Skip to comments.Kill Saddam! U.S. journalists agree: If you can't beat him, assassinate him. (1997 of course)
Posted on 08/29/2005 6:21:35 AM PDT by Grampa Dave
Kill Saddam! U.S. journalists agree: If you can't beat him, assassinate him. Eric Umansky November 25 , 1997
The latest saber-rattling with Iraq has an odd twist: As the United States government shows restraint and revives the lost art of diplomacy, this time it's the U.S. press that's howling for blood -- the blood of Saddam Hussein personally. The press, of course, has the distinct advantage that nobody really follows their policy suggestions anyway, so their advice doesn't have to be diplomatic, or even legal:
Prohibition on Assassination. No person employed by or acting on behalf of the United States Government shall engage in, or conspire to engage in, assassination. -- Executive Order 12333, issued Dec. 4, 1981, by President Ronald Reagan, continuing the policy of his predecessors Ford and Carter. Neither Bush nor Clinton has rescinded it.
The handy (and illegal) tips from the press:
"Conventional Wisdom," Newsweek, Nov. 17: "Take him down." (next to a photo of Hussein and a downward-plunging arrow)
Thomas Friedman, foreign affairs columnist, New York Times, Nov. 6: "Saddam Hussein is the reason God created cruise missiles. ...So if and when Saddam pushes beyond the brink, and we get that one good shot, let's make sure it's a head shot."
George Stephanopolous, former Clintonite and current ABC News analyst, on ABC'S "This Week," Nov. 9: "This is probably one of those rare cases where assassination is the more moral course...we should kill him."
Sam Donaldson, co-host of "This Week," Nov. 9: We should kill Saddam "under cover of law.... We can do business with his successor."
Bill Kristol, ABC News analyst, "This Week," Nov. 9: "It sounds good to me."
Cokie Roberts, co-host of "This Week," Nov. 9: "Well, now that we've come out for murder on this broadcast, let us move on to fast-track..."
Jonathan Alter, Newsweek, Nov. 17: "It won't be easy to take him out. ...But we need to try, because the only language Saddam has ever understood is force."
Newsweek, Dec. 1: "Why We Should Kill Saddam."
FRIEDMAN: "I was taken out of context by the neo-cons...What I meant to say was that this is only valid when a Democrat is in the Oval Office."
Anything the Killer Klintoons did was wonderful in the eyes of the left wing lunatics who controlled the MSM.
Anything that GW wants to do to protect Americans in the WOT is terrible in the eyes of thee lunatic lefty mediots in control of the MSM today.
Because Klinton is GOD to the left and could never do any wrong.
"FRIEDMAN: "I was taken out of context by the neo-cons...What I meant to say was that this is only valid when a Democrat is in the Oval Office."
FYI and indexing.
"Because Klinton is GOD to the left and could never do any wrong."
Amazing isn't it?
Just like when Clinton ordered the execution of that retarded inmate when he ran for election and the media didn't say nothing but Bush caught hell over his executions (never mind that Ma Richards oversaw more executions than he did)
Fyi and ping lists.
Were there attempts from 1992-2000 to kill Saddam, and, if so , what evidence is there?
> Executive Order 12333 ...
> Neither Bush nor Clinton has rescinded it.
But the EO notwithstanding, the first bombs of Operation
Iraqi Freedom were aimed at Saddam personally (based on
faulty intel, as it turned out).
I wrote a letter to the editor the other day about this. And also JFK's administration trying to kill Castro.
MoonbatLand: Somehow, Karl Rove is behind this.... < /Leftist paranoia>
Excellent! Thanks for posting this.
Excellent post! Bump for great justice! MSM, make your time!
I don't think that is true. Clinton got just as much, if not more flack from the press for all the stuff done in his presidency. It just seems like less, because it was from FR, instead of against FR.
Thank you Grandpa Dave.
So you are saying Clinton got more flack from the press than W does?