondreams.org/headlines02/1003-03.htm
THE INTELLIGENCE DISPUTE
C.I.A. Rejects Request for Report on Preparations for War in Iraq
By JAMES RISEN
WASHINGTON, Oct. 2 — The Central Intelligence Agency has refused to provide Congress a comprehensive report on its role in a possible American campaign against Iraq, setting off a bitter dispute between the agency and leaders of the Senate Intelligence Committee, Congressional leaders said today.
In a contentious, closed-door Senate hearing today, agency officials refused to comply with a request from the committee for a broad review of how the intelligence community's clandestine role against the government of Saddam Hussein would be coordinated with the diplomatic and military actions that the Bush administration is planning.
http://www.nytimes.com/2002/10/03/politics/03INTE.html
Gephardt Posture Irks Some in Party
by Susan Milligan
Thursday, October 3, 2002 in the Boston Globe
WASHINGTON - President Bush was in the Rose Garden, laying out the details of a resolution against Iraq as Republicans stood loyally behind him. But there was another face in this familiar picture yesterday: House Democratic Leader Richard A. Gephardt, standing beside a president who is aggressively raising money to block the Democrats from winning a majority in the House. http://www.commondreams.org/headlines02/1003-01.htm
Irked? Let House Democratic Leader Gephardt hear what you think:
E-Mail: HDLWebPage [at] mail.house.gov
Phone: (202) 225-0100
THE CONGRESSIONAL RESOLUTION
Bush Strikes Deal for House Backing on Action in Iraq
By ELISABETH BUMILLER and ALISON MITCHELL
WASHINGTON, Oct. 2 — President Bush reached an agreement today with House leaders on a proposal authorizing him to use force against Iraq, a deal that Democrats acknowledged cleared the way for approval of a joint Congressional resolution supporting action against Saddam Hussein.
"We will not leave the future of peace and the security of America in the hands of this cruel and dangerous man," Mr. Bush said in announcing the deal in the White House Rose Garden.
http://www.nytimes.com/2002/10/03/politics/03IRAQ.html
US Hardline on Iraq Leaves Full-Scale Invasion a 'Hair-Trigger' Away
by Julian Borger in Washington, Ewen MacAskill, and Ian Black in Brussels
Thursday, October 3, 2002 in the Guardian/UK
Washington last night revealed its intention to use UN weapons inspections as a possible first step towards a military occupation of Iraq by sending in troops, sealing off "exclusion zones" and creating secure corridors throughout the country.
In a leaked proposal for a UN resolution drafted by the US with help from British officials, the Bush administration is seeking to transform the inspections process into a coercive operation. The resolution would place a full-scale invasion of Iraq on a hair trigger, authorizing UN member states "to use all necessary means to restore international peace and security" if Iraq does so much as make an omission in the weapons inventories it presents to the security council. http://www.commondreams.org/headlines02/1003-03.htm
THE INTELLIGENCE DISPUTE
C.I.A. Rejects Request for Report on Preparations for War in Iraq
By JAMES RISEN
WASHINGTON, Oct. 2 — The Central Intelligence Agency has refused to provide Congress a comprehensive report on its role in a possible American campaign against Iraq, setting off a bitter dispute between the agency and leaders of the Senate Intelligence Committee, Congressional leaders said today.
In a contentious, closed-door Senate hearing today, agency officials refused to comply with a request from the committee for a broad review of how the intelligence community's clandestine role against the government of Saddam Hussein would be coordinated with the diplomatic and military actions that the Bush administration is planning.
http://www.nytimes.com/2002/10/03/politics/03INTE.html
Add Your Comments
Comments
(Hide Comments)
[Idiot Pathetic Undemocratic Loser] Gephardt Caves
Thursday, October 3, 2002 in the St Louis Post-Dispatch
Editorial
HOUSE MINORITY Leader Richard A. Gephardt acceded to the drums of war on Wednesday, agreeing to an overly broad resolution authorizing President George W. Bush to attack Iraq. In the process, Mr. Gephardt undermined efforts in the Senate to limit the war authority to disarmament, rather than regime change.
Mr. Gephardt -- who was joined by other centrist Democrats, including Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman of Connecticut -- claimed to have won important concessions from Mr. Bush, and waxed on about how "this should not be about politics." But the concessions he won were minor, and his actions appear to be driven by the political imperatives of the coming election.
