I am 1st! cause I can be.
Nuke em--nuke em til they almost glow?

The NYT also adds, in their version of the story, that Niger is the only source of uranium as well, further complicating the Bush Administration's explanation.

John F. Kerry, in unrelated news, today announced that he is a VietNam veteran.

Scott -- "If we learned anything from September 11, it's that the real weapon is the mind of a man."

I think you've missed satire and struck eloquence.

"No one, however, has challenged the administration's assertions that Saddam was meeting with nuclear scientists, that satellite photos showed former nuclear plants being rebuilt, and that Iraq had attempted to purchase the kind of aluminum tubes used for enriching uranium."

what these photos ?
"Bush cited a satellite photograph and a report by the U.N. atomic energy agency as evidence of Iraq’s impending rearmament. However, in response to a report by NBC News, a senior administration official acknowledged Saturday night that the U.N. report drew no such conclusion, and a spokesman for the U.N. agency said the photograph had been misinterpreted."
http://discuss.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/zforum/02/r_politics_kurtz090902.htm

what these tubes ?
"U.N. weapons inspectors in Iraq are increasingly confident that the aluminum tubes were never meant for enriching uranium, according to officials familiar with the inspection process. The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), the U.N.-chartered nuclear watchdog, reported in a Jan. 8 preliminary assessment that the tubes were "not directly suitable" for uranium enrichment but were "consistent" with making ordinary artillery rockets "
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A35360-2003Jan23?language=printer

is any wonder that after months in Iraq none of these nuclear weapons, or sites that we've now investigated, or chem weapons, or bio weapons, or labs, or documents have given any evidence of WMD.

This just in:
They have changed the pronunciation of Niger, formerly pronounced "Ni'-Jur"

It is phonically "knee-jair'" This was so that no one could make a pronunciation error that would offend anyone who many be of the pigmented persuasion.

To carry this further they have changed the following pronunciations inorder not to offend PETA and other groups.

tiger = Tee-jair'
finger= feen-jair'
hanger= han-jair'
manager = womyn-a-jair'
Kerry = Viet-numb veet

Comical (who really isn't):
Oddly ironic that you chose U.N. sources for your "proof". Aren't these the same people who were sent to Iraq under Resolution 1441, but apparently hadn't read it enough to know that they were not supposed to be on a "hunt-and-find" mission? Aren't they the same ones that had previously reported that Iraq did have WMD, but now that things got extremely political, they forgot about that?

Sorry, Comical (who really isn't)...the U.N. really does not have any credibility. Irrelevance is there to stay, and the Socialist dream of the U.N. is dying.

On that subject of Socialist dreams...anyone thought how close we were to becoming what France or Germany is in the 1930's and 40's? All the programs implemented by FDR and subsequent beginning of entitelements and reliance on government, his reign of power, the creation of the U.N., etc.

So many talk about how "great" he was...maybe I'm missing some of it, but I do not see it. I see one of the greatest threats to us as a nation and way of life.

yup, OS, the UN IS the world community,
I've no idea what you mean by "not supposed to be on a hide and find mission" but when it comes to assessing the authenticity of evidence against Iraq I trust the UN - who are unbiased in this -far more than the US who have been determined to have a war aganst Iraq irrespective of its justification.
"Aren't they the same ones that had previously reported that Iraq did have WMD, but now that things got extremely political, they forgot about that?"
thats because Iraq did have WMD in the 80s but no longer has, all its chem/bio only had a shelf life of 10years or less anyway
and weren't the US the ones who said there were no hidden triggers in UN Res 1441 until they realised they couldn't find a junior chemistry set in Iraq let alone WMD as a pretext for war ?

Imagine the panic when some New Yorker finds the Non- Nuclear Nuke in the subways. Saddam's boys are sure to have one of those gimmicky digital count down readouts built into the side. After the city is evacuated, Iraqis will have a hearty chuckle when the bomb counter gets to zero. Instead of exploding a flag saying Bang will pop out.

Comical (who really isn't),

The UN is not the world community...it is the socialist world community.

WMD in the 80's? What did you inhale? The UN reports from the mid-90's said otherwise. And then suddenly a few years later, they disappeared? You are kidding only yourself (and maybe France also).

Resolution 1441 was worded so that Saddam's regime would present either the evidence of the destruction of the weapons that the early reports noted as existing, or the weapons themselves for destruction. Instead, they presented a re-creation of a previous 12,000 page report that contained no new info, did not present the proof of destruction, and did nothing to demonstrate to the "world community" that they no longer possessed them.

