or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › No ties to Al-Qaeda. No weapons of mass destruction. No danger to U.S. security.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

No ties to Al-Qaeda. No weapons of mass destruction. No danger to U.S. security.  

post #1 of 444
Thread Starter 
Quoted from (full article here...)
http://www.workingforchange.com/arti...m?ItemID=16212

"The peace movement was right -- and still is -- about Iraq.
The fact that the Bush Administration was lying about virtually every justification for invading Iraq was something any inquiring reporter could have exposed months before, not after, the invasion began. No ties to Al-Qaeda. No weapons of mass destruction. No danger to U.S. security. Dated, wildly exaggerated, or simply forged intelligence. An invasion that was illegal under any and every conceivable legal authority. And peaceniks have continued to be right: the anonymous (and, in the U.S., almost entirely unreported) death of thousands of Iraqi civilians. Many thousands more, including U.S. soldiers, will die from the radioactive munitions. And now the countrys being looted by the same bullies who overran it. Saddam isnt the only government leader who deserves to stand trial.
"

Now, read this...
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main...questid=120459

"...The manifesto, presented as a "manual for victory" in the war on terror, also calls for Saudi Arabia and France to be treated not as allies but as rivals and possibly enemies..."

"...The book calls for tough action against France and its dreams of offsetting US power. "We should force European governments to choose between Paris and Washington," it states. Britain's independence from Europe should be preserved, perhaps with open access for British arms to American defence markets."


----------------------------------------------
- We do not understand here in Europe (especially in France) what's going on in the US. Can someone explain how we got there ?
I'm The Boss... This Is Champaign...
Merry Christmas !
I'm The Boss... This Is Champaign...
Merry Christmas !
post #2 of 444
The destruction of the Twin Towers has affected us in ways you cannot begin to understand. An existing rift between conservatives and liberals has cracked wide open and foreign nations' attempts to curb our wrath has fallen on deaf ears. There's little doubt that the Presidency has been radically politicized for decades to come and the New Media is an accelerant to the fires of partisanship.

Basically, you got in our way.
Steve Jobs ate my cat's watermelon @ drewprops.com
Oldest Member of AI (Jan 99) until JRC snaps to his senses and starts posting again. (the blackout borked my join date)
Steve Jobs ate my cat's watermelon @ drewprops.com
Oldest Member of AI (Jan 99) until JRC snaps to his senses and starts posting again. (the blackout borked my join date)
post #3 of 444
Quote:
Originally posted by pierr_alex
"The peace movement was right -- and still is -- about Iraq.
The fact that the Bush Administration was lying about virtually every justification for invading Iraq was something any inquiring reporter could have exposed months before
"


"...The manifesto, presented as a "manual for victory" in the war on terror, also calls for Saudi Arabia and France to be treated not as allies but as rivals and possibly enemies..."

"...The book calls for tough action


1 - We don't understand here in Europe (especially in France) what's going on in the US. Can someone explain how we got there ? [/B]


hmmmmmm.....your first post and you're throwing hand grenades? VERY interesting.


---To speak intelligently about foreign policy assumes you have ALL (or most of) the relevent data, and know ALL (or most of) the intentions of the involved nations---which none of us on these forums can legitimatly do. We are all speculating on a deficit of information.

BUT, if you must know....

1. If it was that easy to spot, why wasn't it common knowledge before we (the U.S.) went in?

2. On the "revealing" of your "book": read some history---governments are pretty good at keeping secrets, concealing negotiations until they are long over, using covert means of communications, payoffs, etc.



Quite frankly if you yo-yos applied the same logic to the intriguing surrounding the Amercian Rebellion in the late 1700's not mention the relations between France and Great Britain you would arrive at something profoundly stupid and uncomprehensible.

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

post #4 of 444
Quote:
Originally posted by pierr_alex

- We do not understand here in Europe (especially in France) what's going on in the US. Can someone explain how we got there ?


Do you understand why giving refuge to Ayatollah Khumayni was not a good thing? Do you understand why building a nuclear reactor for Saddam was not a good thing? Do you understand why you and Canada helping Pakistan build nuclear program was not a good thing? Do I need to go on?
post #5 of 444
pierr_alex my ASS.

Post using your real name, you pussy.
post #6 of 444
Quote:
Originally posted by pierr_alex
[B- We do not understand here in Europe (especially in France) what's going on in the US. Can someone explain how we got there ? [/B]

You're right. The U.S. is very bad... very, very bad. We have no right to any military action. Actually, we probably should have stayed out of WWII and never even liberated FRANCE and the rest of occupied Europe.
post #7 of 444
Thread Starter 
Please.

