Democrats Will Introduce Legislation Outlawing Inflammatory Language (Video)
Posted by Jim Hoft on Sunday, January 9, 2011, 10:04 PM
Democrats will introduce a bill this week to rip apart the US Constitution.
Rep. Robert Brady (D-PA) will introduce legislation this week that will criminalize inflammatory language.
Democrats are still blaming Sarah Palin and conservatives for the shooting in Tucson by an anti-Christian, anti-Constitution, left-wing, pro-Marx, antiflag, “quite liberal” lunatic.
CNN reported:
Rep. Robert Brady, D-Pennsylvania, said he will introduce legislation making it a federal crime for a person to use language or symbols that could be perceived as threatening or inciting violence against a Member of Congress or federal official.
Brady’s decision to offer the legislation comes less than 24 hours after a gunman attempted to assassinate Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, D-Arizona, in a shooting that claimed the lives of a federal judge, and a nine year-old girl, among others.
“The president is a federal official,” Brady said in a telephone interview with CNN. “You can’t do it to him; you should not be able to do it to a congressman, senator or federal judge.
“This is not a wake up call, this is major alarms going off,” he said.
Brady is particularly incensed over a web posting by former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin during the 2010 election in which she targeted 20 House Democrats, including Giffords for political defeat. The posting showed a map of the United States with the 20 Democratic congressional districts identified by gun sights.
“You can’t put bulls eyes or crosshairs on a United States congressman or a federal official,” Brady said. “I understand this web site that had it on there is no longer in existence. Someone is feeling a little guilty.”
After the shooting democrats immediately plotted to blame the tea party for the shootings by the young leftist crackpot.
This target map appears on this page of the Democratic Leadership Committee website (dated 2004 during the Bush years).
ADVERTISEMENT
-
Featured Story:
NEWLY DISCOVERED VIDEO Previously Scrubbed From YouTube Shows Trayvon Martin Participating in Local Fight Club
Published May 21, 2012 at 12:19 am - 63 Comments
GrayRider commented:
Republicans should band together and shoot this crap down. The left always looks for an excuse to control speech and outlaw guns.
David_V. commented:
So is this idiot rep going to ban the book by Fox Piven? It calls for violence and overthrow of the gov, am i correct?
gus commented:
Free speech?? What does that mean to LIBTARDS??
Aaron commented:
Sooo, if I say “I hope president Obama gets BEAT in 2012″, can that be PERCEIVED as inflammatory language since ‘beat’ can be taken in multiple ways?
donh commented:
Looks more and more like this assassination is being welcomed by politicians of both parties as a Reichstag fire to consolidate power, end public debates, silence the people, and make audible criticism of the political class a serious personal risk for the american voter.
Bruce MacMahon commented:
Right on time.
toogoon commented:
I’ll be kinda sorry to see Ed Schultz And Keith Olberman go to Jail.
Bruce MacMahon commented:
Hey, what good is a crisis or tragedy if you can’t exploit it to further erode the civil liberties of the citizenry and expand the role of government in controlling our lives?
AuntieMadder commented:
Well, that explains this.
http://politics.blogs.foxnews.com/2011/01/09/no-way-start-year-again
With Republicans now in the majority, they planned to devote the first days of the 112th Congress to repealing the controversial health care reform law. The final vote was slated for Wednesday. But now Majority Leader Eric Cantor is yanking that legislation off the floor “so that we can take whatever actions may be necessary in light of today’s tragedy.”
justasimplepatriot commented:
I, [name], do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.
Impeachment, anyone?
Edouard commented:
Inflammatory ACCORDING TO WHOM?
Who gets to decide what’s “inflammatory”?
Criminalizing words is a horrendous precedent. Truly a slippery slope, because the border between “inflammatory” and “non-inflammatory” would forever be ill-defined and will always favor the more powerful and crush the less powerful.
This is a dagger aimed at the heart of lawful media personalities who DO NOT incite violence but whose words can be INTENTIONALLY MISINTERPRETED in order to chill lawful speech.
Brady wants Rush Limbaugh behind bars, in other words.
Do keep in mind that there is still no reason whatsoever to conclude that Jared Loughner was incited by any voice at all — except for the voices inside his own head.
chuck in st paul commented:
This is just like the poorly written sexual harrassment laws. “perceived” is the key word here. Anyone can ‘perceive’ a threat in any bloody thing you write!
We have laws concerning ‘citing to violence’. That’s all this butt biscuit needs, but then he wouldn’t be demonstrably pandering to the nutroots.
theBuckWheat commented:
Of all the deadly inflammatory language, the pen with the most blood on it belonged to Karl Marx. His followers such as Mao, Lenin, Stalin, Pol Pot, Kim Jong Il, and others were responsible for the deaths of over 100 million people.
