Despite "stockpiles" of Saddam's WMD in the hands of jihadists, the Left still blame Bush

The "irrational" Left is at it again, trying to provide cover for Obama's malfeasance by blaming his predecessor:

McCain is right; it could have been avoided. If, in the aftermath of 9/11, President George W. Bush had treated the arguments of Feith, McCain, and other advocates of the Iraq War with the disdain they deserved, we (and the Iraqis) wouldn’t be where we are today.

Iraq is imploding because Sunni and Shiite have warred against each other for more than a thousand years. This is what Islam does.

So, yes. Put the blame where it belongs. Some of it on a president who didn't know and didn't learn but had to do something in light of 9/11. (And he was right about Saddam's "stockpiles.") Pile a more generous helping on his successor who, being the "smartest president ever" and a(n allegedly) former Muslim, must have known what would occur but abandoned anyway gains made in Iraq at unfathomable cost in blood (and treasure).

But the bulk of the responsibility for the current "mess" in Iraq goes to the ideology that motivates so much death and destruction: Islam.

When obfuscating for Islam-- intentionally or not -- the truth goes . . . incognito

The truth about Islam and who's responsible for the conflict with it, exposed here:

incognito's lies no longer ... incognito

"I have a Bible that is one hundred years old and it has a map of Palestine in it. Palestine has been in existence since the times of the Romans. After WWII, the state of Israel was created and Palestine was wiped off the map."

Rome utterly destroyed the Jewish nation. The appellation was given to the land to humiliate its former occupants. [The name is a bastardization of "Philistine," one of Israel's historic enemies.]

There was no "Palestianian nation" in the sense for which you apparently wish.

"And Holy War originated in the Bible. “Do not fear them, for it is the Lord your God who fights for you.” – Deuteronomy 3:22. This is what you would call Holy War."

False.

Unlike jihad, the war commanded of Ancient Israel was limited to a specific people at a specific time and place.

The command to ". . . kill the unbelievers wherever you find them" (Qur'an 9:5) is for all times and places to be carried out by able-bodied Muslims and their supporters until the whole world is subdued under the tyranny of Allah.

The false equivalence you make here calls into question your ability (or willingness) to address this topic truthfully.

"In fact, much of the Old Testament has to do with the Hebrews slaying innocent people to take their land because God told them to."

False. Citations, please. Be specific.

"And since the Bible came first, I believe that the Koran is a reaction to it. Heathens, infidels..."

Obviously, chronology equals causation.

Qur'an is the perfect word of Allah. Offensive warfare against non-Muslims is central to it.

Along with ahadith and sira, Qur'an requires the conversion, subjugation and humiliation, or killing of all non-Muslims to make the world Islam.

"There was large-scale destruction of Jewish populations even before the establishment of Christianity as the state religion of the Roman Empire..."

Rome destroyed Israel over a century before it stopped using Christians as torches and chew toys.

"...Critics have faulted (new historians) for their failing to make use of available Arab sources."

Arabs never lie. Muhammed said, "War is deceit" (Bukhari Volume 4, Book 52, Number 268).

It should shock no one that nations execute policy based on their own (sometimes short-sighted) self-interest.

Neither should it surprise anyone that Israel might be reluctant to negotiate with terrorists (unlike President Bush).

Modern Israel was attacked by its neighbors repeatedly for the crime of existing as an Infidel nation on formerly Muslim-controlled soil.

Islam can never, ever, under any circumstances tolerate land that was once under the rule of Allah belonging again to Infidels.

That is why, more than any other supposed justification you can conjure up, the Muslim world hates Israel. Just ask Hamas:

"Israel will exist and will continue to exist until Islam will obliterate it, just as it obliterated others before it."

"Israel, by virtue of its being Jewish and of having a Jewish population, defies Islam and the Muslims."

"The Islamic Resistance Movement believes that the land of Palestine is an Islamic Waqf consecrated for future Moslem generations until Judgement Day. It, or any part of it, should not be squandered: it, or any part of it, should not be given up."

"There is no solution for the Palestinian question except through Jihad. Initiatives, proposals and international conferences are all a waste of time and vain endeavors."