Don't turn this thread into an "US vs Europe" or "US vs France".
Just want to talk about hard facts:

- No ties to Al-Qaeda.
- No weapons of mass destruction.
- No danger to U.S. security.
I'm The Boss... This Is Champaign...
Merry Christmas !
I'm The Boss... This Is Champaign...
Merry Christmas !
post #8 of 444
hehehe Murbot can see IP addresses! tee hee

So which one of you suckers had to make up a new screen name to stir up the pot?
Steve Jobs ate my cat's watermelon @ drewprops.com
Oldest Member of AI (Jan 99) until JRC snaps to his senses and starts posting again. (the blackout borked my join date)
Steve Jobs ate my cat's watermelon @ drewprops.com
Oldest Member of AI (Jan 99) until JRC snaps to his senses and starts posting again. (the blackout borked my join date)
post #9 of 444
Thread Starter 
- No ties to Al-Qaeda.
- No weapons of mass destruction.
- No danger to U.S. security


I know it sucks. But this is reality.

Don't get me wrong: I am happy as much as you are about Hussein being removed, and I'm happy for the Iraqi people that will sooner or later stabilise and jump on Democracy (just hope It won't be Islamism). This makes one dictator less.

The problem we have here is: Do the End justify the Mean...?

+++

We would like to see a connection between 9/11 and Saddam Hussein. But it seems there's not.

So while you fight in Irak, real Al Queda forces get (probably) stronger somewhere. And who will get the next bomb in its face? New-York again ? Washington ? London ? Paris ? Brussel ? Berlin ? Tokyo ?
I'm The Boss... This Is Champaign...
Merry Christmas !
I'm The Boss... This Is Champaign...
Merry Christmas !
post #10 of 444
Quote:
Originally posted by pierr_alex
Quoted from (full article here...)
...
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main...questid=120459
...

Is this supposed to pass as journalism? It reads like an opinion piece but there's no clear label. Oh wait it's anti-Bush so we don't care if it's hard news or opinion. Let the lines be blurred!
post #11 of 444
Thread Starter 
I don't know. I just hope this 'Manifesto' does not exists (in those words) and is pure Fantasy.
I'm The Boss... This Is Champaign...
Merry Christmas !
I'm The Boss... This Is Champaign...
Merry Christmas !
post #12 of 444
Well of course they are right in hat the war on terror needs to include Syria and Iran.
post #13 of 444
Hmmm, this, and this seem to shed light on the idea that Iraq did indeed have weapons of mass destruction and ties to terrorism, not necessarily Al Qaeda, but terrorism nonetheless, not to mention the 30 years of terrorism against the bastard's own people. Now I agree there is no evidence that those weapons are still there, BUT I have two ideas on this topic:

1: It's a BIG F***ing desert to hide stuff
and
2: If they destroyed and dismantled their weapons program...why couldn't Iraq account for that dismantling and what did they have to hide when they refused to let UN inspectors into their country.

I agree this war was probably unnecessary and that our troops shouldn't be in the situation they are in...but guess what...their OUR troops. We're going to support them either way and pray for each soldier's safe return. We don't need the constant French resistance...you've made your point...we get it. But fact of the matter is the Iraqi people are a HELL of a lot better off now than they were a year ago and now we have a brutal dictator in custody who will be tried for crimes against humanity. That's cause enough for me.
post #14 of 444
i think everyone needs to re-watch south park: the movie. comedy central is playing it UNEDITED right now. some of its themes are very interesting in lieu of today's international climate (plus it still makes me laugh my ass off)
When you're lovers in a dangerous time,
You're made to feel as if your love's a crime.
Nothing worth having comes without some kind of fight.
Gotta kick at the darkness 'til it bleeds daylight.

-...
When you're lovers in a dangerous time,
You're made to feel as if your love's a crime.
Nothing worth having comes without some kind of fight.
Gotta kick at the darkness 'til it bleeds daylight.

-...
post #15 of 444
Quote:
Originally posted by Scott
Is this supposed to pass as journalism? It reads like an opinion piece but there's no clear label. Oh wait it's anti-Bush so we don't care if it's hard news or opinion. Let the lines be blurred!

The (UK) Daily Telegraph is a conservative publication, btw.

No matter which way a newspaper is aligned...all they have to do is report some truth and reality: it will automatically sound anti-Bush by default.
"We've never made the case, or argued the case that somehow Osama bin Laden was directly involved in 9/11. That evidence has never been forthcoming". VP Cheney, 3/29/2006. Interview by Tony Snow
"We've never made the case, or argued the case that somehow Osama bin Laden was directly involved in 9/11. That evidence has never been forthcoming". VP Cheney, 3/29/2006. Interview by Tony Snow
post #16 of 444
Al Qaeda videos found in Iraq weapons raid
Quote:
Tuesday, December 30, 2003 Posted: 6:53 PM EST (2353 GMT)

BAGHDAD, Iraq (CNN) -- U.S. forces operating in the so-called Sunni Triangle - the region of Iraq most loyal to captured former dictator Saddam Hussein - found a significant weapons cache that included al Qaeda literature and videotapes, the U.S. military said Tuesday.