In unrelated news, at least three top officials of this administration, White House Communications Director Anita Dunn, “green jobs czar” Van Jones, and “Manufacturing Czar” – Ron Bloom each praised Mao either directly or indirectly. But of course following Mao is not dangerous to the Republic, no not at all.
bigkahuna commented:
This jerk needs his butt kicked. Does that count enough to get me arrested ?????
Whata tool. He should be impeached immediately upon introducing such a clusterf*ck bill.
AuntieMadder commented:
donh #5: To usher in a new form of govt that is, basically, the anti-thesis of the govt envisioned and written into law by our Founding Fathers. We absolutely should not stand for this.
If this tragedy, which may or may not have had anything to do with “rhetoric,” as they like to call speech that they don’t like and/or presents them in an unflattering light (such as the light of day), then perhaps they and Congress aren’t a good fit; perhaps it’s time for a career change.
Rep Allen West, tell those cowards to stop sniveling and cowering or go home.
Jet Jaguar commented:
Is there any doubt left that the Constitution is dead? The fact that a U.S. Congressman can be thinking this, let alone introducing a bill, shows that it’s over. Trying to stop the tidal wave of Leftism by appealing to the Constitution is like trying to bail water from the Titanic with a thimble. The United States **WILL** go down, folks …secession at best – civil war at worst.
chuck in st paul commented:
[that was supposed to be "inciting to violence"... ooops]
myohmy commented:
“America is a nation of wusses.” – Ed Rendell
donh commented:
What ever happened to keeping your chin up and not allowing the terrorists to change our way of life?
pete t commented:
What a bunch of ignorant fools you are here. No such things gonna happen
AuntieMadder commented:
Bruce MacMahon #6: But it’s okay when libtards do it, you silly person, you.
bg commented:
++
don’t forget about this (via Verum Serum) and this (via HillBuzz)..
==
AuntieMadder commented:
#16 January 9, 2011 at 10:32 pm
Jet Jaguar commented:
“Trying to stop the tidal wave of Leftism by appealing to the Constitution is like trying to bail water from the Titanic with a thimble.”
It’s like trying to convince a mugger not to rob you because it’s illegal.
bigkahuna commented:
I see Obama naming The first inflamitory language czar !
Czar: Sgt Special Ed Schultz
First mate: Keith Olberman
Language interpreter:Christingles Mathews
Judge: Bill Ayers
Jury: Rachel Madcow
Executioner: Rosie Odonnel
donh commented:
It sets a very poor precedent when assassination is given the power to place an order of business in Congress. Shame on Congress for giving Jared the power to move an agenda. This invites MORE terrorism.
bg commented:
++
Jet Jaguar #16
re: [secession at best – civil war at worst.]
i respectfully disagree..
it will be Civil War at best, else Islamic
Caliphate aka Ummah States Of Allah..
==
AuntieMadder commented:
I guess Jodie Foster should feel fortunate that Congress didn’t write legislation outlawing her back in the early 80s.
Gringo commented:
Here is Senator Kerry speaking to Bill Maher in 2006: “I could have gone to 1600 Pennsylvania and killed the real bird with one stone.”
Perhaps we could pass the legislation, ignore such niceties as Ex Post Facto, and arrest Senator Kerry for that statement.
Sandy commented:
So one lunatic with a handgun is going to turn it all around for the Dems? HA… How about Jobs, the foreclosure rate among voters who supported Obama in 08 and an economy in freefall. How about the deterioration in respect the rest of the world has for the USA and the fact that nobody cares what we think anymore?
Sounds like an even more divisive atmosphere as we head into 2012 and as far as attacking Palin and the Tea Party they have been doing that right along and its gone nowhere. To the Dems I say GO AWAY AND COME BACK ANOTHER DAY WHEN YOU ACTUALLY START CARING ABOUT THE PEOPLE OF THIS COUNTRY.
Slappy commented:
pete t (#20): “What a bunch of ignorant fools you are here. No such things gonna happen
Says the most ignorant fool on this site. Your side is going to introduce legislation this week that will “make it a federal crime for a person to use language or symbols that could be perceived as threatening or inciting violence against a Member of Congress or federal official,” but yet you call conservatives fools. Unbelievable. Although it’s unlikely that “ignorant fools” will be deemed as inflammatory, maybe some of the negative things you’ve said in the past about Republican public officials would be deemed a federal crime. How would you feel about that? Or do you just figure the legislation will only apply to conservatives?
Swifty commented:
As usual, they keep ignoring the millions of us still employed because of their lefty wet dreams. Focus, Dems. Where are the jobs after your big stimulus pranks on our future? Stop punking us and get out of the way.
Rhymes With Right commented:
Interesting, isn’t it, that the Left in this country are ready to honor the gun-owning Congresswoman who read the First Amendment on the floor of the House last wee by seeking to eviscerate both freedom of speech and the right to keep and bear arms.
