Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Iraq's Restrictions on the 'Unrestricted' Offer
Arthur Wildfire! March

Posted on 09/17/2002 2:10:50 PM PDT by Arthur Wildfire! March

Yes. Restrictions on 'unrestricted access'. Fetters on 'unfettered access'. Iraq fooled Charlie Brown again, but not Bush.

Rush reported this at 3:30, referring to an article I've yet to find. Hannity at 3:30 said he 'Almost drove off the road' when he heard Rush's find. There's an article out there somewhere that the 'unlimited inspection' offer is limited, to military bases. Inspections are, in fact, limited only to military bases, which makes them useless.


TOPICS: Foreign Affairs; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: bush; charliebrown; conditional; conditions; fettered; football; hannity; inspect; inspection; inspector; iraq; iraqs; limited; lucy; restrictions; rush; saddam; unconditional; unfettered; unlimited
I was surprised this wasn't front page news. Ran a search and didn't find anything.

Please delete if this is a repost. I wasn't able to find it anywhere.

1 posted on 09/17/2002 2:10:50 PM PDT by Arthur Wildfire! March
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Arthur Wildfire! March
Here's one.
2 posted on 09/17/2002 2:13:48 PM PDT by newgeezer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MeeknMing
Ping. Was this reported earlier here? If so, I can't find it. Saddam has a history of hiding his WMD centers in basements under hospitals and schools, not in military bases. He is particularly fond of having them in his palaces, which are also off limits in this 'unrestrited' offer.
3 posted on 09/17/2002 2:14:58 PM PDT by Arthur Wildfire! March
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Arthur Wildfire! March
An earlier FR post attributed this to the "Evening Standard", a London, UK, newspaper. Like you, I have been waitin for it to turn up on the USA media. I emailed fox news, as did hundreds of Rush listeners I an sure. It is just a matter of time before Saddam asserts his wiggle room anyhow. Who will support him besides France, Russia and China??
4 posted on 09/17/2002 2:15:58 PM PDT by JimSEA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: newgeezer
TY. I put 'inspect' in the search engine and nothing came up. Why isn't your report on the front page?
5 posted on 09/17/2002 2:16:03 PM PDT by Arthur Wildfire! March
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Arthur Wildfire! March
I was surprised this wasn't front page news. Ran a search and didn't find anything.

This is what the media will suppress so that dems and UN boys can say "War's over before it began"

6 posted on 09/17/2002 2:19:18 PM PDT by Centurion2000
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JimSEA
Hannity used the report to mop the floor with a liberal professor from San Fran. You can bet that Sean is going to run with it tonight, God willing. Freegards....
7 posted on 09/17/2002 2:21:02 PM PDT by Arthur Wildfire! March
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Arthur Wildfire! March
There is an AUDIO tape of the London Ambassador of the Arab League making his comments about only "military sites" to a BBC reporter in an interview.

Brit Hume revealed this tidbit to Neil Cavuto at 4 pm..

8 posted on 09/17/2002 2:21:45 PM PDT by Dog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Centurion2000
Won't work. Word's breaking out. I just want the FR running with this, to stay ahead of the curve.
9 posted on 09/17/2002 2:22:16 PM PDT by Arthur Wildfire! March
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Dog; JimSEA
Ty for the info. =]
10 posted on 09/17/2002 2:24:01 PM PDT by Arthur Wildfire! March
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Arthur Wildfire! March
MadIvan posted the Evening Standard story sometime in the wee hours....
11 posted on 09/17/2002 2:24:24 PM PDT by Dog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Arthur Wildfire! March
This thread points to the source document... Appears to be UK.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/752189/posts
12 posted on 09/17/2002 2:25:13 PM PDT by KansasConservative1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Arthur Wildfire! March
Iraq just announced they will meet with Hans Blix ......in 10 DAYS to discuss when they will allow inspectors back into Iraq.
13 posted on 09/17/2002 2:26:07 PM PDT by Dog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: KansasConservative1
Saddam just strung this out another 10 days.......UNFREAKING REAL!!!!!!!!
14 posted on 09/17/2002 2:26:58 PM PDT by Dog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: MeeknMing
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/752189/posts

West on brink of Iraq war (DEVIL IN THE DETAILS ALERT)

I think this is the original find on this important topic. Freegards....