Members of Task Force Ironhorse 2nd Infantry's Arrowhead Brigade discovered the material Monday morning at a site in Samarra, about 65 miles north-northwest of Baghdad. Some of the items were found hidden in a false wall, the military said.

The troops also found a British-made body armor plate with a bullet hole. U.S. Central Command said it was an indication that insurgents were testing the ceramic plate's ability to withstand expended anti-personnel ammunition...
"Countless mothers will light candles and celebrate the tyrant's capture - mothers in all the cities of Iraq, in all the villages of Iran, in all the streets and quarters of Kuwait, everywhere the...
"Countless mothers will light candles and celebrate the tyrant's capture - mothers in all the cities of Iraq, in all the villages of Iran, in all the streets and quarters of Kuwait, everywhere the...
post #17 of 444
Quote:
Originally posted by zaphod_beeblebrox
Al Qaeda videos found in Iraq weapons raid

And... is there some evidence that the literature and tapes were there before the war ??? like some Al Qaeda library time stamp.. if not it doesn't say sh*t
post #18 of 444
pierr_alex: It has been discussed here endless of times and the general consensus is excatly what you write in your heading. Do a search and you will find endless of threads on the issue. Its like saying that Nixon tried to cover up the Watergate break in. Yes we know.

In old (but just released news): The administration planned to do a "Saddam" thirty years ago.
"I reject your reality and substitute it with my own" - President Bush
"I reject your reality and substitute it with my own" - President Bush
post #19 of 444
Quote:
Originally posted by ericg
And... is there some evidence that the literature and tapes were there before the war ??? like some Al Qaeda library time stamp.. if not it doesn't say sh*t

Riiight. The nonsense that people are determined to believe. Of course it says plenty. Here's more from George Tenet in a recent letter to the Senate Intelligence Committee:
Quote:
Our understanding of the relationship between Iraq and al Qaeda is evolving and is based on sources of varying reliability. Some of the information we have received comes from detainees, including some of high rank.

--We have solid reporting of senior level contacts between Iraq and al Qaeda going back a decade.

--Credible information indicates that Iraq and al Qaeda have discussed safe haven and reciprocal nonaggression.

--Since Operation Enduring Freedom, we have solid evidence of the presence in Iraq of al Qaeda members, including some that have been in Baghdad.

--We have credible reporting that al Qaeda leaders sought contacts in Iraq who could help them acquire W.M.D. capabilities. The reporting also stated that Iraq has provided training to Al Qaeda members in the areas of poisons and gases and making conventional bombs.

--Iraq's increasing support to extremist Palestinians coupled with growing indications of relationship with Al Qaeda suggest that Baghdad's links to terrorists will increase, even absent U.S. military action.
"Countless mothers will light candles and celebrate the tyrant's capture - mothers in all the cities of Iraq, in all the villages of Iran, in all the streets and quarters of Kuwait, everywhere the...
"Countless mothers will light candles and celebrate the tyrant's capture - mothers in all the cities of Iraq, in all the villages of Iran, in all the streets and quarters of Kuwait, everywhere the...
post #20 of 444
Where to begin:

First, the site you link to has a rather obvious agenda. Just read it, for God's sake. And I quote from page one of the top link:

Quote:
The U.S. remains the biggest terrorist nation in the world.

I'm sorry, but anyone who actually believes that does not qualify for me even paying attention to him. The US does plenty wrong. We do plenty of stupid things and even "bad" things. We makes mistakes. But, a "terrorist" nation? Please. It's so absurd, It almost isn't even worth discussing. The United States is the single biggest proponent of Democracy and Freedom in the history of world...despite our problems. The US gives more foreign aid than any other nation the world. The US has it's share of problems, corruption, etc. But a terrorist nation? Come on. This kind of thinking, and this kind of statement is the very core of Anti-Americanism and resentment of American power and influence. And you link to the site like it's the Bible. Please.

As far as Iraq goes...others who have posted above are right. We have discussed it, debated it, and formed our opinions. I don't think they're going to change.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
post #21 of 444
Oh no here we go again.

Zaphod: And Powell said from the UN that the trucks certain building were used for WoMD production. He even gave sattelite pictures as proofs. All that was quickly shown to be wrong information.