Comical (who really isn't), one last question. Are you one of these people who would maintain that going to war with Iraq was wrong under any circumstance, but in the past supported the actions in Kosovo and Yugoslavia, and presently demand we be involved in Liberia?

Comical (who really isn't)...one last thing: That's TOS to you.

"... when it comes to assessing the authenticity of evidence against Iraq I trust the UN - who are unbiased in this -far more than the US who have been determined to have a war aganst Iraq irrespective of its justification."

Trust the UN? It beggars the mind that someone who can spell their own name trusts the judgment of the UN.

I don't care what reason u would have for crushing a cockroach.

A. Dirty
B. Disease Laden
C. Contaminates Food
D. Unsightly

If it were the cleanest cockroach, was rainbow hued, and disease free, but still contaminated food with its little feet ***** Stomp *****

Saddam was a cockroach who tortured his own people. Stomp, squish, crunch, Snap, Crackle, Pop.

What's left to argue about except how to dispose of the corpse and decide how to clean up after and make sure no other roaches come back?

Face it Rummy, you just hate Bush.

The differences between Iraq versus Kosovo and Yugoslavia is (to name but just a few):

1. Occupation/Colonialization

2. Against International Law

3. Pre-emptive War (and the threat to the U.S. seems to be founded in lies and falsehoods).

4. 200+ (and still counting) American Servicemens Lives/3,240+ Iraqi civilian deaths (and still counting)

5. No oil in Kosovo and Yugoslavia, nor presence of Haliburton or Carlyle

And I want to comment on your statement of the U.N. as being "the socialist world community", by defining fascism.

"Fascism should more appropriately be called corporatism because it is a merger of state and corporate power." -- Benito Mussolini

Fascism is a form of totalitarianism in that it holds the State to be the highest value, to which all individuals must be completely loyal. Yet it is distinguishable from other forms of totalitarianism in its exultation of war and violence as a means of envigorating the state and the people. Its focus on nationalism means fascism may vary in detail from country to country, but always it brings war - against others and against the individual.

The liberty of a democracy is not safe if the people tolerate the growth of private power to a point where it becomes stronger than their democratic State itself. That, in its essence is Facism -- ownership of a government by an individual, by a group, or any controlling private power. - Franklin D. Roosevelt

In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist. - Dwight Eisenhower

Oil has far to much power in this country.

We are losing the main thread, the crux of the whole matter is that what teh Iraqis had were Nucular weapons, not Nuclear. Homer Simpson said right

Sooooo I see the poster formerly known as RePukeAlator,Colo Dem, (janwoods78@hotmail.com) has again "graced" us with her angry, Anti Republican, Anti-Bush, Anti-American presence....this time under the name of
El Vez.

Your point, Jan is----?????

Next time you're cruising along the Colorado roads in your SUV....remember"The Power of Oil"!

I don't own an SUV-not guilty. Also not guilty of displaying email addresses and asking others to spam them.

If my posts are that much of a threat to you than you can simply ignore me or post somewhere else.

Freedom of speech is an American value and my constitutional right. And if you want to call me anti-American for excersing that freedom...than be my guest that's your freedom.

My point is that it's people like you that validate my opinion.

And another thing about Resident Happycrack's promise to "stay the course..."

Taking a wild estimate, we're losing 2-3 soldiers per week in Iraq. Tommy Franks says he expects us to be there about 4 years.

Call it three dead soldiers a week, times 52 weeks is 156 dead soldiers a year. Four years of that would be over 600 dead, and the Iraqi's might stumble on a way to kill a few dozen at a time - so when will the killing stop?

And what if Frankie's being optimistic, and we have to stay there 10 years, as some have suggested? Will we need another Memorial Wall built in Washington DC? It should say, "These men sacrificed their lives for the B.F.E.E.'s greedy agression."

Even if Bush loses in 2004, we can't just "up and pull out." We've destroyed the Iraqi government and much of their infrastructure. We can't just say "Nevermind, sorry about that," and leave - can we?

This is what happens when a greeedy oil corporations wants more oil.

Oh that pesky detail...
Put in a different e-mail address.

Nice Sluething happy...

Besides, anyone with a lot of money has power. Power in and of itself is not bad, as money is not bad.