The compromise language that Mr. Gephardt agreed to would authorize Mr. Bush to wage war for violation of any of the past United Nations' resolutions that Saddam Hussein is violating. Those resolutions include matters that do not justify war -- such as the requirement that Saddam pay reparations to Kuwait, and that he treat his citizens more democratically. A far better proposal by Sens. Richard Lugar, R-Ind., and Joseph R. Biden Jr., D-Del., would limit the war authorization to enforcement of the resolutions requiring the elimination of weapons of mass destruction.
Among the concessions Mr. Gephardt trumpeted was one requiring Mr. Bush to certify to Congress, either before war began, or within 48 hours afterward, that "diplomatic and other peaceful means alone are inadequate to protect Americans from Saddam's weapons of mass destruction." That's no real impediment to the president. It's a foregone conclusion that Saddam will not comply with every one of the dozen resolutions that the United Nations has passed.
Before Mr. Gephardt decided to cave in on the war resolution, Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle, D-S.D. had hoped to make the Biden-Lugar resolution the basis of a vote in the Senate. That now appears unlikely. Mr. Biden said Wednesday that he was a realist and knew that the new compromise, ballyhooed Wednesday afternoon in the White House Rose Garden, pretty much meant the end of his approach.
Mr. Gephardt has long favored regime change in Iraq and called Saddam a serious threat. But as recently as two weeks ago he said that Mr. Bush was not justified in waging war to overthrow Saddam, only in disarming him -- a position exactly in line with the Biden-Lugar resolution he has torpedoed.
Undoubtedly Mr. Gephardt believes he is acting in the best interests of the nation. But he protests too much when he says he is rising above politics. He wants to be speaker of the House -- or president. He can't achieve either goal taking an unpopular stand against a war against Saddam.
Copyright (C)2002, St. Louis Post-Dispatch
Thursday, October 3, 2002 in the St Louis Post-Dispatch
Editorial
HOUSE MINORITY Leader Richard A. Gephardt acceded to the drums of war on Wednesday, agreeing to an overly broad resolution authorizing President George W. Bush to attack Iraq. In the process, Mr. Gephardt undermined efforts in the Senate to limit the war authority to disarmament, rather than regime change.
Mr. Gephardt -- who was joined by other centrist Democrats, including Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman of Connecticut -- claimed to have won important concessions from Mr. Bush, and waxed on about how "this should not be about politics." But the concessions he won were minor, and his actions appear to be driven by the political imperatives of the coming election.
The compromise language that Mr. Gephardt agreed to would authorize Mr. Bush to wage war for violation of any of the past United Nations' resolutions that Saddam Hussein is violating. Those resolutions include matters that do not justify war -- such as the requirement that Saddam pay reparations to Kuwait, and that he treat his citizens more democratically. A far better proposal by Sens. Richard Lugar, R-Ind., and Joseph R. Biden Jr., D-Del., would limit the war authorization to enforcement of the resolutions requiring the elimination of weapons of mass destruction.
Among the concessions Mr. Gephardt trumpeted was one requiring Mr. Bush to certify to Congress, either before war began, or within 48 hours afterward, that "diplomatic and other peaceful means alone are inadequate to protect Americans from Saddam's weapons of mass destruction." That's no real impediment to the president. It's a foregone conclusion that Saddam will not comply with every one of the dozen resolutions that the United Nations has passed.
Before Mr. Gephardt decided to cave in on the war resolution, Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle, D-S.D. had hoped to make the Biden-Lugar resolution the basis of a vote in the Senate. That now appears unlikely. Mr. Biden said Wednesday that he was a realist and knew that the new compromise, ballyhooed Wednesday afternoon in the White House Rose Garden, pretty much meant the end of his approach.
Mr. Gephardt has long favored regime change in Iraq and called Saddam a serious threat. But as recently as two weeks ago he said that Mr. Bush was not justified in waging war to overthrow Saddam, only in disarming him -- a position exactly in line with the Biden-Lugar resolution he has torpedoed.
Undoubtedly Mr. Gephardt believes he is acting in the best interests of the nation. But he protests too much when he says he is rising above politics. He wants to be speaker of the House -- or president. He can't achieve either goal taking an unpopular stand against a war against Saddam.