If they have solid reporting show it. If they have credible information give it. The US intelligent community haven´t had a hell of a track record the last three and and a half years so a couple of words on a piece of paper doesn´t quite do it when "proofs" and "believes" and "solid reports" and "credible information" have shown to be false alarm so many times the last three years.
"I reject your reality and substitute it with my own" - President Bush
"I reject your reality and substitute it with my own" - President Bush
post #22 of 444
To hell with it. I´m not gonna discuss this any more. Please look and respond to my new thread where I try to se forward. Lets leave this old discussion behind us.
"I reject your reality and substitute it with my own" - President Bush
"I reject your reality and substitute it with my own" - President Bush
post #23 of 444
Terrorist behind September 11 strike was trained by Saddam
By Con Coughlin
(Filed: 14/12/2003)
Quote:
Iraq's coalition government claims that it has uncovered documentary proof that Mohammed Atta, the al-Qaeda mastermind of the September 11 attacks against the US, was trained in Baghdad by Abu Nidal, the notorious Palestinian terrorist.

Details of Atta's visit to the Iraqi capital in the summer of 2001, just weeks before he launched the most devastating terrorist attack in US history, are contained in a top secret memo written to Saddam Hussein, the then Iraqi president, by Tahir Jalil Habbush al-Tikriti, the former head of the Iraqi Intelligence Service.

The handwritten memo, a copy of which has been obtained exclusively by the Telegraph, is dated July 1, 2001 and provides a short resume of a three-day "work programme" Atta had undertaken at Abu Nidal's base in Baghdad...
"Countless mothers will light candles and celebrate the tyrant's capture - mothers in all the cities of Iraq, in all the villages of Iran, in all the streets and quarters of Kuwait, everywhere the...
"Countless mothers will light candles and celebrate the tyrant's capture - mothers in all the cities of Iraq, in all the villages of Iran, in all the streets and quarters of Kuwait, everywhere the...
post #24 of 444
Quote:
Originally posted by Anders
Oh no here we go again.

Zaphod: And Powell said from the UN that the trucks certain building were used for WoMD production. He even gave sattelite pictures as proofs. All that was quickly shown to be wrong information...

How does this address my posts? I've confined myself to the claim made here that there were no links between Al Qaeda and Iraq. This claim is without merit.
"Countless mothers will light candles and celebrate the tyrant's capture - mothers in all the cities of Iraq, in all the villages of Iran, in all the streets and quarters of Kuwait, everywhere the...
"Countless mothers will light candles and celebrate the tyrant's capture - mothers in all the cities of Iraq, in all the villages of Iran, in all the streets and quarters of Kuwait, everywhere the...
post #25 of 444
Oh, and since I can't let anything go:

Quote:
The peace movement was right -- and still is -- about Iraq.
The fact that the Bush Administration was lying about virtually every justification for invading Iraq was something any inquiring reporter could have exposed months before, not after, the invasion began. No ties to Al-Qaeda. No weapons of mass destruction. No danger to U.S. security. Dated, wildly exaggerated, or simply forged intelligence. An invasion that was illegal under any and every conceivable legal authority. And peaceniks have continued to be right: the anonymous (and, in the U.S., almost entirely unreported) death of thousands of Iraqi civilians. Many thousands more, including U.S. soldiers, will die from the radioactive munitions. And now the countrys being looted by the same bullies who overran it. Saddam isnt the only government leader who deserves to stand trial."


1. The "peace" movement has almost never been right. About anything.

2. There is no evidence that the Bush administration lied about anything....anything at all. There are some questions..."where are the weapons", "why is it taking so long", "why were there so many different reasons given", "why did they focus so much on WMD when there were a million other reasons to go in".....but there is NO EVIDENCE.

3. No Ties to Al-Qaeda: That can't be proven either. We know there were ties to other terrorist organizations. We know Saddam made payments to suicide bombers. But he had nothing to do with Al-Qaeda? Please. We may not know for sure, but the evidence surely doesn't point in the direction of there being "no ties".

4. No WMD: That's not really true either. We have found components. We have found hard evidence of intent to develop them further. We haven't found the weapons, which concerns me as much as it does you. We have found loads of WMD related items, gas masks, etc. Again, this is a valid question...but to come out and say there weren't any or aren't any WMD...that's off base.

5. Intelligence: Show me where you can prove that the Bush Administration knowingly lied about any intelligence. Show me.

6. Illegal Invasion: Again, show me how this statement is supported. Show me the international law the prohibited invasion. Show me the congressional act or part of the Constitution that prohibited it. Bush got Congressional approval. The UN had declared the "serious consequneces" would follow if Iraq did not comply with inspections. Are you telling me they DID comply? Please. And what else would "serious consequences" mean, given that we'd already tried sanctions, inspections, more sanctions, limited military strikes, and then...wait for it...more sanctions?!?! The old "this war was illegal" line is a favorite...but it has no basis in fact.