Tell me, when you counted all those persons who died in the war, did you weep over the 10,000 children who died worldwide today from malnutrition?

I suppose you are somewhere aware of a nation that practices more good with its power than the United States? There is much evil here, and much evil practiced both corporately and privately. But what other nation does any action altruisticaly as often as the US?

Besides, Europe needs the oil and we don't. A tighter US market means more profits from Alaskan and Texas oil fields. Opening up a previously controlled market(by France and Germany)does not serve US oil.

Jan, another individual that Ann Coulter was speaking of in her book "Treason" which I am about 1/2 way through. Learn the real meaning of facism. Hitler formed the NAZI party which was a facist SOCIALIST party. Splain that one! All the industry was nationalized - much like modern day communism. You socialist anti American whiners make me sick to my stomach!! >>> I could go on in the same vein, but I think my non existent NUCLEAR warhead is about to detonate, unless, wait, here comes Kerry (who is a vietnam vet) to save the day with his instant decoder. Yea, the libs have saved us all from the non-existent NUCULAR warhead.

"If my posts are that much of a threat to you than you can simply ignore me or post somewhere else."

Jan---how is it you suspect your posts are a "threat" to me??? LOL

furthermore you may want to follow your own suggestion about posting elsewhere. As ( a point HUGELY lost on liberals..ala Sarandom/Robbins, et al.) The same free speech right you exercise also belongs to those who DISAGREE with you. I'll just stay--thank you. If you're here on a gallant mission to change minds....well.( I'm trying not to burst out in laughter)....Your work is cut out for you. Prepare to be educated. But then...maybe you're not sure of your stance anyway...thus you're here to see if in fact your views are flawed and there's some high ground that will keep you from sinking further into the DNC quagmire?

P.S.---Nowhere did I post a request for anyone to spam anyone...(including you). Your tone tells me you're a miserable enough of a human being without being harrassed..furthermore asking someone to spam anyone is juvenille. I doubt the request is met with many "takers", anyway so you probably have nothing to fear.

Should have put a bogus email address in - I agree. Even though I disagreed with a lot that was being said in these posts, my assumption was that you were still honorable people. And I believe that only one person is the exception. But so what? I haven't been spamed which makes me right about the rest of the people who post here - you are honorable people.

I do weep about the children who die from malnutrition, which is one of the better points about the U.N., specifically UNICEF. When was the last time you contributed?

Disliking Bush and his policies, doesn't mean I don't love my country and am oblivious to the good that we do as a nation. On the contrary, it means I love my country enough to stand against what I feel is wrong. To keep it strong by following the traditions of the past where there are open forums such as this where differences of opinions can be discussed.

We are a great nation not because we are alike, but because we are diverse.

And I don't believe that all corporations are evil. But we all know that sooner or later we're going to have to get our act together on energy alternatives, and for decades the oil companies have resisted. We have checks and balances put in place to balance power.

If France and Germany didn't need the oil from Iraq do you seriously think they would have put up a stink? It's about having world domination of the oil which is what they have a problem with.

It looks like Jimmy Carter wants us to nuke Liberia.

"Feel free to sign her up for some SPAM. Hey, she may NEED a septic tank with all the s#*t she puts out!"

From the "News About Gov. Dean Makes Headlines Nationwide" thread.

Happy I'm Not An Angry Dem Anywhere in the U.S. - don't you take things a bit to personal?

I'm here because I want to understand what makes you people tick and how you arrive at the conclusions you do...not about a "gallant mission to change minds" (you'd have to have a mind first for me to change it-and that goes only for Happy I'm not a Dem Anymore) You act like this is some kind of personal club, and if it is, excuuuussseee
meee!!!!

Otherwise, I'm more open to people like Fr. Guido Sarducci who doesn't act so threatened by a difference of opinion.

"I do weep about the children who die from malnutrition, which is one of the better points about the U.N., specifically UNICEF. When was the last time you contributed?"

How about you? Do you do anything but weep and "feel bad" about the situation, or do something about it? I'm really kinda tired of the current crowd of naysayers (especially the 329 Democratic Presidential candidates) who offer only criticism, but no actual plan of action.

UNICEF? OMG, another UN program nearly as ineffective as our own social programs....I prefer action through private organizations that do much more with much less and are far more effective not just in solving the immediate hunger issues, but also in longterm help.

Great! - my favorite organization is the Red Cross not only as a charity but as a volunteer. I've given 5 years, one week on call every month, And what have you done?