Copyright (C)2002, St. Louis Post-Dispatch
U.S. Losing Iraq Battle at the U.N.
by Maggie Farley and Robin Wright
Thursday, October 3, 2002 by the Los Angeles Times
UNITED NATIONS -- A day after Iraq opened the door to weapons inspections with some limits, a tough U.S. proposal seeking "all necessary means" to force full compliance with past U.N. resolutions appeared to be in trouble Wednesday in the Security Council.
With France proposing an alternative measure designed to delay military intervention, several council members complained that the American approach would more likely lead to war than prevent it.
The shift in attitude, if it holds up, suggested difficult negotiations still ahead for Washington.
by Maggie Farley and Robin Wright
Thursday, October 3, 2002 by the Los Angeles Times
UNITED NATIONS -- A day after Iraq opened the door to weapons inspections with some limits, a tough U.S. proposal seeking "all necessary means" to force full compliance with past U.N. resolutions appeared to be in trouble Wednesday in the Security Council.
With France proposing an alternative measure designed to delay military intervention, several council members complained that the American approach would more likely lead to war than prevent it.
The shift in attitude, if it holds up, suggested difficult negotiations still ahead for Washington.
A tough proposal seeking "all necessary means" to force full compliance with past U.N. resolutions is what the US wants, and it's what they will get.
What about all the UN resolutions against Israel? Why isn't America pressing for them to be enforced? Isn't this a double standard?
Richard Gebhardt
House of Representatives
Dear House Democratic Lapdog, ah, Leader:
Your backing to the Bush war resolution is a sellout. Not only is your integrity on the line--what little of that there may be--but you have sold out the people of Iraq. To what ends? There is no evidence that the Iraqi government has so-called weapons of mass destruction and poses an imminent threat to the US.
As I see it, to not come out on the "down side" of a "successful" war in Iraq, and to secure the empire that Bush and Clinton before him would establish, you are handing over to George Bush and his crypto-Nazi advisors the hair trigger they desire to make war.
The people of Iraq--the "collateral damage" of the militarists--be damned. And Democratic Lapdog, civilian causalities are not "unintended" or "inadvertent" when it is known in advance that they will occur! Maybe you think as Madeline Albright did that 500,000 children dead in Iraq due to US/UN sanctions are "acceptable."
This is cowardly, shameful, and even dangerous to the security of the United States that you and your ilk claim to defend. If terrorists destroy buildings and people in Chicago, Mr. Gebhardt, I'll blame you and George "bin Lyin'" Bush.
Bob Schwartz
Chicago
House of Representatives
Dear House Democratic Lapdog, ah, Leader:
Your backing to the Bush war resolution is a sellout. Not only is your integrity on the line--what little of that there may be--but you have sold out the people of Iraq. To what ends? There is no evidence that the Iraqi government has so-called weapons of mass destruction and poses an imminent threat to the US.
As I see it, to not come out on the "down side" of a "successful" war in Iraq, and to secure the empire that Bush and Clinton before him would establish, you are handing over to George Bush and his crypto-Nazi advisors the hair trigger they desire to make war.
The people of Iraq--the "collateral damage" of the militarists--be damned. And Democratic Lapdog, civilian causalities are not "unintended" or "inadvertent" when it is known in advance that they will occur! Maybe you think as Madeline Albright did that 500,000 children dead in Iraq due to US/UN sanctions are "acceptable."
This is cowardly, shameful, and even dangerous to the security of the United States that you and your ilk claim to defend. If terrorists destroy buildings and people in Chicago, Mr. Gebhardt, I'll blame you and George "bin Lyin'" Bush.
Bob Schwartz
Chicago
"Today is a defining day in America's war against terrorism," Attorney General John Ashcroft told a press conference this afternoon. The FBI has arrested four American citizens--three in Oregon, one in Detroit--and charged two others with being part of a terror cell, CNN reports. "The six are charged with conspiracy to provide material support to terrorists and conspiracy to contribute services to al Qaeda and the Taliban."
http://www.cnn.com/2002/US/West/10/04/oregon.fbi.alqaeda/index.html
Meanwhile, as the Associated Press reports, "shoe bomber" Richard Reid "pleaded guilty Friday, laughing as he admitted he tried to blow up a trans-Atlantic flight with explosives hidden in his shoes. He also declared himself a follower of Osama bin Laden":
"Basically I got on the plane with a bomb. Basically I tried to ignite it. Basically, yeah, I intended to damage the plane," Reid said in court, laughing.
