My comments are in the text...


"Tom Fleischman" wrote in message
rthlink.net...
In article , Bill Denton
wrote:

You will learn a lot more by reading than you will by running your
mouth!


I have never exchanged word one with you before today, so why do you
feel it necessary to begin your discussion with me by being insulting.
It is so typical of right-wingers to think that it is appropriate to
behave this way.

That's not an insult. It's simply a statement of fact. And what makes you
think I'm a right-winger? All I did was correct some totally erroneous
information you posted. I could be a right-winger, which I'm not, or I could
be a left-winger, which I'm not. I'm a centerist, who's only interested in
insuring that the debate is framed by the facts.



You stated: "What he *did* vote for was a congressional resolution to
give
the Prsident the power to use military force in Iraq *if* it could be
shown
that Iraq posed a credible threat to the national security of the United
States."

The word "credible" is not used in the Resolution; the word used was
"continuing". Very different.

Contrary to your statement: "*if* it could be shown that Iraq posed a
credible threat to the national security of the United States" there was
no
such requirement. First of all, you didn't state who had to show it, but
that is immaterial, as shown in the following text from the Resolution.

"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".

I think that makes it obvious that it had been that the threat had been
had
been recognized in the Resolution itself. And interestingly, part of the
threat was recognized by the Democratic Clinton Administration in 1998.


They stated that Iraq "poses a continuing threat to the national
security of the United States" because they were lied to by the
administration. That was the entire basis of the resolution.

Obviously, you don't read very carefully! The information came from both the
Bush AND the Clinton Administrations. Are you saying that both the Bush
Administration and the Clinton Administration lied? Sounds like to me you're
pretty well up **** creek without a party.



The President did not have to show any threat to anyone prior to using
force, he only had to make the following notifications within 48 hours
of
the exercise of said authority.

(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--

Which HE FAILED TO DO.

And that is an absolute lie! Both the Speaker of the House of
Representatives and the President pro tempore of the Senate were notified
well within the statutory time limits. If you actually read things, you
would note that the resolution does not specify any particular method of
notification; it doesn't have to be by registered letter or anything.
President Bush could have invited them to his office for a formal
notification, or he could have simply sent them a note telling them to watch
CNN at some particular time when he would be making a speech that would
include the notification.

John Kerry has already put more than enough information out in the public's
face to cost him the election. Putting out these easily refutable lies, such
as you have done, do nothing to help his cause...