Red Cross---making a windfall after 9/11 so their top dog could get a million dollar (or more) bonus??? I'll stick with Salvation Army and others who don't charge rescue workers for a cup of coffee...and who actually designate the financial contributions to the "victims" it was intended for.

The "Top Heavy" R.C. hurt themselves BADLY after their 9/11 shenanigans! Their true colors flew.

Yes, Jan---you are to be praised and The Other Scott isn't worthy----or he just has chosen not to boast.

Benevolent...I am not worthy. But I do not mean in Jan's presence.

Jan---I'm not threatened by you. Admittedly I'm annoyed by you. Your rants are the same broken record Dem rants. I believe Fr. Guido S stated it when he addressed C-Rummy in saying "Face it Rummy--you just hate Bush". That's typically the underlying issue anyway from voices such as yours. Its just usually cloaked in other "issues".

Furthermore, I now recall seeing that post about spamming you, etc. Of course it's your choice to believe me or not---BUT even though I don't agree with your views and quite frankly your attitude mostly-- I myself thought that "invitation" to spam you was way O.T.T (over the top!). That's not even remotely honest dialogue and is purely foolishness and immature. I'd say the majority of people here aren't on that level, myself included.--whether you believe it or not.

Jan...you wrote above:
"I've given 5 years, one week on call every month"

What does that mean, that you have a "position"? What do you directly do that alleviates any of the issues of malnutrition that you rail against above, aside from pledging your undying faithfulness to the U.N.?

Point of clarity for above post: I did indeed intend on insinuating (gotta love alliteration so late at night) that a "position" does not, in and of itself, "do" anything toward achieving any goal.

For what it's worth or not worth, I have you right wingers figured out.
Whether someone is a Democrat, Independent, Moderate, true Conservative (real conservatives recoil at the right wing politics of hate. In the tradition of Barry Goldwater, true conservatives criticize the growing and rampant misuse and abuse of power by right wingers like Attorney General Ashcroft.)or, a liberal you think that we are the enemy to America. You demand that everyone believe whatever you believe -- even if that belief changes at the whim of your superiors -- because. Well just because! And don't ask questions! You believe whatever your superiors tell you to believe, because your insecurity and fear of the unknown prevents you from defying tradition or thinking in new ways.

Extremists like Trent Lott, Jesse Helms, Tom DeLay, Don Nichols, Jerry Falwell and "Pat" Robertson finger point, backbite, and undermine our unity. Sadly, there's no end to right wing divisive disloyalty.

In a crisis, loyal Americans support solutions no matter where they come from--Republican and Democrats and independents, moderates, conservatives, and liberals. In troubled times Americans who love our country unite to overcome adversity.

I'd say right wingers demand that everyone *thinks* whatever they *think* but right wingers don't think. They listen and obey. Free thinking threatens right wingers. It weakens their precarious hold on their make-believe world.

Everyone clings to the familiar and fears the unknown to some degree. What makes right wingers different? It's their unwillingness to face these fears and strike out into the wider world. No right winger ever came up with a new idea. No right winger developed a medical cure, discovered a new territory, or envisioned a new approach to anything. In fact, right wingers oppose all of that.

Right wingers dislike education and they loath science. New information and the uncertainty fostered by a flow of fresh thinking undermine their sense of stability. They are still in denial about evolution! Education may lead to progress and new ideas. Science uncovers new facts. Therefore, right wingers fear learning and research. Progress threatens their precious predictable status quo.

Right wingers have always opposed reforms which protect and invigorate capitalism -- anti-trust, fair trade practices, SEC regulations, protections for consumers, investors, workers and the environment.

Right wingers believe superstitions and embrace propaganda. They ignore information that challenges their prejudices and preconceptions.
Right wingers support the policies which comprise class warfare, but whine when anyone demonstrates the injustice of robbing the needy to enrich the greedy.

Right wingers support theocracy and fascism -- actually craving a unified authority over their lives and even their afterlives! They support censorship. They want to impose their religious views on everyone.

Dubya enlightened me to the answer of why right wingers hate the rest of us Americans:

"They hate us because of our Freedoms."

What scares right wingers to the bone? Freedom. Free speech. Free thoughts. Free people. They are afraid of their own freedom. What scares right wingers to the bone? People like me. Without people like me there would be nobody left to point out your hypocrisy and your intolerance. That way there would be nobody telling them that they're giving conservatism or Christianity or patriotism a bad name.