Patriotic Americans must make it clear that if any politician who pins targets on the First and Second Amendments will have targets pinned on them as well come the next election.
http://rhymeswithright.mu.nu/archives/310462.php
Swifty commented:
Should read: unemployed. (I hate laptop keyboards, but mainly I hate typing.)
Taxpayer1234 commented:
A word of advice to Dems: If you want to keep your day jobs, DO NOT mess with the First Amendment.
Taqiyyotomist commented:
What is next? Almost afraid to ask.
What to do? Better pray to the God of Israel. Right quick. On knees.
And get ready to witness what too many in Europe and Asia already have.
This is Judgement on America. Chuck your idols in the trash.
Wil commented:
Taxpayer1234
Your post should have been, A word of advice to Democrats. If you want to be forcefully returned to whatever job you had prior to becoming a Congressman , Do NOT mess with the First amendment.
bg commented:
++
Frances Fox Piven Rings in The New
Year By Calling for Violent Revolution
[She’s considered by many as the grandmother of using the American welfare state to implement revolution. Make people dependent on the government, overload the government rolls, and once government services become unsustainable, the people will rise up, overthrow the oppressive capitalist system, and finally create income equality. Collapse the system and create a new one. [.]
In a chilling and almost unbelievable editorial again in The Nation (”Mobilizing the Jobless,” January 10/17, 2011 edition), she calls on the jobless to rise up in a violent show of solidarity and force. As before, those calls are dripping with language of class struggle. Language she and her late husband Richard Cloward made popular in the 60s.
“So where are the angry crowds, the demonstrations,
sit-ins and unruly mobs?” she writes.[.]
“[T]he out-of-work have to stop blaming themselves for their hard times
and turn their anger on the bosses, the bureaucrats or the politicians who
are in fact responsible.”
Only then, once their rage has been properly stoked, can the angry take
action. And when they do, sh[e] says, the “protesters need targets.”
For Piven, the best “targets” are the people or organizations “capable of
making some kind of response to angry demands.” Regular demands, notice,
just won’t do. No, people must be fired up and not easily deterred. Angry
and not quickly placated.[.]
seems to me that Jared and Frances have a lot in “creative”
common, they also repeat their “creative” selves quite often..
the only reason i can think of as to why the idiots can’t see
the writing on the wall is, they’re are the ones wrote on it..
which, in turn, is why they see us as being the idiots, and so far i have to
agree, also wouldn’t say we (the American people) have the advantage at
the moment, and imho, it’s only going to worsen..
==
joscefi commented:
“Rep. Robert Brady, D-Pennsylvania, said he will introduce legislation making it a federal crime for a person to use language or symbols that could be perceived as threatening or inciting violence against a Member of Congress or federal official.”
“…crime for a person to use language or symbols that could be perceived as…”
It’s ironic that Congresswoman Gifford was the one who read the First Amendment during the opening session of the 112th Congress, where was Congressman Brady during this?
Rock commented:
And of course we all know how equally Obama and his Justice Department under Holder apply the law. Maybe Obama’s Manufacturing CZAR Ron Bloom comment about we kinda agree with Mao that political power comes largely from the barrel of a gun. So White House staff see’s guns as a tool for control and Mr. Robert Brady is fine with that, more B/S.
gus commented:
Libtard goes ape shyte. Murders several. Targets a Democrat Congresswoman. Kills a little child.
The SHOOTER is a LEFT WINGER.
So the MEDIA template is about. RIGHT WING OVERHEATED RHETORIC.
Libtard kills, wounds, maims and attacks. The LEFT WING MEDIA TEMPLATE IS; Right wing HATE SPEECH and HATE SPEECH POLITICAL RHETORIC???
Libtards INCLUDING PRESIDENT DIMWIT O’GROOVIE. Have used VIOLENT METAPHORS over and over again.
LIBTARD GETS VIOLENT!!
SARAH PALIN and RUSH LIMBAUGH are blamed.
There is a reckoning ON THE WAY.
echo commented:
Gus,
I feel your pain.
The USA was attacked by mostly Saudis on 9/11, and zero Iraqis. Soon thereafter, we invaded Iraq and continued to have the ear of Saudi Arabia. Sometimes, things don’t jibe.
Martini is dry.
bg commented:
++
echo #42
iow: duh..
==
==
Taqiyyotomist commented:
echo, I agree, we should have gone after Saudi Arabia, even before taking out Bin Ladin at Tora Bora in Afghanistan.
Where you have beclowned yourself is equating the invasion of Iraq with 9/11.
That invasion was predicated on the 14 U.N. resolutions which Iraq was in defiance of, and the WMD programs which every single intel agency in the world agreed were in full swing.
Do you not recall that even the entire Clinton administration was beating that drum way back in 1998?