7. Unreported Deaths: Show me. Someone has to know.

8: Risk to US military: What is the point here? Is there risk? Yes, of course.

9. Country being looted by bullies: So we're there for the money? Unlikely and unsupported...as is the whole article. If we wanted cheap oil, we would have simply PURCHASED it. It would have been one hell of a lot easier than invading, pouring $100 Billion into a war and reconstruction, losing hundreds of lives, and spending years there straightening out the goddamn mess that the regime made the country...don't you think?

Try thinking before you post. We don't have to agree, but don't take some left-wing, Anti-American propoganda rag and splash bold faced print all over the place proclaiming your ridiculous opinion is justified and vindicated.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
post #26 of 444
Quote:
Originally posted by zaphod_beeblebrox
How does this address my posts? I've confined myself to the claim made here that there were no links between Al Qaeda and Iraq. This claim is without merit.

It adress your post in the way the intelligent community works and the information floating from it. The claims in the letter you posted is more ambiguous than the more presice claim that this truck and that building were used for WoMDs. As long as they don´t give hard evidence how are we to determine if they pulled another Powell on us?
"I reject your reality and substitute it with my own" - President Bush
"I reject your reality and substitute it with my own" - President Bush
post #27 of 444
Quote:
Originally posted by sammi jo
The (UK) Daily Telegraph is a conservative publication, btw.

No matter which way a newspaper is aligned...all they have to do is report some truth and reality: it will automatically sound anti-Bush by default.


Yes but SJO since you're unable to tell opinion and conjecture from hard news reporting I'll let you know that that article is filled the former not that latter. Newspapers tend to label their opinion and op-eds clearly. Something I noticed the European papers seem to fail at. I can only think they either do it intentionally or can't tell the difference between the two.
post #28 of 444
Quote:
Originally posted by Anders
It adress your post in the way the intelligent community works and the information floating from it. The claims in the letter you posted is more ambiguous than the more presice claim that this truck and that building were used for WoMDs. As long as they don't give hard evidence how are we to determine if they pulled another Powell on us?

Well, precise claims HAVE been made with respect to the videos and and the Atta-Nidal memo. And the existence of the Salman Pak terrorist training camp isn't a matter of conjecture. It's a fact. Two Iraqi defectors have described the kind of training that went on there.
Quote:
Two Iraqi Military defectors, an unnamed former Lt. General and a Captain Sabah Khodada recently gave details of an Iraqi school at Salman Pak which includes training for the hijacking of passenger airliners and other modes of transportation. The former Iraqi General said that there was a old Boeing 707 resting next to rail tracks on edge of Salman Pak being used in terrorist training, the existence of this aircraft has been confirmed by UN. Inspectors.

The General, who had been the Security Officer in charge of the camp also reported that there were mixed nationality units including Saudis, Egyptians and Chechens at Salman Pak. Usually about 40 strong, these terrorist units received upto five months of intensive training. However the terrorist units were actually under the control of Iraqs Al- Mukhabarat Intelligence Service and in particular a section called the Division of Special Operations. Much of this was also confirmed by Captain Khodada...

Here's another link that describes the possibility of a connection between one of the 9/11 hijackers and Abu Nidal. The hijacker's great-uncle was close to Nidal. Perhaps this was how Atta and Nidal came into contact with each other.
Quote:
When the London Telegraph reported last week that newly uncovered documents link 9/11 ringleader Mohamed Atta to Iraq-based Palestinian terrorist Abu Nidal, it wasn't the first time one of the 9/11 hijackers had been reported to have such ties.

In a development that adds evidence to the case that Iraq played a direct role in the worst attack ever on the U.S., reports show that Ziad Jarrah - who piloted the plane that crashed in Pennsylvania after passengers had discovered they were on a suicide mission - also had ties to Nidal.

Like Atta, Jarrah traveled to Hamburg, Germany, where three al-Qaeda operatives plotted their attack. The other member of the Hamburg cell was Marwan al Shehhi, who drove his plane into the World Trade Center's South Tower. Jarrah's assigned target: the White House.

"A constant figure in Jarrah's life in Germany was his great-uncle, Assem Omar Jarrah," reported the Wall Street Journal in August 2002. "According to the German magazine, Der Spiegel, Assem Jarrah worked for a long time as an informer for the Stasi, the East German secret service, while maintaining connections to [Abu] Nidal's terror group."