He said he did not recognize the American justice system but agreed that he committed the acts outlined in the indictment against him. . . .
In court Friday, when U.S. District Judge William Young asked him why he pleaded guilty, Reid replied: "Because I know what I've done. . . . At the end of the day I know that I done the actions."
http://apnews.excite.com/article/20021004/D7MER17O2.html
The federal government's "statement of relevant facts" (link in PDF form) quotes from an e-mail Reid wrote his mother the day before he intended to blow up a plane (quoting verbatim):
what i am doing is part of the ongoing war between islaam and disbelief . . . I know you will find many muslims quick to condemn the war between us and the US and . . . I've sent you a copy of my will . . . (The reason for me sending you it is so that you can see that i didn't do this act out of ignorance nor did i do just because i want to die, but rather because i see it as a duty upon me to help remove the oppressive american forces from the muslim lands and that this is the only way for us to do so as we do not have other means to fight them). I hope that what i have done will not decur you from looking into islaam, or even cause you to hate the religion as the message of islaam is the truth, this is why we are ready to die defending the true islaam rather than to just sit back and allow the american government to dictate to us what we should believe and how we should behave, it is clear that this is a war between truth and falsehood . . . this is a war between islaam and democracy.
http://news.findlaw.com/wsj/docs/terrorism/usreid10302sof.pdf
John Walker Lindh is being sentenced at a hearing that was to begin at 2 p.m. EDT; CNN should have the latest. The Marin mujahid, who pleaded guilty to reduced charges, is expected to get 20 years.
http://www.cnn.com/2002/LAW/10/04/lindh.sentencing/index.html
http://www.cnn.com/2002/US/West/10/04/oregon.fbi.alqaeda/index.html
Meanwhile, as the Associated Press reports, "shoe bomber" Richard Reid "pleaded guilty Friday, laughing as he admitted he tried to blow up a trans-Atlantic flight with explosives hidden in his shoes. He also declared himself a follower of Osama bin Laden":
"Basically I got on the plane with a bomb. Basically I tried to ignite it. Basically, yeah, I intended to damage the plane," Reid said in court, laughing.
He said he did not recognize the American justice system but agreed that he committed the acts outlined in the indictment against him. . . .
In court Friday, when U.S. District Judge William Young asked him why he pleaded guilty, Reid replied: "Because I know what I've done. . . . At the end of the day I know that I done the actions."
http://apnews.excite.com/article/20021004/D7MER17O2.html
The federal government's "statement of relevant facts" (link in PDF form) quotes from an e-mail Reid wrote his mother the day before he intended to blow up a plane (quoting verbatim):
what i am doing is part of the ongoing war between islaam and disbelief . . . I know you will find many muslims quick to condemn the war between us and the US and . . . I've sent you a copy of my will . . . (The reason for me sending you it is so that you can see that i didn't do this act out of ignorance nor did i do just because i want to die, but rather because i see it as a duty upon me to help remove the oppressive american forces from the muslim lands and that this is the only way for us to do so as we do not have other means to fight them). I hope that what i have done will not decur you from looking into islaam, or even cause you to hate the religion as the message of islaam is the truth, this is why we are ready to die defending the true islaam rather than to just sit back and allow the american government to dictate to us what we should believe and how we should behave, it is clear that this is a war between truth and falsehood . . . this is a war between islaam and democracy.
http://news.findlaw.com/wsj/docs/terrorism/usreid10302sof.pdf
John Walker Lindh is being sentenced at a hearing that was to begin at 2 p.m. EDT; CNN should have the latest. The Marin mujahid, who pleaded guilty to reduced charges, is expected to get 20 years.
http://www.cnn.com/2002/LAW/10/04/lindh.sentencing/index.html
We are 100% volunteer and depend on your participation to sustain our efforts!
Donate
$110.00 donated
in the past month
Get Involved
If you'd like to help with maintaining or developing the website, contact us.
Publish
Publish your stories and upcoming events on Indybay.
Topics
More
Search Indybay's Archives
Advanced Search
►
▼
IMC Network