“[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq’s refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs.” — From a letter signed by Joe Lieberman, Dianne Feinstein, Barbara A. Milulski, Tom Daschle, & John Kerry among others on October 9, 1998
“This December will mark three years since United Nations inspectors last visited Iraq. There is no doubt that since that time, Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to refine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer- range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies.” — From a December 6, 2001 letter signed by Bob Graham, Joe Lieberman, Harold Ford, & Tom Lantos among others
“Saddam’s goal … is to achieve the lifting of U.N. sanctions while retaining and enhancing Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction programs. We cannot, we must not and we will not let him succeed.” — Madeline Albright, 1998
“Iraq made commitments after the Gulf War to completely dismantle all weapons of mass destruction, and unfortunately, Iraq has not lived up to its agreement.” — Barbara Boxer, November 8, 2002
“The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retained some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capability. Intelligence reports also indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons, but has not yet achieved nuclear capability.” — Robert Byrd, October 2002
“What is at stake is how to answer the potential threat Iraq represents with the risk of proliferation of WMD. Baghdad’s regime did use such weapons in the past. Today, a number of evidences may lead to think that, over the past four years, in the absence of international inspectors, this country has continued armament programs.” — Jacques Chirac, October 16, 2002
“The community of nations may see more and more of the very kind of threat Iraq poses now: a rogue state with weapons of mass destruction, ready to use them or provide them to terrorists. If we fail to respond today, Saddam and all those who would follow in his footsteps will be emboldened tomorrow.” — Bill Clinton in 1998
“In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including Al Qaeda members, though there is apparently no evidence of his involvement in the terrible events of September 11, 2001. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons. Should he succeed in that endeavor, he could alter the political and security landscape of the Middle East, which as we know all too well affects American security.” — Hillary Clinton, October 10, 2002
“I am absolutely convinced that there are weapons…I saw evidence back in 1998 when we would see the inspectors being barred from gaining entry into a warehouse for three hours with trucks rolling up and then moving those trucks out.” — Clinton’s Secretary of Defense William Cohen in April of 2003
“Iraq is not the only nation in the world to possess weapons of mass destruction, but it is the only nation with a leader who has used them against his own people.” — Tom Daschle in 1998
“Saddam Hussein’s regime represents a grave threat to America and our allies, including our vital ally, Israel. For more than two decades, Saddam Hussein has sought weapons of mass destruction through every available means. We know that he has chemical and biological weapons. He has already used them against his neighbors and his own people, and is trying to build more. We know that he is doing everything he can to build nuclear weapons, and we know that each day he gets closer to achieving that goal.” — John Edwards, Oct 10, 2002
“I share the administration’s goals in dealing with Iraq and its weapons of mass destruction.” — Dick Gephardt in September of 2002
“Iraq does pose a serious threat to the stability of the Persian Gulf and we should organize an international coalition to eliminate his access to weapons of mass destruction. Iraq’s search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to completely deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power.” — Al Gore, 2002
“We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction.” — Bob Graham, December 2002
“We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction.” — Ted Kennedy, September 27, 2002
“I will be voting to give the president of the United States the authority to use force – if necessary – to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security.” — John F. Kerry, Oct 2002
“We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandates of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them.” — Carl Levin, Sept 19, 2002
“Over the years, Iraq has worked to develop nuclear, chemical and biological weapons. During 1991 – 1994, despite Iraq’s denials, U.N. inspectors discovered and dismantled a large network of nuclear facilities that Iraq was using to develop nuclear weapons. Various reports indicate that Iraq is still actively pursuing nuclear weapons capability. There is no reason to think otherwise. Beyond nuclear weapons, Iraq has actively pursued biological and chemical weapons.U.N. inspectors have said that Iraq’s claims about biological weapons is neither credible nor verifiable. In 1986, Iraq used chemical weapons against Iran, and later, against its own Kurdish population. While weapons inspections have been successful in the past, there have been no inspections since the end of 1998. There can be no doubt that Iraq has continued to pursue its goal of obtaining weapons of mass destruction.” — Patty Murray, October 9, 2002
“As a member of the House Intelligence Committee, I am keenly aware that the proliferation of chemical and biological weapons is an issue of grave importance to all nations. Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process.” — Nancy Pelosi, December 16, 1998
“Even today, Iraq is not nearly disarmed. Based on highly credible intelligence, UNSCOM [the U.N. weapons inspectors] suspects that Iraq still has biological agents like anthrax, botulinum toxin, and clostridium perfringens in sufficient quantity to fill several dozen bombs and ballistic missile warheads, as well as the means to continue manufacturing these deadly agents. Iraq probably retains several tons of the highly toxic VX substance, as well as sarin nerve gas and mustard gas. This agent is stored in artillery shells, bombs, and ballistic missile warheads. And Iraq retains significant dual-use industrial infrastructure that can be used to rapidly reconstitute large-scale chemical weapons production.” — Ex-Un Weapons Inspector Scott Ritter in 1998
“There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years. And that may happen sooner if he can obtain access to enriched uranium from foreign sources — something that is not that difficult in the current world. We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction.” — John Rockefeller, Oct 10, 2002
“Saddam’s existing biological and chemical weapons capabilities pose a very real threat to America, now. Saddam has used chemical weapons before, both against Iraq’s enemies and against his own people. He is working to develop delivery systems like missiles and unmanned aerial vehicles that could bring these deadly weapons against U.S. forces and U.S. facilities in the Middle East.” — John Rockefeller, Oct 10, 2002
“Whether one agrees or disagrees with the Administration’s policy towards Iraq, I don’t think there can be any question about Saddam’s conduct. He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do. He lies and cheats; he snubs the mandate and authority of international weapons inspectors; and he games the system to keep buying time against enforcement of the just and legitimate demands of the United Nations, the Security Council, the United States and our allies. Those are simply the facts.” — Henry Waxman, Oct 10, 2002
I guess all those Dems were hoodwinked by GW Bush and the evil Repubs, while Bush was still in Texas. Or maybe he went back in time with his time machine and fooled them somehow.