The Journal's Asla Aydintasbas - the only U.S.-based reporter to explore the Nidal-9/11 link in any depth - reported that the Palestinian terror kingpin spent much of his terrorism career as a hired hand, often in service to Iraq or Syria...
"Countless mothers will light candles and celebrate the tyrant's capture - mothers in all the cities of Iraq, in all the villages of Iran, in all the streets and quarters of Kuwait, everywhere the...
"Countless mothers will light candles and celebrate the tyrant's capture - mothers in all the cities of Iraq, in all the villages of Iran, in all the streets and quarters of Kuwait, everywhere the...
post #29 of 444
"pierr_alex my ASS.

Post using your real name, you pussy"


Nice. Name-calling by one of the mods.
post #30 of 444
Quote:
Originally posted by filmmaker2002
Hmmm, this... seem to shed light on the idea that Iraq did indeed have weapons of mass destruction

Sorry, bud. Already discredited (you might want to actually read it) and he's an INC defector, which should have made you realize it was false.

Quote:
1: It's a BIG F***ing desert to hide stuff
and

That's not what the issue is. The fact is that it is PHYSICALLY IMPOSSIBLE for Iraq to have had almost any WMD. I find it utterly amazing that you people continue to ignore this simple cold hard indisputable fact. For example, look at the famous VX. If the VX degrades in a couple weeks from when it is produced, and if there are no production facilities to make new VX, then you ain't got no VX.

Get up to speed.
Quote:
2: If they destroyed and dismantled their weapons program...why couldn't Iraq account for that dismantling and what did they have to hide when they refused to let UN inspectors into their country.

You might understand a little more if you bothered to look at what the actual discrepancies are. Then, if you could be bothered to, you could look up the MOUNTAIN of text that has been written on the subject in the past couple of months, a lot of which include explanations from former Iraqis involved.
post #31 of 444
Quote:
Originally posted by zaphod_beeblebrox
Well, precise claims HAVE been made with respect to the videos and and the Atta-Nidal memo.

Oh my god, are you serious? It's already been exposed as clearly forged, including getting the timeline wrong, by everyone, and even reported in major media like Newsweek.

No wonder you people believe this garbage; you don't even bother to cross check stuff before putting faith in it.
post #32 of 444
Quote:
Originally posted by zaphod_beeblebrox
Two Iraqi defectors have described the kind of training that went on there.

I mean, get with the program already. INC defectors again? There credibility is and always has been ZERO. That's one of the main reasons the pentagon fought with the CIA and State, and why the pentagon eventually created the OSP. State and the CIA didn't want to invest anything in them, and they clearly were correct.

And Salman Pak? Hell, how long has this been discredited for? 6 or 7 months?

This from hersh's may selective intel article (from all the way back in May)
Quote:
Almost immediately after September 11th, the I.N.C. began to publicize the stories of defectors who claimed that they had information connecting Iraq to the attacks. In an interview on October 14, 2001, conducted jointly by the Times and Frontline, the public-television program, Sabah Khodada, an Iraqi Army captain, said that the September 11th operation was conducted by people who were trained by Saddam, and that Iraq had a program to instruct terrorists in the art of hijacking. Another defector, who was identified only as a retired lieutenant general in the Iraqi intelligence service, said that in 2000 he witnessed Arab students being given lessons in hijacking on a Boeing 707 parked at an Iraqi training camp near the town of Salman Pak, south of Baghdad.


__In separate interviews with me, however, a former C.I.A. station chief and a former military intelligence analyst said that the camp near Salman Pak had been built not for terrorism training but for counter-terrorism training. In the mid-eighties, Islamic terrorists were routinely hijacking aircraft. In 1986, an Iraqi airliner was seized by pro-Iranian extremists and crashed, after a hand grenade was triggered, killing at least sixty-five people. (At the time, Iran and Iraq were at war, and America favored Iraq.) Iraq then sought assistance from the West, and got what it wanted from Britains MI6. The C.I.A. offered similar training in counter-terrorism throughout the Middle East. We were helping our allies everywhere we had a liaison, the former station chief told me. Inspectors recalled seeing the body of an airplanewhich appeared to be used for counter-terrorism trainingwhen they visited a biological-weapons facility near Salman Pak in 1991, ten years before September 11th. It is, of course, possible for such a camp to be converted from one purpose to another. The former C.I.A. official noted, however, that terrorists would not practice on airplanes in the open. Thats Hollywood rinky-dink stuff, the former agent said. They train in basements. You dont need a real airplane to practice hijacking. The 9/11 terrorists went to gyms. But to take one back you have to practice on the real thing.


__Salman Pak was overrun by American troops on April 6th. Apparently, neither the camp nor the former biological facility has yielded evidence to substantiate the claims made before the war.
post #33 of 444
Quote:
Originally posted by zaphod_beeblebrox
This claim is without merit.

