Expose the Left
July 26, 2006

“Iraq is the frontline in this struggle and history will prove that the sacrifices of Iraqis for freedom will not be in vein, Iraqis are your allies in the war on terror.”

—- Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri Maliki in his address to the United States Congress

VIDEO – .WMV
VIDEO – .MOV



Say Anything linked with Code Pinks Disrupts Maliki Speech...
Unpartisan.com Political News and Blog Aggregator linked with Bush has confidence in Iraqi PM...

By: Ian at 1:03 pm in Iraq, Terror, Video, Congress | | Permalink


35 Responses to “Iraqi Prime Minister Maliki Addresses Congress (VIDEO)”
  1. 1
    Shemp_The_Mighty Said:
    1:43 pm  [ Quote ]

    Idiot leftists claiming Maliki is a puppet in 3…2….1…

  2. 2
    anaconda Said:
    2:18 pm  [ Quote ]

    I noticed a peacenik Code Pink storm trooper trying to heckle the Iraqi Prime Minister during his address.

    Surprisingly, it was not Cindy Sheehan.

    Cindy was busy starving herself to death as a result of her “fast” sitting beside a pool in San Francisco at the Moonbat Central Headquarters.

  3. 3
    Hello Said:
    2:22 pm  [ Quote ]

    yes, isn’t it funny how the moonbats want us to listen to them but don’t want to give the same consideration to others. I guess their parent didn’t teach them that free speech goes both ways.

  4. 4
    Unpartisan.com Political News and Blog Aggregator Trackbacked With:
    2:44 pm  [ Quote ]

    Bush has confidence in Iraqi PM…

    President Bush and Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki worked to find common ground on Tuesday, wit…

  5. 5
    Ray Charles Said:
    3:24 pm  [ Quote ]

    Whats really ugly is that the dems had to have an official response to Maliki, when all he wanted to do was say “thankyou”...like he was an American politician they were running against in an election.

    Fools.

  6. 6
    fogw Said:
    3:33 pm  [ Quote ]

    Democrats protesting Prime Minister Alahwi’s speech last year:

    He’s just a puppet of Bush, he’s just going to say what Bush wants him to say. Doesn’t he have a mind of his own?

    Democrats protesting Prime Minister Maliki’s speech today (Durbin and Reed):

    Hey, why won’t this guy condemn Hezbollah and Hamas, and agree with President Bush? Isn’t he our ally?

    Democrats are so friggin funny to watch. This is what comes from the “we’re against anything related to President Bush” policy of the Democrats. It comes back to bite them time and again.

    They have roped themselves into an indefensible position on just about every issue. Why don’t they just wear clown suits and be done with it.

  7. 7
    gman_atl Said:
    3:47 pm  [ Quote ]

    It was a great speech. However, the Democrat party response the Prime Minister Maliki over the last few days has amazed me.

    Senator Durbin (who only last year compared abuse of prisoners by American troops to techniques used by the Nazis, the Soviets and the Khmer Rouge) had the effrontery to ask for an apology from the PM for not condemning Hezbollah and condemning Israel. Shall we infer that the Senior Senator from Illinois is two-faced?

    Then we have Senator Jack Reed of Rhode Island providing a Democrat response the Iraqi PM’s speech. He criticized Maliki for ‘failing to seize the opportunity’, ‘being overly optimistic’, and ‘speaking in the style more of the president of the Baghdad Chamber of Commerce than the prime minister of Iraq.’ It must be easy for Senator Reed to be critical since he dodges life-threatening paper-cuts (not bullets or bombs) on a daily basis.

    These statements are insulting. I can’t think of a time in our nation’s history when any political party has pulled a ‘stunt’ like this. What are the Democrats rebutting?
    Mr. Maliki is not running for political office in the US. He does not have a vote on how American policy is carried out. No, this is political grandstanding in its most embarrassing form.

  8. 8
    x2x Said:
    4:00 pm  [ Quote ]

    Uh its a pretty big deal that the Iraqi PM doesn’t think Hezbollah is a terrorist group nor will he condemn Hezbollah.

    Also being against President Bush’s policies doesn’t make you a leftist, democrat. It could make you a conservative with all the big governement this president has enforced.