OR, maybe you are a tool with no idea of what’s what.
I’m gonna go with the latter, from evidence I’ve witnessed in the past few days here.
Taqiyyotomist commented:
It was all a Republican-led time-travelling mind-control experiment.
THAT’S it. Has to be, right echo?
Taqiyyotomist commented:
CLINTON: Good evening.
Earlier today, I ordered America’s armed forces to strike military and security targets in Iraq. They are joined by British forces. Their mission is to attack Iraq’s nuclear, chemical and biological weapons programs and its military capacity to threaten its neighbors.
Their purpose is to protect the national interest of the United States, and indeed the interests of people throughout the Middle East and around the world.
Saddam Hussein must not be allowed to threaten his neighbors or the world with nuclear arms, poison gas or biological weapons.
I want to explain why I have decided, with the unanimous recommendation of my national security team, to use force in Iraq; why we have acted now; and what we aim to accomplish.
Six weeks ago, Saddam Hussein announced that he would no longer cooperate with the United Nations weapons inspectors called UNSCOM. They are highly professional experts from dozens of countries. Their job is to oversee the elimination of Iraq’s capability to retain, create and use weapons of mass destruction, and to verify that Iraq does not attempt to rebuild that capability.
The inspectors undertook this mission first 7.5 years ago at the end of the Gulf War when Iraq agreed to declare and destroy its arsenal as a condition of the ceasefire.
The international community had good reason to set this requirement. Other countries possess weapons of mass destruction and ballistic missiles. With Saddam, there is one big difference: He has used them. Not once, but repeatedly. Unleashing chemical weapons against Iranian troops during a decade-long war. Not only against soldiers, but against civilians, firing Scud missiles at the citizens of Israel, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain and Iran. And not only against a foreign enemy, but even against his own people, gassing Kurdish civilians in Northern Iraq.
The international community had little doubt then, and I have no doubt today, that left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will use these terrible weapons again.
The United States has patiently worked to preserve UNSCOM as Iraq has sought to avoid its obligation to cooperate with the inspectors. On occasion, we’ve had to threaten military force, and Saddam has backed down.
Faced with Saddam’s latest act of defiance in late October, we built intensive diplomatic pressure on Iraq backed by overwhelming military force in the region. The UN Security Council voted 15 to zero to condemn Saddam’s actions and to demand that he immediately come into compliance.
Eight Arab nations — Egypt, Syria, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar, United Arab Emirates and Oman — warned that Iraq alone would bear responsibility for the consequences of defying the UN.
When Saddam still failed to comply, we prepared to act militarily. It was only then at the last possible moment that Iraq backed down. It pledged to the UN that it had made, and I quote, a clear and unconditional decision to resume cooperation with the weapons inspectors.
I decided then to call off the attack with our airplanes already in the air because Saddam had given in to our demands. I concluded then that the right thing to do was to use restraint and give Saddam one last chance to prove his willingness to cooperate.
I made it very clear at that time what unconditional cooperation meant, based on existing UN resolutions and Iraq’s own commitments. And along with Prime Minister Blair of Great Britain, I made it equally clear that if Saddam failed to cooperate fully, we would be prepared to act without delay, diplomacy or warning.
Now over the past three weeks, the UN weapons inspectors have carried out their plan for testing Iraq’s cooperation. The testing period ended this weekend, and last night, UNSCOM’s chairman, Richard Butler, reported the results to UN Secretary-General Annan.
The conclusions are stark, sobering and profoundly disturbing.
In four out of the five categories set forth, Iraq has failed to cooperate. Indeed, it actually has placed new restrictions on the inspectors. Here are some of the particulars.
Iraq repeatedly blocked UNSCOM from inspecting suspect sites. For example, it shut off access to the headquarters of its ruling party and said it will deny access to the party’s other offices, even though UN resolutions make no exception for them and UNSCOM has inspected them in the past.