Guess what. When you bother to do adequate research and not invest so much of your position in famously forged documents, then you will be taken seriously.
post #34 of 444
Quote:
Originally posted by SDW2001
Oh, and since I can't let anything go:




1. The "peace" movement has almost never been right. About anything.

2. There is no evidence that the Bush administration lied about anything....anything at all. There are some questions..."where are the weapons", "why is it taking so long", "why were there so many different reasons given", "why did they focus so much on WMD when there were a million other reasons to go in".....but there is NO EVIDENCE.

3. No Ties to Al-Qaeda: That can't be proven either. We know there were ties to other terrorist organizations. We know Saddam made payments to suicide bombers. But he had nothing to do with Al-Qaeda? Please. We may not know for sure, but the evidence surely doesn't point in the direction of there being "no ties".

4. No WMD: That's not really true either. We have found components. We have found hard evidence of intent to develop them further. We haven't found the weapons, which concerns me as much as it does you. We have found loads of WMD related items, gas masks, etc. Again, this is a valid question...but to come out and say there weren't any or aren't any WMD...that's off base.

5. Intelligence: Show me where you can prove that the Bush Administration knowingly lied about any intelligence. Show me.

6. Illegal Invasion: Again, show me how this statement is supported. Show me the international law the prohibited invasion. Show me the congressional act or part of the Constitution that prohibited it. Bush got Congressional approval. The UN had declared the "serious consequneces" would follow if Iraq did not comply with inspections. Are you telling me they DID comply? Please. And what else would "serious consequences" mean, given that we'd already tried sanctions, inspections, more sanctions, limited military strikes, and then...wait for it...more sanctions?!?! The old "this war was illegal" line is a favorite...but it has no basis in fact.

7. Unreported Deaths: Show me. Someone has to know.

8: Risk to US military: What is the point here? Is there risk? Yes, of course.

9. Country being looted by bullies: So we're there for the money? Unlikely and unsupported...as is the whole article. If we wanted cheap oil, we would have simply PURCHASED it. It would have been one hell of a lot easier than invading, pouring $100 Billion into a war and reconstruction, losing hundreds of lives, and spending years there straightening out the goddamn mess that the regime made the country...don't you think?

Try thinking before you post. We don't have to agree, but don't take some left-wing, Anti-American propoganda rag and splash bold faced print all over the place proclaiming your ridiculous opinion is justified and vindicated.

Once again it's you who are alomost never right about anything!

You pad your posts with half truths ( at best ). No we haven't found any WOMD. Tell me if you were doing a project for your boss would he accept it if you said " I've completed 25% of the work that's good enough isn't it? "

It was an illegal invasion because the UN approved this based on the idea that Iraq was a direct threat to us. That they had those same WOMD.

So what if they found components? We know he had an arsenal at one time. I'd be surprised if we didn't find some remnants of that.

Your arguments are weak and rhetorical.

Give it up. Geez!


A relevent side note. In typical republican fashion....

http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/europe....ap/index.html


This could have been on someone's mind for sometime.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
post #35 of 444
Quote:
[i]It was an illegal invasion because the UN approved this based on the idea that Iraq was a direct threat to us. That they had those same WOMD. [/B]

Prove just that statement, If you can.
Quote:
[i]
So what if they found components? We know he had an arsenal at one time. I'd be surprised if we didn't find some remnants of that.
[/B]

Answer me this, why was that government that you defend keeping these components?

Was if for posterity?
post #36 of 444
The Iraq-al qaeda "link" is a red herring, even if there was a proven one, (which there isn't). Al qaeda has far stronger links to plenty of other countries including Britain, France and Germany..... Including Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Egypt, UAE, Sudan....Including Malaysia, Singapore and the Philippines..... Bush II even said it himself...
Quote:
al qaeda may have agents and cells in up to 60 different nations

. (Whether that's true or not though is anyone's guess, he has lied enough times for me to never, ever again trust anything else that comes out of his mouth).

Iraq is physically close to the al qaeda homeland of Saudi Arabia... right next door in fact: they share a long, remote and largely unmanned border. The fact that al qaeda was more absent than present in Iraq underscores fundamentalist Osama bin Laden/Al Qaeda's and the former secular Iraqi regime's deep and mutual distrust of each other. Bin laden referred to Saddam's regime as "anti-islamic godless heathen" and the paranoid Saddam was obsessed his own power and glory... no way was he going to permit a possible rival space on his stage, especially a bunch of deranged fundamentalists.