If left to their own devices, right wingers will destroy everything that makes America good and great. This despite their characteristically arrogant and unwarranted claim as the only "real Americans," in the phrase of the hypocritical and hateful Bob Barr. These are many of the same people who want the U.S. out of the United Nations so we don't have to deal with any kind of international laws and can wreak whatever havoc we please.

I guess it's ok for Kenneth Lay to steal but not ok for RC. Never the less, you couldn't tell me what you are doing to make the world a better place.

No more information about me - I've had my say and this is my last and final posting. I know who the enemy is and now know how to beat you at your game. Thanks!

Please Note: ScrappleFace readers are intelligent enough to express themselves without obscenities. ScrappleFace endeavors to be suitable for all ages. If an obscene interloper posts here, please report the incident to the blogmaster who will delete the comment. (Include the name, date and time of the comment.) So please take that extra moment to think of a civil synonym

o dear, OS, is the UN a socialist world community ? does that mean capitalism has faled if the world community is socialist - and there was me thinking we won the Cold War.
thats right. the weapons disappeared under UN weapons insepctions and thats why we can't find any. And having to prove they've been destroyed is a joke given the US can't even prove its own WMD found in Maryland was destroyed.

thats right, Sard, Saddam was a cockroach and thats why he was our ally in the 1980's like the other cockroaches Pinochet Suhiarto et al were our allies and thats why we stood by while he gassed the Kurds in 1988 and crushed the Kurds and Shiites in 1991.
actually I opposes the Kosovo intervention too.
I think OS gavve the game away as to why we supported the Islamic terrorist KLA against the oppressive Slobo .. because Slobo was a darn commie !
I guess if Iraq was now about human rights and Bush has changed his mind re WMD we'd be intervening in Zimbabwe, Laos, Burma too. Lets check ... nope we're not ! case closed.

Jan,

I always am amazed by how angry liberals like you, become so angry when they canít get people to agree with them. You guys always go back to being judgmental, categorizing people in to descriptive generalizations, and polluting the area with your self righteous indignation... The liberal mantra, ìEverybodyís - stupid but meî! My goodness ñ you guys are such a waste of a satirical blog. Go somewhere else to spout your Poli - Sci referendums.

The liberal standard operating procedure: Spout your biased communist/socialist agenda. Nobody agrees with you. Leave the blog.

Comical (who really isn't):
You miss the irony of the point. The "world community" that so many speak of now really isn't, especially that of the UN. Do you disagree that the UN is Socialist in its form and function? Take a simple look at how it is arranged: countries, whether democracies or brutal dictatorships are placed on the same level, yet we in the US foot the vast majority of the bill. The "leader" is the Secretary-General, and you can't ask for a more Socialist title than that.

If the UN had real power (and I think the first Gulf War established that it had the potential, but the second showed it true irrelevancy)then your point would be more accurate. As it is, this is one of the last vestiges of the Cold War.

Comical (who really isn't): let's say you were involved in an OJ-style murder. (I'm not presupposing your guilt, but, well actions follow character, n'est-ce pas?). The "proof" that the prosecutor seeks is somewhere on your property. They go in front of a judge for a search warrant, but court delays and rescheduling makes it such that he search warrant isn't actually signed and served for several months. In the meantime, you've had that much time to hide the "proof". With that much time (unless you are less intelligent than I assume you are) you hide it pretty well.

They may take a while to find it. That does not mean that the "proof" is not there. In the case of Iraq, the reports through the 90's until the inspectors were kicked out in '98 said, in fact, that there were specific weapons and specific programs. Saddam was given ample time to show either the proof of the destruction of the weapons and the programs, or to present them to inspectors this last round for cataloguing and destruction. Instead, he drug his feet, biding for time...

the inspectors weren't kicked out in 1998. they lect of thier own accord claiming Saddam wasn't cooperating. in fact its now weel established that Saddams claims the US inspectors were spying beyond the remit of their job is now accepted as fact.
by then Saddam was pretty much disarmed. As in fact Blix says now in a more up to data assessment.
Its strange how the US had all this intel about the WMD and now can't find a bean. Every site they've suspected and then checked has come up zilch.