Iraq repeatedly restricted UNSCOM’s ability to obtain necessary evidence. For example, Iraq obstructed UNSCOM’s effort to photograph bombs related to its chemical weapons program.
It tried to stop an UNSCOM biological weapons team from videotaping a site and photocopying documents and prevented Iraqi personnel from answering UNSCOM’s questions.
Prior to the inspection of another site, Iraq actually emptied out the building, removing not just documents but even the furniture and the equipment.
Iraq has failed to turn over virtually all the documents requested by the inspectors. Indeed, we know that Iraq ordered the destruction of weapons-related documents in anticipation of an UNSCOM inspection.
So Iraq has abused its final chance.
As the UNSCOM reports concludes, and again I quote, “Iraq’s conduct ensured that no progress was able to be made in the fields of disarmament.
“In light of this experience, and in the absence of full cooperation by Iraq, it must regrettably be recorded again that the commission is not able to conduct the work mandated to it by the Security Council with respect to Iraq’s prohibited weapons program.”
In short, the inspectors are saying that even if they could stay in Iraq, their work would be a sham.
Saddam’s deception has defeated their effectiveness. Instead of the inspectors disarming Saddam, Saddam has disarmed the inspectors.
This situation presents a clear and present danger to the stability of the Persian Gulf and the safety of people everywhere. The international community gave Saddam one last chance to resume cooperation with the weapons inspectors. Saddam has failed to seize the chance.
And so we had to act and act now.
Let me explain why.
First, without a strong inspection system, Iraq would be free to retain and begin to rebuild its chemical, biological and nuclear weapons programs in months, not years.
Second, if Saddam can crippled the weapons inspection system and get away with it, he would conclude that the international community — led by the United States — has simply lost its will. He will surmise that he has free rein to rebuild his arsenal of destruction, and someday — make no mistake — he will use it again as he has in the past.
Third, in halting our air strikes in November, I gave Saddam a chance, not a license. If we turn our backs on his defiance, the credibility of U.S. power as a check against Saddam will be destroyed. We will not only have allowed Saddam to shatter the inspection system that controls his weapons of mass destruction program; we also will have fatally undercut the fear of force that stops Saddam from acting to gain domination in the region.
That is why, on the unanimous recommendation of my national security team — including the vice president, the secretary of defense, the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, the secretary of state and the national security adviser — I have ordered a strong, sustained series of air strikes against Iraq.
They are designed to degrade Saddam’s capacity to develop and deliver weapons of mass destruction, and to degrade his ability to threaten his neighbors.
At the same time, we are delivering a powerful message to Saddam. If you act recklessly, you will pay a heavy price. We acted today because, in the judgment of my military advisers, a swift response would provide the most surprise and the least opportunity for Saddam to prepare.
If we had delayed for even a matter of days from Chairman Butler’s report, we would have given Saddam more time to disperse his forces and protect his weapons.
Also, the Muslim holy month of Ramadan begins this weekend. For us to initiate military action during Ramadan would be profoundly offensive to the Muslim world and, therefore, would damage our relations with Arab countries and the progress we have made in the Middle East.
That is something we wanted very much to avoid without giving Iraq’s a month’s head start to prepare for potential action against it.
Finally, our allies, including Prime Minister Tony Blair of Great Britain, concurred that now is the time to strike. I hope Saddam will come into cooperation with the inspection system now and comply with the relevant UN Security Council resolutions. But we have to be prepared that he will not, and we must deal with the very real danger he poses.
So we will pursue a long-term strategy to contain Iraq and its weapons of mass destruction and work toward the day when Iraq has a government worthy of its people.
First, we must be prepared to use force again if Saddam takes threatening actions, such as trying to reconstitute his weapons of mass destruction or their delivery systems, threatening his neighbors, challenging allied aircraft over Iraq or moving against his own Kurdish citizens.
The credible threat to use force, and when necessary, the actual use of force, is the surest way to contain Saddam’s weapons of mass destruction program, curtail his aggression and prevent another Gulf War.
Second, so long as Iraq remains out of compliance, we will work with the international community to maintain and enforce economic sanctions. Sanctions have cost Saddam more than $120 billion — resources that would have been used to rebuild his military. The sanctions system allows Iraq to sell oil for food, for medicine, for other humanitarian supplies for the Iraqi people.
We have no quarrel with them. But without the sanctions, we would see the oil-for-food program become oil-for-tanks, resulting in a greater threat to Iraq’s neighbors and less food for its people.
The hard fact is that so long as Saddam remains in power, he threatens the well-being of his people, the peace of his region, the security of the world.
The best way to end that threat once and for all is with a new Iraqi government — a government ready to live in peace with its neighbors, a government that respects the rights of its people. Bringing change in Baghdad will take time and effort. We will strengthen our engagement with the full range of Iraqi opposition forces and work with them effectively and prudently.