15 posted on 09/17/2002 2:28:05 PM PDT by Arthur Wildfire! March
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Arthur Wildfire! March
Its already been posted. Point conservatives have rapidly formed a consensus on is "Fool you once, shame on you; fool you twice, shame on me." Saddam simply can't be trusted on any offer he makes and certainly not to abide by any agreement that could be reached. Its high time to begin effecting a "regime change" in Iraq.
16 posted on 09/17/2002 2:28:17 PM PDT by goldstategop
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dog
Blix better be ready to duck and cover. The nuclear bomb time line is now at 3 months, and Saddam keeps moving ahead of schedule. Heck, it might take two months to bomb him. So, we shouldn't wait 10 days.
17 posted on 09/17/2002 2:29:33 PM PDT by Arthur Wildfire! March
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Arthur Wildfire! March
It all depends on your definition of what "is" a military base. I believe that the entire country of Iraq is a military base. We should simply tell Saddam "Kulu qa'idatikum namlikuha" and inspect everywhere.
18 posted on 09/17/2002 2:30:18 PM PDT by Poohbah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Arthur Wildfire! March
It's not mine, and I've no idea.

FWIW, I searched for "Iraq, Iraq's, restrictions, restrictions, conditional, unconditional, conditions, rush" ;-).

19 posted on 09/17/2002 2:30:50 PM PDT by newgeezer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop
It was posted in a quiet headline, unfortunately. Yes, we shouldn't be fooled a hundred times after being fooled for 12 years! And this proves we were right. Freegards....
20 posted on 09/17/2002 2:31:52 PM PDT by Arthur Wildfire! March
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Arthur Wildfire! March
Here's a direct link:

http://www.thisislondon.com/dynamic/news/story.html?in_review_id=698298&in_review

Hope it works. Anyway Iraq is toast now.
21 posted on 09/17/2002 2:34:22 PM PDT by Burr5
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Poohbah
I think we should inspect the way Madam Albright says, massively. I think five divisions of inspectors would be mininmal. Although, twenty five divisions would be better. And they better be armed, with air support.

Seriously, the inspectors proved multiple times that he violated the rules. Such proof was supposed to trigger and end to the cease-fire, if I'm not mistaken. And kicking inspectors out? Definite end to cease-fire.
22 posted on 09/17/2002 2:35:06 PM PDT by Arthur Wildfire! March
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Burr5
[It works. TY.]

West on brink of Iraq war

by Joe Murphy, Evening Standard

The US and Britain returned to the brink of war today as Saddam Hussein's dramatic promise to allow unfettered weapons inspections turned out to have strings attached...

http://www.thisislondon.com/dynamic/news/story.html?in_review_id=698298&in_review


23 posted on 09/17/2002 2:37:33 PM PDT by Arthur Wildfire! March
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Arthur Wildfire! March
well we keep hammering away at this on Free Rebublic.Drudge or somebody other than Hannity and Rush will pick up on it...keep it bumping and pinging till the rest of the press reports it.
24 posted on 09/17/2002 2:55:54 PM PDT by lexington minuteman 1775
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: lexington minuteman 1775
Maybe someone should post a vanity of this under 'front page news'. I didn't have the guts to. LOL.
25 posted on 09/17/2002 3:01:52 PM PDT by Arthur Wildfire! March
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Arthur Wildfire! March
Just amazing to me is that this is HUGE news.And so far only Limbaugh, and Hannity have picked up on it.And don't you find it wierd that i read on FR that Daschle now says war vote will come well before the election in November when just a couple days ago he was saying.It OUGHT to wait until after? Something very strange goin on here.
26 posted on 09/17/2002 3:04:45 PM PDT by lexington minuteman 1775
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Arthur Wildfire! March
I heard on CNBC that the arab group says that is not true and there no restrictions. This is just the beginning of a stalling process. Iraq and their cohorts will try and drag this out as long as possable.
27 posted on 09/17/2002 3:21:35 PM PDT by Uncle Hal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Arthur Wildfire! March
I think we should counter the "unrestricted" inspection offer by saying that the UN inspectors will be supported by 250,000 ground troops and air support.
28 posted on 09/17/2002 3:23:59 PM PDT by CougarGA7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Uncle Hal
I heard on CNBC that the arab group says that is not true and there no restrictions.

A careful reading of the letter shows there are no restrictions on the return of the inspectors. However, the letter says nothing about whether there will be restrictions on the actual inspections.

Elsewhere in the letter it says Iraq is ready to discuss the practical details.

In other words, the Arab League spokesman is absolutely right when he says there are no restrictions on the return of the inspectors. And that is absolutely irrelevant to doing meaningful inspections.

Where are the "brilliant" analysts in the U.S. media? Are they blind? Or are they just dumber than a box of rocks.