re the UN who decides who the upstanding countries that should be allowed a voice are ? Of course the US will be one even though it has overthrown democracies in Guatemala, Chile etc in its time, supported dictators like Saddam and Pinochet and sponsored terror regimes particularly in central america.
the US already has huge influence in the UN, beyond even its veto,
I thought this letter 18 months ago was quite telling
Friday October 19, 2001

Your correspondents, Leslie Seavor in the UK and Andrew Hirsch in the US (Letters, October 17), make the usual attacks on the "inadequacy" of the UN as if it were an independent body able to carry out its policies on its own initiative. This is far from the case; the UN has for years been hobbled by the failure of its members to support it.
They have failed to finance its actions, even when they have voted for them; they have refused to supply forces, even after voting for military action; and in many cases, where they have provided such forces they have refused to put them under UN command or, having nominally done so, have deemed themselves to have the right to interfere with the command, even to the extent of withdrawing their troops at a vital time.

And the main culprit, though not the only one, has been the US, which has for years withheld its contributions to the main UN budget and peacekeeping assessments - the former to such an extent that it was on the verge of losing its vote in the general assembly. Yet it still turns to the UN to pick up the pieces after its military adventures as, now, it talks of a UN role in restoring normal government in Afghanistan after the war.

What the UN needs, more than anything, is true and full support by its members, led by the permanent members of the security council. Then it would have a chance to do the job for which is was created: maintaining world peace and removing the causes of war.
Harold Stern
Vice-chairman, United Nations Association UK
harold.stern@virgin.net

Comical (who really isn't):
Where we divurge in our beliefs on the UN is, I believe, at the level where you call for "true and full support". By your own words, that would mean that the US would have to give up the postitions it has over the years, or whatever disagreements about something, and be a pawn of the UN. And, by the way, isn't such a phrase as "true and full support" something you more liberal types would normally rail against (if not go absolutely ballisstic on)?

we invaded iraq for their oil. just like we did in '91, but we didn't take enough. now we need more to feed the bush cartels appetite. every democrat-voting, suv-driving, suburban, soccer-mom, should keep that in mind every time she loads little johnny into the Navigator for tuba lessons.(mpg/0 city, 1 highway)

Hey biz, what kind of car do you drive? I ask not because I really care, but because I am so often amazed at the uber-envionmentalists who make comments like this, but then are drivign a less-than-average fuel efficient vehicle, apparently not seeing that they are part of the problem, not the solution.

well as I said the US already has huge influence in the UN, I think what you would like is for the UN to be a pawn of the US

btw rummy
you said the UN was unbiased on the iraq issue(july 13 4:02 pm). if thats what you call having billions of dollars invested in iraqs oil, i.e. france and russia, then they are unbiased.

other scott
that first part was a joke. and btw i dont own a car at the moment. i am a full time student who can't afford one. but my last car was a plymoth reliant. so i feel i am able to blast suv drivers. do you feel guilty about something?

os
could you not see the sarcasm in my first post?????????????

Biz, walking/mass transit apologies to you. Me feel guilty? Nope. In the past I've had a Geo Metro that I loved (3-cylinder...and for a brief time, 2-cylinder--would not advise) adn now have a good fuel-efficient Saturn....not because of the gas issue, but the money issue--sadly, I'm not being supported by the government)

"...You demand that everyone believe whatever you believe -- even if that belief changes at the whim of your superiors -- because. Well just because! And don't ask questions! You believe whatever your superiors tell you to believe, because your insecurity and fear of the unknown prevents you from defying tradition or thinking in new ways."

Funny... same thing could be said of you.

...You demand that everyone believe whatever you believe -- even if that belief changes at the whim of your superiors -- because. Well just because! And don't ask questions! You believe whatever your superiors tell you to believe, because your insecurity and fear of the unknown prevents you from defying tradition or thinking in new ways.

Actually, this sounds much more like the current batch of liberals than any conversative...

Evict the UN. Condemn the building.

Biz, too early. Caffeine not kick in yet. Sarcasm detection unit not online...

Some random guy,

You are right on. Following hte letter of the law, with the amount of asbestos, I think they might have to condemn the building. Instead of replacing, they should move it to, I don't know, anywhere else to support the economy of some other country. It's blatantly unfair for it to be based in the US, and symbolically would sent a big warning flag to those pesky Americans.

What did the building do?

KJ...the building is not responsible for what it did. You see, it's parents were poor. And actually its father was not around much. It was an at-risk building. 'Twas only a matter of time.