"After Palestine, the Zionists aspire to expand from the Nile to the Euphrates. When they will have digested the region they overtook, they will aspire to further expansion, and so on. Their plan is embodied in the "Protocols of the Elders of Zion", and their present conduct is the best proof of what we are saying."

"Allah is its [Hamas'] goal, the Prophet its model, the Qur’an its Constitution, Jihad its path and death for the case of Allah its most sublime belief."

incognito advocates racism and injustice

He begins with:

"In my previous life here at townhall I revealed that I came from a "religious right" background."

Connections to the military, now this. Are these claims supposed to add to your credibility?

[Truth] would be more effective.

"These are the authentic Christians from the Midwest - not the frauds represented here. They may not be as well informed in foreign policy as some but they are honest and they will not live a lie."

Clumsy ad hominem.

"Why do you delude yourselves? Do you never tire of sending your children off to war? The information age has reached the far corners of the earth."

No, we frauds love to see our sons and daughters maimed and butchered by the Religionists of Peace.

"If America has committed crimes in the past, wouldn’t it be the right thing to do to acknowledge that and condemn it – as we expect others to do – and seek forgiveness?"

A tu quoque non sequitur! You're convoluting your logical fallacies.

"Maybe Christians should ask themselves, 'What would Jesus do?'"

I doubt He would advocate allowing evil men to harm innocents.

"Nevertheless, he cannot grasp the significance of a hate crime law? I’m not buying it. He says it is “enhanced punishments for crimes committed because of thoughts that government especially disapproves…Mind-reading juries are required to distinguish causation from correlation.”

How is murder, rape, or any other violent crime not hateful?

"Hate crime" seems more often than not an attempt to punish one group of people for the crimes of others based on their ethnicity, as you confirm in your next statement:

"Hate crimes are necessary when there has been a history of violence and cruelty toward minorities"

So, one who commits a crime should receive special punishment because of his and his victim's ancestry?

That's racist! [Or at least, "ancestrist."]

"and where the abusers have the power to get away with it. Motive is a fundamental component of our justice system and always has been."

Motive is useful in distinguishing between harm done accidentally and intentionally.

Harm is harm. Why not deal with it justly?

"Americans have indulged themselves for far too long in the belief that we can just isolate ourselves, turn away and pretend that the rest of the world is just not there."

If you're talking about Allah's War Against Humanity, then yes.

For nearly fourteen centuries, non-Muslims have suffered at the hands of the faithful, and still our political, academic, and media elites prattle on about a "tiny minority of radicalist, fundamentalist, extremist, Islamist, Islamonazi, Islamofascist Jihadist-ists" -- if they mention Islam at all.

But you didn't mean that, did you?


More from incognito

"That is a ridiculous statement. Not one time did the Bush administration say we were going to war to right our past wrongs. Or rather - "our wrongs which weren't wrong at the time." BS. Ditto bin Laden and everything else."

The author was not referring to the President's justification for taking out Saddam, he was refuting your false claim that America leaves its mistakes unaddressed.

"And you freaks have the nerve to call me crazy. I don't recall ever, EVER, the U.S. government trying to recruit young people into the military for OIL or any other mercenary purpose."

Again, the author was not describing government policy, he was pointing out to you one likely result of our leaving the region to jihad's proponents.

"You obviously did not read my previous posts."

Your posts have a tinge of incoherence to them. Do you not see that?

And isn't it a little bit self-important to require others be familiar with your body of "work" before engaging with you in discussion?

"See them concerning the U.S. supporting strongman regimes as well as interfering and meddling where we never had any business, including Iran."

That would be under "Hind-sight is 20/20."

What do you about jihad now?

"I know all about colonization - the British in particular are especially guilty and I don't recall the U.S military trying to recruit young people to fix those problems, either. I guess it would only be fair, if what you say is true, to at least let the children in on it in school."

So, now America -- which according to you does nothing to address its past wrongs -- must address the (alleged) wrongs of others?

And it seems inaccurate to claim British colonization of obviously brutal, primitive, and intolerant "societies" was not beneficial for those under England's rule. In fact, since you know all about colonization, what did the Ahmadiyya say about the Queen's rule?