The decision to use force is never cost-free. Whenever American forces are placed in harm’s way, we risk the loss of life. And while our strikes are focused on Iraq’s military capabilities, there will be unintended Iraqi casualties.
Indeed, in the past, Saddam has intentionally placed Iraqi civilians in harm’s way in a cynical bid to sway international opinion.
We must be prepared for these realities. At the same time, Saddam should have absolutely no doubt if he lashes out at his neighbors, we will respond forcefully.
Heavy as they are, the costs of action must be weighed against the price of inaction. If Saddam defies the world and we fail to respond, we will face a far greater threat in the future. Saddam will strike again at his neighbors. He will make war on his own people.
And mark my words, he will develop weapons of mass destruction. He will deploy them, and he will use them.
Because we’re acting today, it is less likely that we will face these dangers in the future.
Let me close by addressing one other issue. Saddam Hussein and the other enemies of peace may have thought that the serious debate currently before the House of Representatives would distract Americans or weaken our resolve to face him down.
But once more, the United States has proven that although we are never eager to use force, when we must act in America’s vital interests, we will do so.
In the century we’re leaving, America has often made the difference between chaos and community, fear and hope. Now, in the new century, we’ll have a remarkable opportunity to shape a future more peaceful than the past, but only if we stand strong against the enemies of peace.
Tonight, the United States is doing just that. May God bless and protect the brave men and women who are carrying out this vital mission and their families. And may God bless America.
===
Waste of time, I know. echo will not see. none so blind as those like echo.
rbosque commented:
This would mean that NBC would have to shut down.
Andreas K. commented:
Brady has always been a nutter and a liar.
But I think this is doubleplusgood. It will rout out all the doublethink. All the crimethink will cease and only goodthink will rule. Right?
So get used to it: http://www.newspeakdictionary.com/
Granny commented:
BTW – this proposed “law” applies to ANY Federal official – which means that you had better not talk back to the TSA hack at the airport. ALL Federal employees.
Andreas K. commented:
It already started: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/01/07/passport-applications-soon-gender-neutral/
echo commented:
Taqi,
I am a bit too tired and world-weary right now to unearth the litany of book-cooking that went into the actual invasion of Iraq —- remember, it’s one thing to flirt with a woman and be told she’s a scandalous vamp, and another to actually attack, ravish, and defile her —- but everyone without a dog in the fight will tell you that the fix was in, and you should be able to deduce that even without reading the NeoCons’ anticipatory mission statement in A New American Century, the Downey Street memo, any of the articles about the Niger forgery or any of the 25 books or so about the fiasco. I will just say that if somebody empowers a president to act on something, they do so in good faith. When that same president actually enables or even creates the bad information that other possibly well-intentioned pols sign off on, then he certainly should get impeached. And so I laugh when your voluptuaries herein call for Obama’s impeachment, and he doesn’t even have blood on his hands…
Good night, sweet prince (of darkness).
Hope you won’t remain benighted long, for enlightenment is just a nice Keith Olbermann installment away.
Martini is dry.
silent_rage commented:
WHAT?! The democrats had a map as well?! An apology to Palin please.
zdp 189 commented:
I imagine this is a clever effort to try to spread the “Sarah did it” meme. The bill has no chance but they will get lots of pub. It doesn’t have to make sense or stand up to scrutiny, it just has to be repeated as many times as possible. Not unlike the Bush-WMD thing. Or another example is in the 1990′s when Gingrich talked about orphanages, and the left TV talking heads put the word on endless loop.
That’s what I think is going on here. The right has to be fairly smart in responding, or we will lose. Fortunately Palin tends to be pretty good at this sort of thing, and it will be interesting to see how she handles it in the coming week.
CattusMagnus commented:
Wait a minute. This guys wants to pass a law protecting only FEDERAL OFFICIALS from inflammatory language? What about the rest of us?! Don’t average Americans deserve the same protection? Jackass. But Sarah Palin isn’t a federal official anymore so it will be open season on her.
Radegunda commented:
We already know that when conservatives say things like “cut taxes” or “stop the deficit spending” or “don’t mess with our health care,” Democrats “perceive” it as “threatening or inciting violence.” They’ve explicitly said that “tax cut” is “code” for racism.
Democrats “perceive” conservatism as threatening. So, they’ll try to outlaw any political statements by conservatives.
Aussie commented:
I think that this is one bill that will be shot down in flames (ooops cannot help that language!!)