29 posted on 09/17/2002 3:35:26 PM PDT by EternalHope
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Uncle Hal
[I doubt that PMS-NBC can outquote the following:]

Ali Muhsen Hamid claimed Iraq was being sincere, but he stipulated that civilian sites would not be available to the inspectors. "We support anywhere, any military site (for inspections), but not as some people have suggested for inspections against hospitals, against schools."

Hospitals are among key sites for inspections because of evidence that Saddam uses health laboratories to manufacture viruses for biological weapons.

An Arab League spokesman said only military sites were covered because it would take 10 years for inspectors to examine civilian buildings, which would divert the UN's attention from making Iraq obey its resolutions. "If the US really wants to resolve this dispute it will welcome the offer," he added.

No10 pointed out that during the last, failed, round of inspections, the Iraqi president redesignated about half of his most secret military installations as " presidential palaces", ruling them out of bounds to inspectors.

Iraq capitalised on the disarray to mount a propaganda offensive. Tariq Aziz, Saddam's deputy prime minister, said the offer "thwarted" any reasons for a military attack. He added: "The aim of the American policies is the oil in the Gulf."

The Iraqi state news agency said Saddam may send a personal appeal to the UN within days.

Saddam made his offer in a letter presented to UN Secretary General Kofi Annan late last night after an emergency meeting of his security and diplomatic advisers.

Within minutes, the White House issued a statement scorning the promise as "a tactical step by Iraq in hopes of avoiding strong UN Security Council action".

"As such, it will fail," said spokesman Scott McClellan. "This is not a matter of inspections. It is about disarmament of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction and the Iraqi regime's compliance with all other Security Council resolutions."

The concern in Washington is that support for military action will rapidly lose momentum. A State Department official described the offer as " a nightmare stalling technique".

Officials said planning for war would continue unchanged. But there was no longer any guarantee of a resolution ordering Iraq to disarm.

France was the first of the big five Security Council members to waver, suggesting that a new resolution be put on hold. And its top general flatly ruled out any preemptive strike against Saddam.

Armed forces chief General Jean-Pierre Kelche said an attack would bring chaos, adding: "We have to take him at his word."

Russia declared diplomacy had triumphed. Foreign minister Igor Ivanov said: "We have managed to deflect the threat of a military scenario and to steer the process back to a political channel."

A senior European Union official implied that the US was now out of line, saying: " The question now is whether the Americans will take 'yes' for an answer."

Under the 1991 Gulf war ceasefire terms, UN inspectors must verify the dismantling of Iraqi programmes for biological, chemical and nuclear weapons, and longrange missiles.

President Bush, whose stated policy is the ousting of Saddam, last week told the UN General Assembly that "action will be unavoidable" against Iraq unless the world body forced Baghdad to disarm.

Tony Blair had one consolation - a poll showing far greater support for military action in the wake of President Bush's speech.




Email this article to a friend





© Associated Newspapers Ltd., 17 September 2002
Terms and Conditions
This Is London





30 posted on 09/17/2002 3:36:55 PM PDT by Arthur Wildfire! March
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Arthur Wildfire! March
Correction: do not email this to a friend without filling out a form at their web site. [Didn't mean to copy that far. Freegards....]
31 posted on 09/17/2002 3:39:40 PM PDT by Arthur Wildfire! March
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: newgeezer; JimSEA; Dog; KansasConservative1; goldstategop; Poohbah; Burr5; ...
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/752321/posts

Rush Limbaugh Report on this.

Big Condition Found in Unconditional Inspections
Rush Limbaugh Program | 9/17/02


32 posted on 09/17/2002 4:03:21 PM PDT by Arthur Wildfire! March
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Arthur Wildfire! March

Get the Top 10 Most Popular Sites for "unconditional"
Powered by Ask Jeeves

4 entries found for unconditional.



un·con·di·tion·al   Pronunciation Key  (nkn-dsh-nl)
adj.
Without conditions or limitations; absolute: demanded unconditional surrender.

uncon·dition·al·ly adv.
uncon·dition·ali·ty (-dsh-nl-t) n.

Source: The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition
Copyright © 2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company.
Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.



unconditional

\Un`con*di"tion*al\, a. Not conditional limited, or conditioned; made without condition; absolute; unreserved; as, an unconditional surrender.