Unlike most Muslim sects, this one taught that since the Queen allowed them freedom to practice their religion and protected them from persecution at the hands of their fellow Muslims, they should not take up violent Jihad against it.

Finally, why do you not rail against Muslim imperialism? It's been ongoing around the world for nearly 1400 years.

Is it because everyone knows that only white Christians and Jews are evil?

"And if you are implying that my loved ones can enlist and then the administration can start an ill-conceived war and lie and BS all day long and leave them hanging while all the little Republicans refuse to sign up, then you are not much better than the people you're talking about, are you?"

That's more full of holes than a Fatah administrator's head at a Hamas clambake.

First, he was not saying that "your children should . . . ," he was saying that no one should be surprised if those who volunteer to go to war go to war.

Second, the war was not "ill-conceived," and neither did the President lie about Saddam's WMD.

The war against the tyrant was quite effective and -- according to both Clintons, Gore, Kerry, the UN, et al -- quite necessary.

What has been ill-conceived is the President's attempts to treat Islam as if it were a rational, decent, and moral belief system.

Once he recognizes that it is the truly moderate Muslim who perverts the "great world religion" -- not the jihadist -- then we can begin to deal much more effectively with our enemy.

Third, most members of the military tend to be conservative and all volunteered. In light of this, it seems contrary to reality to claim Republicans aren't "signing up. "

Fourth, to equate those who slaughter innocents to shouts of "Allahu Akbar!" with those who point out errors of fact and logic in defense of the West is not only immoral, it's suicidal.

"You conveniently ignore the fact that Israel slaughtered numerous indigenous tribes to take their land. That's the Holy War part I was talking about:"

Is that supposed to be a tu quoque argument or just a really bizarre non sequitur?

That Ancient Israel killed some [of the remnants of] particularly corrupt nations [which resisted dispossession because of their great evil] at God's command is a fact of history.

That that brief event ended (incomplete) thousands of years ago is also true.

Will you not condemn with comparable vigor Allah and his false prophet's universal and eternal commands to convert, subdue and humiliate, and kill non-Muslims to make the world Islam?

"THAT IS THE BEGINNING OF HOLY WAR."

It is not the beginning, and it is not jihad. The two are equivalent only to the ignorant and the deceitful.

You really ought to do some reading.

"they take back the land and establish the state of Israel as according to the Bible."

At least you admit the Jews have an ancient claim to the land. Most of your fellow apologists for jihad don't have the decency (or carelessness) to do so.

incognito speaks, and the world listens

"But, if the Koran is a reaction to the Holy War in the Bible and to the all of the invasions and occupations that have occurred throughout history"

Even the ones after Qur'an was written!

So, to you Muslim bloodlust and barbarism is the fault of the Jews and Europeans, even before they did it!

That is less than accurate. Qur'an is the revelation of Allah to Muhammad. Is the expressed will of his deity.

Jihad -- Islamic holy war -- is no reaction to anything Biblical, it is a tool used by Allah and his false prophet to extend his rule over all Mankind.

Undoubtedly (though nothing you've written here indicates it), your vast research has led you to discover what Islam's authoritative texts -- Qur'an, ahadith, and sira -- say about jihad.

You must know that Islamic warfare advanced through several stages over the course of Muhammad's career as the apostle of Allah.

Please tell us what they were.

Okay, let me help. In the beginning, when Mohammed was politically, economically, and militarily weak, cooperation, not violence, was taught.

Later, as Muhammad grew in power, defensive warfare was allowed, then it was required.

Finally, at the end of his revelations, Allah required offensive warfare to make the world Islam.

And what did Muhammad say about this use of violence? Here is a sample:

". . . the Messenger of Allah . . . would say: 'Fight in the name of Allah and in the way of Allah. Fight against those who disbelieve in Allah. Make a holy war . . . . When you meet your enemies who are polytheists, invite them to three courses of action. . . . Invite them to (accept) Islam. . . . If they refuse to accept Islam, demand from them the Jizya. . . . If they refuse to pay the tax, seek Allah's help and fight them . . .'" (Muslim Book 019, Number 4294).

"...fight and slay the Pagans wherever ye find them, and seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem (of war) . . . " (Qur’an 9:5).

"Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued" (Qur'an 9:29).

". . . fight them [Unbelievers] on until there is no more tumult or oppression, and there prevail justice and faith in Allah altogether and everywhere . . . " (Qur'an 8:38, 39).

"O ye who believe! fight the unbelievers who gird you about, and let them find firmness in you: and know that Allah is with those who fear Him" (Qur'an 9:123).

"Fighting is prescribed for you, and ye dislike it. But it is possible that ye dislike a thing which is good for you, and that ye love a thing which is bad for you." (Qur'an 2:216).

"Allah's Apostle said: 'I have been ordered (by Allah) to fight against the people until they testify that none has the right to be worshipped but Allah and that Muhammad is Allah's Apostle . . . '" (Bukhari Volume 1, Book 2, Number 24).

“A man came to Allah’s Apostle and said, ‘Instruct me as to such a deed as equals Jihad in reward.’ He replied, ‘I do not find such a deed’” (Bukhari Volume 4, Book 52, Number 44).

"Remember thy Lord inspired the angels (with the message): 'I am with you: give firmness to the Believers: I will instill terror into the hearts of the Unbelievers: smite ye above their necks and smite all their finger-tips off them'" (Qur'an 8:12).

“Allah’s Apostle said, ‘I have been made victorious with terror. The treasures of the world were brought to me and put in my hand’” (Bukhari Volume 4, Book 52, Number 220).

incognito continues:

"I don’t see how the West’s involvement in the establishment of the state of Israel could make things anything but worse. Much worse. And, our continued meddling and interference, how is that going to make things better? Do you honestly believe this is going to solve anything? Do you honestly believe that denying the obvious is going to work?"

Let's see, we interfered in this little thing called World War II. That worked out for quite a few of the nations involved, even the antagonists.

I supported President Bush's toppling of Saddam.

From the moment the first American was killed by a suicide bomber at a checkpoint, I have opposed the President sacrificing our people's well-being in an effort to safeguard theirs.

And as I have learned more about Islam's deity, founder, and history, I have become ever more disgusted with the efforts to "win Muslim hearts and minds." The truly Muslim heart and mind sees the sacrifice of Infidel blood and treasure only as a proper tribute to the supremacy of Islam and the Muslim.

We ought to allow Shia and Sunni to work out their little disagreements with each other the way they always have.

We should rescue the Christians, Jews, and other non-Muslims from Dar al-Islam, and not one more Infidel dime should go to any nation which refuses to recant their faith in the deity of blood.

"al-Qaida is in sixty countries and then there are the other extremist groups, I don’t think their goal is really to kill all the infidels so much as to get them out of their business. Maybe get some accountability."

Speaking out of ignorance does not add to your credibility.

The faithful Muslim will adhere to the command and example of Mohammed, and violent Jihad is only one tool to be used in accomplishing his goal, the subjugation of Humanity under the tyranny of Allah.

"You say this is false and that much of the Old Testament does not have to do with slaying innocent people to take their land."

I wrote that your assertions were false, including this "much of the Old Testatment" falsehood.

I asked for you to provide specific citations to demonstrate that "much of the Old Testament" had to do with genocide. Not too successful with that search, I assume?

"Many times, they killed every living thing including women and children, animals and crops."

Neither "many" nor "every" is true. But since you just advised me not to come in here and talk about things of which I know nothing, you must already know that!

"That is not so different than – “I will expel the Jews and Christians from the Arabian Peninsula and will not leave any but Muslim.”

There are quite a few differences, incognito. Are you unable or unwilling to admit them?

"I never said there was a “state” called Palestine. I said there are maps in Bibles that call this place Palestine and now, when you look at a map, there is no longer a Palestine. Plain and simple."

So, now you're claiming you made a statement of fact apart from any sort relevance to your argument or the thread?

That is unsurprising.

"Your point seems to be that because it is a specific thing in the Koran that, somehow, supersedes all practical reasons."

No, my point is that the Source and Sustenance of global jihad is the will of Allah and the example of his apostle.

It is only reasonable to expect that the faithful will strive to carry out their god and founder's commands (especially when they say that's what they are doing!).