  9. 9
    fogw Said:
    4:22 pm  [ Quote ]

    x2x on July 26, 2006 at 4:00 pm said:

    Uh its a pretty big deal that the Iraqi PM doesn’t think Hezbollah is a terrorist group nor will he condemn Hezbollah.

    Also being against President Bush’s policies doesn’t make you a leftist, democrat. It could make you a conservative with all the big governement this president has enforced.

    Libs don’t think the prisoners at Guitmo are terrorists either. They think they are being kept there illegaly, are entitled to legal representation and are protected by the Geneva Convention.

    Now, after the left has made it clear they are concerned about looking out for the poor little terrorists in Guitmo, you want to condemn Maliki because he doesn’t think Hezbollah is made up of terrorists?

    You’re in the same camp with him, since both of you are incapable of recognizing a terrorist when you see one. So the left really isn’t in a position to judge his “non-condemnation of terrorists.

  10. 10
    Rob Said:
    5:45 pm  [ Quote ]

    Glad that code pink lady was there. It takes a real person to stand up like that. sadly the congress is not listening to the will of the people. A majority of Americans and Iraqi’s want the U.S. the hell out of Iraq. Government for and by the people? yeah right.

  11. 11
    Phil Byler Said:
    6:08 pm  [ Quote ]

    So Rob (re post 10), you want to just leave Iraq? Do you think that the old murderous days of Saddam were preferable? Do you want to allow the current democratically elected Iraqi government operating under a democratically adopted written Constitution to fail and Islamic fascists to take power? Do you want the resulting bloodbath to occur? I think that your position is as thoughtless as it is immoral.

    Iraqi Prime Minister Maliki gave a very good speech. That the Democrats believe that they should respond to it is a reflection of how the Democrats are invested in the defeat of Iraqi democracy and how the Democrats are unfit for governing responsibility.

  12. 12
    MirCat Said:
    6:10 pm  [ Quote ]

    I like the CNN Side thingies (Thingy, I’m speaking British hehe) 28 countries in Iraq, down from 35.

    Point: 28 is 80% of 35, meaning that 35 went in to help with the ousting and 28 of those countries are helping with reconstuction.

    Point: 28 and they say no international support??

  13. 13
    Bushbot Said:
    6:42 pm  [ Quote ]

    Moonbats always = “Israel bad” but Howard Dean = “The Iraqi PM is an antisemite.”

    Those dumbfucks couldn’t win a pie eating contest if Kennedy was doing the chowing for em’.

  14. 14
    RobCon Said:
    7:10 pm  [ Quote ]

    The Congressman who gave Medea Benjamin (the loud mouth Code Pink protester) access to the Congress should be censored.
    BTW, Maliki could teach that big mouth jerk a thing or two about real dissent.

  15. 15
    nick Said:
    7:22 pm  [ Quote ]

    The LOOOOOooney Liberal Left can prosper ONLY with an American defeat in Iraq!
    Gas prices will climb to 10 dollars a gallon and then we can stop Global Warming
    Did you hear Hezbollah runs some kick-ass bake sales?
    Why is Israel being some mean to the poor ole terrorist!

  16. 16
    Zim Said:
    7:41 pm  [ Quote ]

    Some of the more anti-Israel liberals are indeed hypocritical for bashing the PM for not condemning Hezbollah. But many of you guys are hypocritical too, for refusing to even acknowledge the fact that accoridng to the Iraqi PM, Hezbollah is not a terrorist group but a legitimate movement. Of course, on the other hand, as a politician, this guy is very constrained in what he can say in public regarding Hezbollah – most of the Shiites in Iraq would (probably violently) oppose any statement by the government that condemns Hezbollah.

  17. 17
    RobCon Said:
    7:44 pm  [ Quote ]

    Zim on July 26, 2006 at 7:41 pm said:

    Some of the more anti-Israel liberals are indeed hypocritical for bashing the PM for not condemning Hezbollah. But many of you guys are hypocritical too, for refusing to even acknowledge the fact that accoridng to the Iraqi PM, Hezbollah is not a terrorist group but a legitimate movement. Of course, on the other hand, as a politician, this guy is very constrained in what he can say in public regarding Hezbollah – most of the Shiites in Iraq would (probably violently) oppose any statement by the government that condemns Hezbollah.

