"Vaughn" wrote in message
...

"Kevin Brooks" wrote in message
...

Who gave Al Zarqawi refuge? Who gave Abu Nidal refuge for a decade or
so?
Abu Abbas? Who delighted in butchering civilians? Who planned and
actions
that targeted US leaders (outside a time of war)? Answers: Saddam,
Saddam,
Saddam *and* OBL, and Saddam *and* OBL.

All apparently true, and as I DID say earlier, no worse than other
Arab
countries with which the present administration is not at war.

Can you name any Arab country currently, or over the past year, providing
knowing refuge to an individual who we have expressed a desire to take into
custody over the 9-11 affair (and Al Zarqawi was a key leader in AQ before
that attack)? Any?


No, contrary to your assertion, the White House has apparently not been
looking very hard for linkage between Saddam and AQ.
There were some reports
that senior AQ personnel visited Iraq, as guests of one of the Iraqi
intelligence organizations, pre-war, traveling from Sudan.

There is probaby a very good reason why you did not hear much about
thoes
allegations.

Then there is the
whole Al Zarqawi issue. But we have seen precious little indicating that
the
WH has been diligently searching for further evidence.

As I previously noted...

While you express an opinion that you'd like to see Al Zarqawi in a body
bag, you don't seem to be very concerned over his reportedly being given
refuge in Iraq by Saddam--why is that?

Again, something I previously addressed.


(sarcasm off) This is an interesting point! What law?
Seriously;
are
you saying that Clinton "made" Bush attack Iraq? Or even that he set
foreign
policy that the Bush administration was powerless to change or ignore?

PL 105-338, "The Iraqi Liberation Act", was indeed signed into law by
Clinton. "It should be the policy of the United States to support
efforts to
remove the regime headed by Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq and to
promote
the emergence of a democratic government to replace that regime."
Clinton
signed it into law in 1998, after it was passed by the House 360-38, and
by
unanimous consent in the Senate. The goal was clearly stated.


Thanks for the info. But I notice that you ignored my questions
about the
import of PL 105-338 to the present administration after berating me for
simply
not addressing each and every of your points. Please don't bother now,
this
exchange has gone long enough.

No, I left it intact (not snipping away without "acknowledgement"--are you
all warm and fuzzy now?) and answered the relevant question. You obviously
were unaware of the very existance of the ILA, so I kind of figured you's
perhaps rethink those questions once you checked into it. But since you have
not...

No, Clinton did not "make" Bush attack Iraq. He did however sign into law
the act that made "regime change" our stated goal. That law did remain in
effect, amended in sorts I guess by the later congressional approval for
Bush to used armed force to acheive it.

Brooks




Vaughn