Your repeated arguments of moral equivalence, "It's the Jews' fault!" and "Islam does it because the Bible did!" are false.

"The point I am trying to make is that with the West and particularly the U.S. supplying aid and weapons to Israel for decades, the Palestinian people are fighting back the only way they can – like it or not – and I don’t think they are going to stop any time soon, just because the world disapproves of their methods."

Here again you're attributing responsibility and blame to the U.S. and Israel for Muslim terrorism. That's intellectually dishonest and morally corrupt, and it's just what Islam does: "It's your fault for defending yourselves!"

"Also, if you all feel so strongly about this why aren't you signing up to fight these people? There has never been enough troops in Iraq and I think this country has just about asked for enough sacrifices from the troops and people like you should put up or shut up."

"you all"? "people like you"?

A false, ad hominem argument made from ignorance. Why not address the facts?

The President needs to recognize Islam makes it impossible to persuade its adherents with anything other than force, and -- instead of using our military as policemen -- let them do what they do better than anyone else.

incognito's inexcusable incognizance

"We have no right, whatsoever, to meddle in the Middle East, period. Not for oil, not to establish a foothold there, nothing."

9/11.

The ironic, self-contradictory hypocrisy of the Islamo-Leftist alliance

Ever notice how people doing (or defending) evil have to lie?

Nevermind that even President Clinton believed Saddam had WMD.

Not finding the quantities of weapons everyone expected is not evidence that President Bush lied, it's evidence that Saddam used the time prior to the actual invasion -- during which the President solicited the cooperation of those nations in collusion with the Iraqi tyrant -- to ship them off to Syria.

So, here's "PersianImmortal" (I saw 300 -- talk about a misnomer!) warning against spreading FUD (Fear, Uncertainty, Doubt) by spreading . . . FUD!

"Indeed, as we know, FUD is not limited to the IT world. US President George Bush knowingly lied about Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMDs) existing in Iraq - the CIA reported conclusively in 2004 that no such weapons existed.

Everyone in the U.S. knows what a friend to President Bush the CIA has been! Nope, no political agenda here!

This information was widely reported in the media at the time. Yet public polls such as this one show that from 2004 to 2006 the proportion of Americans who believe Iraq had WMDs actually grew substantially from 38% to 50%!

Clearly FUD is extremely hard to counter once it gains a foothold in people's hearts and minds."

Clearly.

No wonder Ghazi spends so many words in this article trying to convince us he's unbiased.

What happened to Saddam Hussein's WMD?

Everyone knew he had them. Even the previous administration cited the danger Saddam posed and concluded regime change was necessary.

Unfortunately, political opportunists and those eager to believe the worst about President Bush claim now that he "lied us into war."

The reason our forces have not found Home Depots full of WMD in Iraq -- though smaller amounts and plans for reconstituting those programs have been found -- is because Saddam sent his weapons to Syria during the year the President tried to cajole his political opponents into supporting the effort.

Here are excerpts from an interview with Georges Sada and his underreported claims regarding what happened to Saddam's WMD:

Kevin McCullough: Gen. Georges Sada, welcome to the WMCA MuscleHead Revolution broadcast.

Georges Sada: Thank you very much, Kevin.

KMC: There is a common conception, that is going around in America today, and I'd like to play you a sound bite from last night's Democratic response to President George W. Bush's State of the Union address.

SOUNDBITE: (Gov. Tim Keane, D-Va.) "We now know that the American people were given inaccurate information about reasons for invading Iraq."

KMC: General, were there weapons of mass destruction ... what had Saddam Hussein done with them, and where did they go?

GS: Well here I can say 2,000 times, that the WMDs were in Iraq, and that they were used against Kurds in the north, and people in the south against Shia people, and these weapons were there up to the summer of the year 2002. When a natural disaster happened in Syria, a dam was collapsed, and Saddam said he wanted to do an air-bridge humanitarian aid to Syrian people, those who were flooded in the area. But that was not true.