    At least he is no puppet and is often claimed.

  18. 18
    Zim Said:
    7:47 pm  [ Quote ]

    At least he is no puppet and is often claimed.

    I’d argue that he is, however, he is certainly not a puppet of Bush. If the Iraqi government leaders were indeed Bush puppets, the sectarian violence would stop overnight or would have never started in the first place.

  19. 19
    Harmonica Said:
    8:04 pm  [ Quote ]

    Rob on July 26, 2006 at 5:45 pm said:

    Glad that code pink lady was there. It takes a real person to stand up like that. sadly the congress is not listening to the will of the people. A majority of Americans and Iraqi’s want the U.S. the hell out of Iraq. Government for and by the people? yeah right.

    Code Pink = Majority of Americas? The most of Dems won’t even rub elbows with them.

  20. 20
    anaconda Said:
    8:38 pm  [ Quote ]

    Zim on July 26, 2006 at 7:41 pm said:

    Some of the more anti-Israel liberals are indeed hypocritical for bashing the PM for not condemning Hezbollah. But many of you guys are hypocritical too, for refusing to even acknowledge the fact that accoridng to the Iraqi PM, Hezbollah is not a terrorist group but a legitimate movement. Of course, on the other hand, as a politician, this guy is very constrained in what he can say in public regarding Hezbollah – most of the Shiites in Iraq would (probably violently) oppose any statement by the government that condemns Hezbollah.

    Well, I don’t say this to you very often, but you are absolutely right on this one.

    The primary reason why Maliki won’t condemn Hezbollah publicly for their terror against Israel is because he is a Shiite and Hezbollah is primarily made up of Shiites as well.

    A public condemnation of Hezbollah could be very problematic for him politically because he is trying to form a government in Iraq and he doesn’t want it to fall apart.

    He also doesn’t want to give terrorists in Iraq another reason to assassinate him. Remember, even the maniac Al-Zarqawi was turned in by one of his own guys after they got tired of him.

    A public condemnation of Shiites by Maliki could possibly provoke one of his own guys to turn on him as well and I don’t think he feels it’s in his best interest to potentially piss off a bunch of his own supporters when they are in the infant stages of developing the new Iraqi government.

  21. 21
    Patrick Said:
    8:55 pm  [ Quote ]

    Harmonica on July 26, 2006 at 8:04 pm said:

    Rob on July 26, 2006 at 5:45 pm said:

    Glad that code pink lady was there. It takes a real person to stand up like that. sadly the congress is not listening to the will of the people. A majority of Americans and Iraqi’s want the U.S. the hell out of Iraq. Government for and by the people? yeah right.

    Code Pink = Majority of Americas? The most of Dems won’t even rub elbows with them.

    Uh, yeah. In terms of what they want. AKA Get the f*** out of places we don’t need to be in.

  22. 22
    Scooternyc Said:
    9:42 pm  [ Quote ]

    I think that those who believe that Hezbollah or any of the other terrorist organizations are simply victims of the viscious Bush Administration and his croynies throughout the world, should gather together with these terrorists and see what happens to them.

    Go to Iran, to Syria to Lebanon and let them know who you are and that you support them and let’s see what happens to you.

    If you have the courage of your convictions then do it.

    Others of us who have the courage of our convictions are either in the military, have family in the military and are supporting our troops for their bravery in keeping us free Americans.

    So, put up or shut up. If you really believe it, then prove it. Actions speak louder than words.

  23. 23
    Zim Said:
    9:46 pm  [ Quote ]

    I think that those who believe that Hezbollah or any of the other terrorist organizations are simply victims of the viscious Bush Administration and his croynies throughout the world, should gather together with these terrorists and see what happens to them.

    Can you please point to ANYONE implying that terrorist organizations such as Hezbollah, Hammas, or Al Qaeda are the victims?

  24. 24
    Scooternyc Said:
    9:49 pm  [ Quote ]

    Zim on July 26, 2006 at 9:46 pm said:

    I think that those who believe that Hezbollah or any of the other terrorist organizations are simply victims of the viscious Bush Administration and his croynies throughout the world, should gather together with these terrorists and see what happens to them.

    Can you please point to ANYONE implying that terrorist organizations such as Hezbollah, Hammas, or Al Qaeda are the victims?

    Are you blind to the many protests going on in this country and other countries throughout the world supporting Hezbollah?

    I’m presuming that you’re joking.

  25. 25
    Zim Said:
    10:08 pm  [ Quote ]

    Scooternyc on July 26, 2006 at 9:49 pm said:

    Zim on July 26, 2006 at 9:46 pm said:

    I think that those who believe that Hezbollah or any of the other terrorist organizations are simply victims of the viscious Bush Administration and his croynies throughout the world, should gather together with these terrorists and see what happens to them.

    Can you please point to ANYONE implying that terrorist organizations such as Hezbollah, Hammas, or Al Qaeda are the victims?

    Are you blind to the many protests going on in this country and other countries throughout the world supporting Hezbollah?

    I’m presuming that you’re joking.

    I suppose I am. I thought you were refering to people whose opinions actually matter or are heard by the public.

  26. 26
    DKM Said:
    10:11 pm  [ Quote ]

    Zim#16 You nailed it!

    I love how the Times reports that were hurrying up shipments of weapons to Israel. Of course we are, any chance to have Israel kill these bastards is at the top of the list. We have been looking for a way to hand Hezbollah some payback. Israel, you are now on the clock, please tell us what weapons you need, no charge.

    Sorry to be off topic, I just find the article absolutely hilarious.

  27. 27
    AStext Said:
    12:53 am  [ Quote ]

    “freedom will not be in vein”

    That’s in vain, actually, as in wasted or futile, not an injection. Just as “to rein in” is correct, as in reins of a horse, not “to reign in” as we commonly see.

  28. 28
    Say Anything Trackbacked With:
    1:59 am  [ Quote ]

    Code Pinks Disrupts Maliki Speech…

    Medea Benjamin – the founder of the rabidly anti-war group Code Pink, a pro-communist activist and a symapthizer with Saddam Hussein – managed to get a ticket to Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki’s speech in Congress today, and she used…...

  29. 29
    Rob Said:
    2:10 am  [ Quote ]

    Harmonica on July 26, 2006 at 8:04 pm said:

    Rob on July 26, 2006 at 5:45 pm said:

    Glad that code pink lady was there. It takes a real person to stand up like that. sadly the congress is not listening to the will of the people. A majority of Americans and Iraqi’s want the U.S. the hell out of Iraq. Government for and by the people? yeah right.

    Code Pink = Majority of Americas? The most of Dems won’t even rub elbows with them.

    Are you familiar with any polls? The Iraq war is one of the main reasons Bush’s numbers are in the can.

  30. 30
    MirCat Said:
    3:48 am  [ Quote ]

    Note on aproval numbers. True some of the negatives are due to him being too right wing, true also that he is not right wing enough.

    Thing is there is never a reason attached as a follow up.

    Reasons,
    a. we went into Iraq
    b he stole the elections
    b. we aren’t trying gitos with military tribunals.
    c. we, for some odd reason, are letting syria having a pass
    d. we are not clamping down on the boarders
    e it soooo is to amnesty
    f we are too cozy with china

    These are all reasons, and widely discussed ones at that. Notice that the majority are not lib criticisms

  31. 31
    Bill McGubbin Said:
    4:00 am  [ Quote ]

    MirCat on July 27, 2006 at 3:48 am said:

    Note on aproval numbers. True some of the negatives are due to him being too right wing, true also that he is not right wing enough.

    Thing is there is never a reason attached as a follow up.

    Reasons,
    a. we went into Iraq
    b he stole the elections
    b. we aren’t trying gitos with military tribunals.
    c. we, for some odd reason, are letting syria having a pass
    d. we are not clamping down on the boarders
    e it soooo is to amnesty
    f we are too cozy with china

    These are all reasons, and widely discussed ones at that. Notice that the majority are not lib criticisms

    As much as I would concur with your points as being reason that you and I probably wouldn’t vote for bush (probably?), here is a list of reasons why Dubya’s ratings are in the shitter:

    1. Iraq
    2. Iraq
    3. Iraq
    4. Iraq
    5. Iraq
    6. Iraq

    The rest is background noise. Dubya’s presnitcy is a turd circling around the whirpool of Iraq, and that’s the dominant force.