O, pass not, Lord, an absolute decree, Or bind thy sentence unconditional. --Dryden. -- Un`con*di\"tion*al*ly, adv.
Source: Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary, © 1996, 1998 MICRA, Inc.



unconditional

adj 1: not conditional; "unconditional surrender" [ant: conditional] 2: not modified or restricted by reservations; "a categorical denial"; "a flat refusal" [syn: categoric, categorical, flat] 3: not contingent; not determined or influenced by someone or something else
Source: WordNet ® 1.6, © 1997 Princeton University



unconditional

unconditional in InvestorWords

Source: InvestorWords, © 2000 InvestorGuide.com, Inc.

ADVERTISEMENT

Just what does Saddam not understand about the word "unconditional"?

33 posted on 09/17/2002 4:55:28 PM PDT by Paleo Conservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Paleo Conservative
ROFL!
34 posted on 09/17/2002 4:57:19 PM PDT by Arthur Wildfire! March
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Arthur Wildfire! March
Saddam has a history of hiding his WMD centers in basements under hospitals and schools, not in military bases. He is particularly fond of having them in his palaces, which are also off limits in this 'unrestrited' offer.


_____________________________




Rummy, you tell 'em to keep sifting the dirt for Osama. Next up? SADdam ! Let's get him!

35 posted on 09/17/2002 5:57:59 PM PDT by MeekOneGOP
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: EternalHope




36 posted on 09/17/2002 5:59:57 PM PDT by MeekOneGOP
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Uncle Hal






37 posted on 09/17/2002 6:01:44 PM PDT by MeekOneGOP
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: newgeezer
Iraqi version of Let's Roll??.....







38 posted on 09/17/2002 6:03:40 PM PDT by MeekOneGOP
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop






39 posted on 09/17/2002 6:04:32 PM PDT by MeekOneGOP
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: lexington minuteman 1775
And don't you find it wierd that i read on FR that Daschle now says war vote will come well before the election in November when just a couple days ago he was saying.It OUGHT to wait until after? Something very strange goin on here.

Let me copy a post to me on another thread about Democrats.....

To: MeeknMing

Democrats are a strange bunch especially their leaders. They complain about politics of personnel destruction when that is how they try to divide the country. They have little pride in America, it seems that the American people serve for their pleasure only. If you don't cotton to the democratic line, you aren't American. They used the surplus for other countries and other people when there was much to do here at home. They take our best technologies and sell them to nations that will use the knowledge against us. They lack an enormous amount of integrity and don't seem to care as they flaunt sleazy ethics and morality in our faces.

We didn't have a government for the people under the Clinton administration, what we had was a Democrats Only need apply type of government and now they are attempting to replace a People's Government with their tired old arguments about an education system they didn't fix in 8 years, a health care program they messed up and couldn't fix in 8 years, a social security system they say needs fixing and did nothing about it in 8 years when in reality that system is fine as long as lawmakers don't spend the money that social security is meant for; they spent 8 years hiring federal workers with no qualifications as long as it meant a democratic vote leaving behind a dumbed down, bloated army of sleazy federal laborers who have plundered their departments of millions in dollars and equipment.

Democrats seem to have no respect, no real base from which true justice can spring, only justice that bends for them. They have no enthusiasm for country/nation, no pride, just the spoils from a rich nation for the DNC. They continue to huddle with shady and corrupt people both here in America and abroad for reasons that only benefit them. They are elitists and exclude the real Americans as they race for the Marxist Utopia they have dreamed about...where individual successes are discouraged in favor of a commune like population. They have learned nothing from failed socialism or failed communism; they still want to live like kings all the while painting a glowing picture of togetherness for the masses who work for them. It is called Slavery, servitude to a few at the top, domination over the people through higher taxes and rules and regulations. Democrats want a Unionized nation/world of bondage and they can surely have it by dividing the country with the deceptive lies they and the press propagandize with daily.

Stand tall Americans and stand firmly for the principals of our Constitution and the Declaration of Independence, both of which are like the fabled Vampires silver cross or spike to the leading democrats, they don't want you to have either; it is these people who would return this country to the quagmire of corruption of the Clinton/Gore/Reno years.

12 posted on 7/30/02 8:42 AM Central by yoe

40 posted on 09/17/2002 6:07:52 PM PDT by MeekOneGOP
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: MeeknMing; Arthur Wildfire! March
No, Saddam, you may not restrict inspections.

No more Three Card Monte.

No more convoys of trucks out the back door, as inspectors enter the front.

The whole of Iraq is open to inspections, if it means one hole at a time:

Bomb Damage Assessment: Bush for "inspections".

41 posted on 09/17/2002 6:08:42 PM PDT by PhilDragoo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson