SwiftVets.com

[Doc Jerry]

Does anyone know how to just post a transcript? Heck with trying to download it. I've been unsuccessful myself. A transcript would be nice.

[Rdtf]

I called media research and spoke to a guy in their IT dept - he is working on it - he will call and e-mail me back with a better link in a few...stay tuned...

[Rdtf]

It should work now- see email below-

Thank you for contacting MRC to inform us of the problem you (and many others) were experiencing. I've taken a look at the problem and found out what was blocking you from viewing the RealPlayer video file from our website. The problem has been corrected and you should now be able to access the video file.

This link http://www.mediaresearch.org/rm/cyber/2004/binladen061704/segment1.ram

should now be working properly. I am also sending you the link to the story where the video and transcript are posted within the website. The link is as follows: http://www.mediaresearch.org/cyberalerts/2004/cyb20040617.asp#1


If you encounter any other difficulties regarding either link or anything else on www.mediaresearch.org please feel free to email me so I can correct the problem as soon as possible.

Thank you again.

Sincerely,
Mez Djouadi

Media Research Center
Webmaster

[Chuck Z Ombie AC2000]

Still cant connect to the clip
_________________
John Kerry, R.I.P. (Rot In Paris)

[Stevie]

[Rdtf]

[Chuck Z Ombie AC2000]

This played on Hannity today
_________________
John Kerry, R.I.P. (Rot In Paris)

[Somebunny]

There was someone on Fox News talking about this, this morning. I didn't catch his name but he is the producer of another documentary about the war in Iraq.

[dcornutt]

Let the player come up. Then wait a min. Then hit "play" button. It took about a min or 2..and hitting play twice...but I finally got it to play.

Of course, the MSM will dismiss this. "Based on intelligence sources". Everything that says that...they will dismiss as being false. But, it's what we knew at the time, and it's "why" Iraq presented a grave threat to us..and why the decision was made to take up Iraq, and back it with the use of force. They can't dismiss Osama's own words..nor the images of Iraqi officals in Sudan. But, they can, and will, entirely dismiss what it means...as it relates to Iraq..because all of that is based on intel source assessments.

What many don't realize is..that the reason we broke from the UN process to take out Saddam, was beause of 2 things. 1) Saddam was not complying fully with resolution 1441 (even in regards to parts of the inspection process) and 2) the UNSC not only failed to enforce those provisions Saddam was not complying to..but threatened veto (France) over anything further we tabled...in order to force the process forward with no timelimit...and not threat of force.

Those 2 events..do not even meet "Kerry's" own standard of what he outlined in his own Senate speech regarding his vote to authorize force. He, in typical fashion...went to the UNSC memebers himself ..and said he had assurances from them they understood the seriousness of the matter and would in fact enforce the resolution (1441) should Saddam not comply.

Well? Saddam wasn't complying fully with 1441..and evidently they changed their mind. I have a copy of the resolution that the US/UK/Spain tried to jointly sponsor at that time...the 2nd resolution..that France threatened to veto. It has nothing in it about "force". It only stiuplates the areas that Saddam had yet to comply with under 1441 process and put a timelimit on him to comply. That's it. France veto'ed it because it had a timelimit in it..and they described any effort to threaten force via the UNSC as "difficult" and that inspections continuing was "easier" and therefore should continue given what progress /cooperation had been made (despite it not meeting the conditions of 1441)

What this effectively did..at the UNSC was to remove any threat of force from Saddam...with his non-compliance still pending. ANNNNNKKK...wrong. Further, the threat of veto to anything further..even in regards to stating those areas he was still out of compliance and having a timelimit on it...ended the diplomatic process at the UN. The US would either accept a non-1441 process..with no timelimit and no use of force..or pullout. Further, they, other UNSC members suggested that inspection would serve as containment and negate any threat to US national security while ongoing. Some of them openly admitted that Saddam was not complying as to the letter of 1441 but discounted american security conerns at that stage..as sufficiently covered by the current process. ANNNNKKKK wrong.

Kerry says we rushed to war. For over a decade..this has been going on. And it was already well known..despite better access along the way..that inspection/containment had failed to bring this to a verifiable close. IN fact..if you read 1441..it clearly acknowledges this..and a NEW process to be put in place...that was immediate, without condition, etc...to ensure that "verifiable" disaramament could take place.

Dems would have us believe that because no WMD stockpiles have been found that the war was therefore unjustified. But, the truth is...no WMD stockpiles have been found in Iraq since 1991!!! Only , evidence..that SAddam was not telling the truth about the scope and depth and history of his WMD..that left descrepancies..and open questions..that NO ONE..including even Blix in the last days of this..could say by "looking" whether or not Saddam did or did not still persue them..or hang on to some..or have undeclared things. Because we have, over the years found documentation and other evidence that proves...that he was lieing..and always had. Saddam could not answer the questions, nor make a full declaration..nor provide those documents..etc that would have led to his "verifiable disarmament" under resolution 687 provisions....without having to reveal his "intent" and full history of WMD programs..which would have led to even MORE questions and more doubt and probably..more inspection and continued sanction. Because he never gave up the intent or desire to have an continue a path to WMD and means to deliver them anyway he could.

All of that..happened ...from 91 on..without ever finding any more stockpiles or actual WMD. And yet..Saddam remained..a "threat to interntional peace and security" ...according to every UN resolution passed. And "these conditions"...are what constituted an even more immeidate threat..post 9/11. It has always been..the basis of threat assessment...done..with the full knoweldge that no further WMD stockpiles, believed to exist...were ever found in Iraq since 91.

I know I'm preaching to the choir here..but wanted to add this to the discussion because of all the BS and spin that has come about since OIF, these things..even Saddam's history, have been either ignored, misrepresented or reinvented in some way.

Bush did not break his promise to the American people. He agreed..via pressure from within the US gov..and others..to take this to the UN for the purpose of offering one last chance for Saddam to "willingly" disarm in a verifiable way under the conditions set out in 1441...immediately, unconditionally..OR..we would lead a coalition to disarm him and Saddam would loose his regime.

Who broke their promise and obligations in this to Sen Kerry? Saddam did for one. And so did the UNSC memebers..who promised him they understood the situation and would enforce the resolution. The same body that had for YEARS not upheld the resolutions in Iraq. The same body that KErry wants to use as our "global test" for any force we use in the world to deal with national security issues that do not involve a direct response to an immediate attack against our homeland. I got news for Kerry...when the next 9/11 happens..you aren't going to see any UN troops here picking up the pieces of your loved ones.

The 9/11 commission clearly, clearly...said..this has been OUR failure..over many years..to take the steps and actions necessary to understand the seriousness of the threats we faced..and respond to it to protect ourselves. It didn't say that we failed to work through the UN to stop this. It said..WE failed..to recognize we were in a "WAR" and to act approrpiately at certain times to protect ourselves. WE let stuff go..at the UN and elsewhere..that we should not have. Stuff that the UN and other countries who have their "own" security interests (sometimes hostile to ours)...might be opposed to.

Kerry..is both an idiot..and an opportunist. And always has been.

[dcornutt]

2 months before 9/11..state run media ran an article about Osama's coming strike against us. In it..the actual parts of the quote mentioned above were:
“will strike America on the arm that is already hurting,” and that the US “will curse the memory of Frank Sinatra every time he hears his songs” – an apparent reference to the Sinatra classic, “New York, New York”.