  32. 32
    MirCat Said:
    5:59 am  [ Quote ]

    But the reason he got elected again and would a 3rd (if not for term limits)

    1. Iraq
    2. Iraq
    3. Iraq
    4. Iraq
    5. Iraq
    6. Iraq

    because even with mistakes that he makes (and not because he’s there but because of not hitting hard enough) he is still better at handling the situation than any of the Dems running

  33. 33
    Bill McGubbin Said:
    7:32 am  [ Quote ]

    MirCat on July 27, 2006 at 5:59 am said:

    But the reason he got elected again and would a 3rd (if not for term limits)

    1. Iraq
    2. Iraq
    3. Iraq
    4. Iraq
    5. Iraq
    6. Iraq

    because even with mistakes that he makes (and not because he’s there but because of not hitting hard enough) he is still better at handling the situation than any of the Dems running

    Bwahahahaha…. thud

    (Picks self up off floor)

    Even with Diebold making the Machines and Katie “Silicone” Harris counting the votes, you don’t get elected with 35% and falling.

    In what freaking alternate reality do you think Iraq is a winner? If Rush clones himself and votes 210 million times? If the election were turned into an e-poll and put on this site? (which is pretty well what florida is anyway)

  34. 34
    USN6872 Said:
    8:00 am  [ Quote ]

    anaconda on July 26, 2006 at 8:38 pm said:

    Zim on July 26, 2006 at 7:41 pm said:

    Some of the more anti-Israel liberals are indeed hypocritical for bashing the PM for not condemning Hezbollah. But many of you guys are hypocritical too, for refusing to even acknowledge the fact that accoridng to the Iraqi PM, Hezbollah is not a terrorist group but a legitimate movement. Of course, on the other hand, as a politician, this guy is very constrained in what he can say in public regarding Hezbollah – most of the Shiites in Iraq would (probably violently) oppose any statement by the government that condemns Hezbollah.

    Well, I don’t say this to you very often, but you are absolutely right on this one.

    The primary reason why Maliki won’t condemn Hezbollah publicly for their terror against Israel is because he is a Shiite and Hezbollah is primarily made up of Shiites as well.

    A public condemnation of Hezbollah could be very problematic for him politically because he is trying to form a government in Iraq and he doesn’t want it to fall apart.

    He also doesn’t want to give terrorists in Iraq another reason to assassinate him. Remember, even the maniac Al-Zarqawi was turned in by one of his own guys after they got tired of him.

    A public condemnation of Shiites by Maliki could possibly provoke one of his own guys to turn on him as well and I don’t think he feels it’s in his best interest to potentially piss off a bunch of his own supporters when they are in the infant stages of developing the new Iraqi government.

    Agree wholeheartedly.

    PM Maliki understands the tenuous situation he faces back home trying to put a cohesive government together.

    Once again the Dems don’t want to acknowledge this but instead want to create a diversion for their own selfish reasons. Schumer, et al, are way off base and out of line. His ilk has festered devisiveness.

    The Dems are just a bunch of whiners and the more they continue their selfishness the more voters pull away from the DNC and their wingnuts.

    It would be a crushing blow to the Dems if a unified government came to fruition in Iraq. What a GOP coup that would be. But, God forbid we should show the world and especially the terrorists that the U.S. is unified in our goals for Iraq. After all, Al Jazeera has endorsed the DNC.

  35. 35
    USN6872 Said:
    9:20 am  [ Quote ]

    Why don’t the Dems get behind PM Maliki and root for him to gain appeasement within his own country?

    The Dems are huge on dialog and talks….....where are they now?

    C’mon you libbierals, speak up now for dialog just like your boy Clinton and Jimmy Carter did…....now is your chance to shine and bring unity not only to Iraq but to the U.S. and help put us in a better universal light.

    Let’s see how fast we get a response…......10 – 9 – 8 – 7 – 6…........

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Register to comment here.