If this was to pass in the Congress it would be immediately challenged in the SCOTUS and I am certain that the 5 justices would strike it down because it would be a blatant attempt to chill free speech… for those who bothered to read Citizens United case, the 5 justices were most concerned with the free speech aspects of the case, which is why they struck down certain provisions of the McCain-Feingold legislation, but left intact the law relating to foreign donations.
squeaky commented:
#56 January 10, 2011 at 3:55 am
Radegunda commented
isn’t that the truth…there was an oped in a chicago paper yesterday talking about the hot rhetoric of the last two years – as if the previous 8 years were a time of love and harmony. not good when they attempt to stiffle even the most subdued complaint or criticism under a ton of b.s. as if history started just over 2 years ago.
Arch commented:
In the last election, Americans told these fools we want more freedom, not less. If more people in Tucson had exercised their Second Amendment rights, not even the limp-wrist democrats would not be talking about limiting everyone’s First Amendment rights.
What evidence do we have that this dope-head, communist loser was motivated by inflammatory language?
We already have laws against incitement. What constitutes this new inflammatory language?
In Politico, Brady, an uneducated union thug, will “introduce a bill that would make it a crime for anyone to use language or symbols that could be seen as threatening or violent against a federal official, including a member of Congress.”
On his website, the first image we see is Brady man wearing a boxing glove. What, exactly, do boxing gloves symbolize?
http://www.brady.house.gov/
RedBeard commented:
Well I, for one, am pleased as punch that Congressman Bobby “Stifle Yourself” Brady is going to stop all the vicious smack talk coming from Barack Obama. Will it now be an impeachable offense for The One to say, “If they bring a knife to the fight, we bring a gun?”
Tricky_Dick commented:
Does that mean we’ll finally get those two lunatics. Schultz, and Olbermann off of MSNBC????
Liz commented:
An the Commie libs will be the ones in charge of deciding what is inflammatory.
Ginger commented:
It is time to arrest the fraud in the white house….. If they bring a knife you bring a gun! More and more of his hate speach! Oh, please Lord
John Lee Pettimoore III commented:
If rhetoric causes assassinations then why are George W. Bush, Dick Cheney still alive and unharmed after all the crap directed at them for eight years? Answer that all you who are so incensed and playing the blame game. All of you weren’t concerned and wanting to tone it down during those times because it helped your agenda. Hypocrites one and all.
Muffin commented:
Inflammatory language. Like, “If they bring a knife, we bring a gun?” Yep, it incites violence, jail those people. Start with POTUS and let’s make a public example out of those daring to use this violent rhetoric.
Muffin commented:
Unions would have to disband and be jailed also. The list goes on.
Rio commented:
This representative did a less than stellar, must see interview with Gretchen a few minutes ago. Hard to believe he appeared on that evil FOX network or that he was elected into the House, he’s more in the line of a ward boss, union goon, precinct fixer. I’d have to be embarrassed to have him as my representative.
Ginger commented:
I think it is so funny that the liberal/communist/socialist pigs can not control themselves since we are finally standing up to the BULLIES!
Yep! What goes around comes around!
Poosh commented:
The democrats have the most to loose from this legislation – ironically
Poosh commented:
*lose
Bunni commented:
Of course we knew they wouldn’t let a crisis go to waste. The bodies aren’t even cold yet! They should be ashamed of themselves!
Thanks for keeping on top of these developments so perfectly, Jim.
I linked you in my latest post about this event!
http://amusingbunni.blogspot.com/2011/01/alex-jones-take-on-az-shooter.html
Ricky Vines commented:
Will this restrict only the Conservatives. How about the Liberals and Obama whose hoodlum, gangsta, criminal, violent vitrol has poisoned the air more than anyone.
Obama: “They Bring a Knife…We Bring a Gun”
Obama to His Followers: “Get in Their Faces!”
Obama on ACORN Mobs: “I don’t want to quell anger. I think people are right to be angry! I’m angry!”
Obama to His Mercenary Army: “Hit Back Tw…ice As Hard”
Obama on the private sector: “We talk to these folks… so I know whose ass to kick.“
Obama to voters: Republican victory would mean “hand to hand combat”
Obama to lib supporters: “It’s time to Fight for it.”
Obama to Latino supporters: “Punish your enemies.”
Obama to democrats: “I’m itching for a fight.”
Obama to Latino supporters: “Punish your enemies.”
Obama to democrats: “I’m itching for a fight.”
Mad Hatter commented:
Then the speech Nazi’s better go after one of their own.
Dylan Ratigan ask if it’s time for violent revolution.
From Nov 9th or 10th, just after the mid terms.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-4n4YSF8BsQ
bg commented:
++
Mad Hatter #80
oh my, what a find, no wonder the left is changing their tune..
and i’m more than certain there’s more to come that will prove leftist
culpability v their all too obviously ridiculous targeting of Sarah Plain..
==
bg commented:
++
Cloward & Piven
Obama & The Greens
IslaMarxism flashback
IslaMarxism flashforward
NWO
more & links @ links..
==
bg commented:
++
Taq #46
thank you..
and here’s a link..
==
EdgarLongenecker commented:
The pussywillow trees, are, hiding….