Yo Biz,

not sure the UN atomic energy agency people personally have loads invested in Iraqi oil.
anyway so France and Russia had oil contracts with Saddam whereas the US wanted the oil contracts or just the oil. whats the diff.

anyway the point was it gave the lie to the original spoof where it was claimed "No one, however, has challenged the administration's assertions ..." when yes in fact the UN agencies have - whatever you think of them.

Comical (who really isn't): YOU miss the point that it wasn't until just recently that the UN agencies challenged the assertions. Funnier still is the fact that those agencies now contradict themselves.

Sounds like they were trying to build the Hush-a-Bomb from Rocky & Bullwinkle.

comical
so its cool for russia and france to look out for their interest but not us, huh? when we do it we are imperialists???? and we should listen to the UN?????? c'mon man, you can do better than this.

biz..no, he can't.

The un should be turned into an after hours rave bar.
Any New York people here?
When,if ever,has the un served us being americans well?
What % of the un is sponsored by us?
Why are we,the American tax payer,being made to shoulder the burden of an organization that has the Sudan,Libya and Syria on the commision of human rights.Simply outrageous.
Whats even more outrageous are the friggin un diplomats who for the most part are former 7-11 employess without the charisma.
I HATE THEM.

Ditto - Sean,

I am all for helping the down-trodden of the world. I just don't like being spat at in the face after doing it. It sours my compassion when someone elseís flem is hanging off my proboscis. Someone who really needs help appreciates picks up and moves on taking advantage of the kindness of strangers. Someone who - pan handles is never satisfied. I wish we would get smart enough to realize that. Best case in point - the U-nited N-eedy.

PS.
I do and donít - mean this in a satirical way. But what actually has the UN accomplished in all of its History and glory? Maybe I am just too tired from being on call the last 48 hours or I can't think past my political objections. I am really having a hard time focusing on anything. I don't mean the betterment of mankind speech - we are the world crap. You know? Like the decisive world accomplishments that would challenge my belief system, that the UN isnít a group of "Fathead socialist agenda pontificators, who wouldn't know how to get off their fat butts and actually do something about something , unless they knew they were facing a coup in their own countriesî. I donít count things like delivering grain in a bucket. The Red Cross does a much better job at that than the UN. Just ask ìJanî.

Good to finally have a minute of the good Drs time
You were always spoken well of Dr Stuhl so allow me to help you.
Korea
saved the south from the north and in the meantime probably stopped ww3 because in Korea we actually did have a UNITED WORLD,sans the soviet block.It has been all down hill since.
You may consider Gulf 1 a un sponsored event too.
NOW
you asked if they ever had any success and the above mentioned military acts were,in fact successful.
If you asked me "'was the un ever successful without direct help from the usa""then my response would be once.
In the 1970 Indian-Pak war over East Pakistan.
That particular event had China ready to go on Indias east and mother Russia looking down to Chinas north.We of course took the high road as we wanted all 4 of these nations to duke it out so we could do our thing in Vietnam.
That was 30+ years ago when my wife weighed less than her IQ and my kids were still cute.

I dont respect the un,I dont respect their faint hearted approach to hard line military regimes either..see Israel,Burma,most of Africa and the Far East.
Since we,Israel,Iraq and about 150 other nations no longer heed the world court,the un or any other global organization then perhaps we ought to move it to some place where it would be appreciated.
Tripoli,Khartoum,Gay Paris,Damascus etc....

Kofi Annan looks like a black Eddie Arcaro

Well, I four one certainly hope you scrappleface people are happy. It is because of you that people like me and comical rummy and jan are fast becoming spiteful venomous hate mongers. You make us see red with your denial of the true things that we say. Just because we don't have real "evidence" doesn't mean we aren't right, by golly! We went to war without real evidence, so you can't make us provide evidence for what we say. You need to stop relying on your "facts" and start thinking more about your feelings - deep down you know that we are right.

Comical Rummy - I understand you are a bitter person. I too suffer from feelings of inadequate impotence ever since the Republican landslide in the last election. Still, there's nothing funny about alcoholism. It's a disease, and you can get the better of it if you seek professional help. Hurry before the Republican majority that runs this country takes away the free programs available. You will find you are even more comical when you are no longer a rummy, and I would personally love to have someone recovering towards being clean and sober on the Terwiliger '04 team.

Now all the rest of you, stop the hating!