The thing he did was, he converted two aircraft, two airplanes, a 747 Jumbo, and a 727 and WMDs, raw materials, many other equipment were put in that two aircraft, by the special Republican Guard, in a very secret way and they were transported to Syria to Damascus and they did 56 flights, to make all – whatever has to do with weapons of mass destruction to be in Syria. AND besides to that, 18-wheel tractor trucks, civilian trucks, were also loaded of what couldn't go in the aircraft, and this was also transported to Syria.

KMC: You're saying 56 flights, 747s and 727s, transported – under the guise of humanitarian aid for victims of the dam break in Syria – Saddam Hussein transported his illegal weapons to Syria via that method, and also some 18-wheel trucks were also used in that effort?

GS: That's TRUE!

KMC: General, simply for telling these things to us today, you run the risk of being retaliated against by Saddam Hussein's friends and allies, why did you choose to speak out particularly at this time.

GS: You see actually, I was not speaking this, I was not even writing the book, but, what happened in year 2004 on 26th of April, when the terrorists wanted to explode many tons of these same chemical weapons that we had in Jordan, Amman, and they were trying to destroy the prime minister's office, and the Jordanian Intelligence and the American Embassy. You see 20,000 people were expected to die of that explosion. As a friendly country, Jordan, the Jordan which I love, this had effected on me very much, and then on Feb. 2, 2005, I was in a conference in Phoenix, Ariz., where I met my two friends, Michael Coleman and Dr. Teddy Lowe of World Compassion. They listened to these stories that I had mentioned in the conference. They came and asked me very warmly to make the book of this because this is very important and these informations. So I was persuaded by their two people to write the book, and since Feb. 2, 2005, till now we have worked on the book.

KMC: Let's talk about who you are ... what was your rank within the Saddam Hussein regime?

GS: I was the air-wise marshall, in the Air Force, (second highest rank in the Iraqi military) and I was one of the people who did not attend the Baath Party. And that's why I was forced to retire in 1986.

KMC: You were never a member of the Baath Party?

GS: No never ... And they asked me in '86, it is not possible to be in this rank and second man in the air force and you are not a Baath Party. I said "sorry I can not attend that party, because you said in your principles that the body of the party is Arab, and the spirit of the party is Islam. And myself am neither Arab nor Muslim. I am an Assyrian Christian; therefore I don't fit in this party. And I'm sorry to tell you. I don't want to bluff you ... I just can not attend."

They said, "OK, if you will not attend the party then you will be retired."

I said, "OK, let me retire."

So I was retired in '86, but when Saddam invaded Kuwait on Aug. 2, 1990, I was the first man to be recalled again to join the active duty, by the regime, by Saddam and to be the adviser on the air force.

Lies the only way to hurt President Bush

I happened to be perusing a few articles at The Guardian, a UK news site.

The ultra-liberal bent obvious in just the first two articles I saw was nauseating. Because it was so blatantly dependent on outright lies, one article in particular deserves comment:

The author claims that both President Bush and Prime Minister Blair lied their nations into war. One must conclude this author is either intellectually-deficient or a liar.

If President Bush lied us into war in Iraq, he wasn't the only one (and I'm not referring to the esteemed Prime Minister) ...

-President Clinton in 1998 repeatedly referred to Saddam's nuclear threat and other WMD; indeed, he believed the threat so credible that he bombed Saddam.

-The United Nations also lied us into war by reporting that a large number of Saddam's Weapons of Mass Destruction were missing.

-The Democrats of the United States Congress, who voted to give President Bush the power to go to war against Iraq months before the president gave his State of the Union Address, also warned of the danger of Saddam Hussein's weapons.

-It was apparently France's intelligence regarding Iraq's attempts to acquire African uranium which became a part of the British intelligence to which Mr. Bush referred in the State of the Union.

Those who are actually lying regarding the war in Iraq are those gutless, self-serving wretches whose political success depends on President Bush's failure (and, therefore, our enemies' success).

After 9/11, the realization of their own mortality caused sane people to support President Bush's actions against the jihadists.

Once enough time passed and people saw it was safe again to be liberal (read: "weak, appeasing, and treacherously self-serving") -- and that a Presidential Election was coming up -- they crawled out from under their rocks.

We are at war, and those elected to defend our lives and liberties lie about the Commander-in-Chief in order to harm him politically.

That's Treason.