Now that I am looking at what I wrote to Comical Rummy I have decided that it should be private. The rest of you please don't read it. Thank you. Also here is a link for alcoholism. It isn't funny.

Bambi:

It's good to see your posts again.

Im sorry im not intelligent enough. But Im young and that is how I can express what I wanted to say. To say what I said before which you people got out. Since the government knowz that Saddam is in Niger, why dont they just end his death right there and then. Many pepople to me would agree on this. When I hear almost everyone,here where I live and on t.v ... they all say if they see Saddam they would want to murder him.

I guess I could blast anyone who owns a car, because all I have is a bicycle. Therefore, I can protest the sale of cars that get 100MPG. Not that I would, because I think that global warming is a bunch of hooey, and have read a lot on the subject.

Whew! I hope that sitepest Jan stays away! She said it was her last post, and it was funny, if you read it as satire... I'll bet it got lifted off some wacko left-wing website, too. It didn't seem very original, somehow.

biz,

so you're saying the US are the same as the French !
well at least we're clear. actually I think its wrong for the US, France or anyone else to exploit Iraq.
I see we've got that Iraqi oil we said we'd never touch and are using it to pay ourselves hamdsomely for rebuilding Iraq. We should let Iraqis decide how Iraq gets rebuilt

OS, which conflicting UN reports ? you mean the US spies who wanted an excuse to carry on spying on Iraq (outside their remit) against Scott Ritter, former marine, who says Iraq has been disarmed for years - a view Blix on investigating now accepts and a view the US/UK have been unable to provide ANY evidence against from their on the ground searches (despite their earlier bluster).

I would just like to post a comment regarding Jan's rant. I too found it amusing. I even played a little game with her witty retorts and unfounded accusations. As I read her post, I simply reversed all the names. Dems became Republicans, and "right wingers" became "left wingers". Try it... it's great fun, and for some strange reason it makes the piece a bit more palatable. :)

On a more serious note, playing the word switch game also illustrated for me the real truth in what she was saying, and the flagrant fact that she herself had not realized it. The truth is "right wingers" do and are most of the things she has claimed, but the same goes for "left wingers." Extremism and fundamentalism are counterproductive regardless of your political philosophy. Take for instance Lawrence vs. Texas. The vehement hatred of homosexuals by the "radical right", namely Christian Coalition types, has blinded them to the unconstitutionality of that particular Texas law. Also, when addressing the war on drugs, the moralistic desire to "rid our land of the plague of drugs" has blinded many conservatives to the unconstitutionality and destructiveness of our current drug policy. This becomes obvious when you attempt to enter into a reasoned, logical debate with someone who holds these beliefs. The mere attempt to persuade them brings about a vitriolic response. This is because to ask someone to think about their BELIEFS logically, in essence to ask them to call their personal beliefs into question, forces them to also call their faith and God into question, for this is the perceived source of their beliefs. When emotion rules over reason, the result is often nonsensical ranting.

Which leads me to the leftists. The source upon which many radically left ideals are based is followed as ìreligiouslyî by its believers as Christians and Jews follow the source of their teachings. It is, of course, the Communist Manifesto. For the liberals who do not believe this, give it a read sometime and compare itís teachings to your own personal beliefs. We have all seen and most of us have experienced legitimate efforts to logically debate a liberal. When one attempts such folly, they are lambasted with hate speech. See any NAACP debate for further evidence.

These are truths that are self-evident, to steal a phrase. These are aspects of human nature that will never change. And, dare I say, this is OK. The beauty of this nation is the fact that we can coexist and prosper along side people who harbor feeling and sentiments completely opposite of our own. This is the essence of freedom and liberty: the ability to have unpopular beliefs and say unpopular things without an oppressive governing body moving to stop you. Problems arise when any one group of people who share certain beliefs gain majority control, and seek to utilize the police power of government to force all to think, feel, speak, and behave as they do, i.e. Lawrence vs. Texas, PC laws on college campuses, and a myriad of other examples from both sides of the political sphere. When free men are not allowed to live freely, because of fundamentalism, our nation as a whole suffers.

Don't forget the "Kip Winger" types!

Let's bring back hair-band metal and acid washed jeans! (but not the mullet)

rummy
i think its best if we DON'T let the iraqi's decide how they get rebuilt. we are trying to keep them from going islamic state on us. we are going to westernize those cave men. mc donalds and wendy's are on the way for our little friends ahmed and abu abu rashad.