Is Al Qaeda in Iraq now? You bet they are. They're converging like wasps to a jamjar. The ongoing terrorism in Iraq (and Saudi Arabia, and Turkey and elsewhere in the region which were relatively stable), the inevitable and much warned-about fallout of the war, has the hallmarks of Al Qaeda and other fundie groups. I wonder how long it will be before the growing ranks of furious, angry vengeful people in the Mid east, now boiling with rage will make it over here to America and start bombing shopping malls and train stations and hotels...just like the Provisional IRA did in the U.K. from 1969 onwards, after London sent the British Army onto the streets of Northern Ireland...and just like bin Laden and Al Qaeda did in the 1990s to US facilities as a result of US forces being stationed on "Mohammed's sacred soil".

Bush's war on terrorism is designed to get "tough" on the one hand (cheap electoral lip-service to yahoos), while at the same time enraging unstable religious lunatic-fringe groups, sparking more terrorism in the process...a self perpetuating cycle of violence in which the only winners are the ones who profit from warfare. For the maintenance of the status quo, they feel there has to be a public bogeyman in the absence of (for example) the USSR and the global "communist threat": Al qaeda and terrorism is a convenient scapegoat to neatly fill the vacuum. It's so convenient because it can't be easily indentified and encapsulated, as can an actual nation. Instead the whole thing remains a nebulous set of shadowy phantoms and dire probabilities, fueled by a cowardly media that is limited to parrotting administration-friendly propaganda. Al Qaeda doesn't even have to do anything "terroristic" these days...all they have to do is chatter on the airwaves...and the US admin. does the rest...terrifying everyone sh¡tless with dire warnings and orange alerts which never pan out, and nobody is ever caught doing anything untoward...
........but keep on shopping.

Quote:
May your tanks swim in a sea of eyeballs

!!!!!
"We've never made the case, or argued the case that somehow Osama bin Laden was directly involved in 9/11. That evidence has never been forthcoming". VP Cheney, 3/29/2006. Interview by Tony Snow
"We've never made the case, or argued the case that somehow Osama bin Laden was directly involved in 9/11. That evidence has never been forthcoming". VP Cheney, 3/29/2006. Interview by Tony Snow
post #37 of 444

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
post #38 of 444
Quote:
Originally posted by NaplesX
Prove just that statement, If you can.

Answer me this, why was that government that you defend keeping these components?

Was if for posterity?

Answer me this : Why not? I'm not being obtuse. It's just that when you have an arsenal of any size and you've gotten rid of it. If some stuff's lying around left what differnce does it make? It's not complete.


As to the rest.....THE PROOF IS IN THE NOT FINDING!
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
post #39 of 444
Quote:
Originally posted by sammi jo
The Iraq-al qaeda "link" is a red herring, even if there was a proven one, (which there isn't).

Talk about spin. No, isn't that a waffle.

Quote:
Originally posted by sammi jo
Iraq is physically close to the al qaeda homeland of Saudi Arabia... right next door in fact: they share a long, remote and largely unmanned border. The fact that al qaeda was more absent than present in Iraq underscores fundamentalist Osama bin Laden/Al Qaeda's and the former secular Iraqi regime's deep and mutual distrust of each other. Bin laden referred to Saddam's regime as "anti-islamic godless heathen" and the paranoid Saddam was obsessed his own power and glory... no way was he going to permit a possible rival space on his stage, especially a bunch of deranged fundamentalists.

You know i have been looking for someone that could read SH's mind. Where were you when Powell went to the UN?

Quote:
Originally posted by sammi jo
Bush's war on terrorism is designed to get "tough" on the one hand (cheap electoral lip-service to yahoos), while at the same time enraging unstable religious lunatic-fringe groups, sparking more terrorism in the process...a self perpetuating cycle of violence in which the only winners are the ones who profit from warfare.

Designed by who?


Quote:
Originally posted by sammi jo
For the maintenance of the status quo, they feel there has to be a public bogeyman in the absence of (for example) the USSR and the global "communist threat": Al qaeda and terrorism is a convenient scapegoat to neatly fill the vacuum. It's so convenient because it can't be easily indentified and encapsulated, as can an actual nation.

When you are on a plane and a guy is threatening to blow it up because his religious leaders told him to, will you be able to Identify your enemy then?

When you saw palestinians dancing in the streets along with other large groups of fundamentalists cheering the deaths of innocent people, you meen to tell me, you did not see who the enemy possibly was?

Quote:
Originally posted by sammi jo
Instead the whole thing remains a nebulous set of shadowy phantoms and dire probabilities, fueled by a cowardly media that is limited to parrotting administration-friendly propaganda. Al Qaeda doesn't even have to do anything "terroristic" these days...all they have to do is chatter on the airwaves...and the US admin. does the rest...terrifying everyone sh�tless with dire warnings and orange alerts which never pan out, and nobody is ever caught doing anything untoward...
........but keep on shopping.

I saw a million people celebrating NYD in NY despite being the biggest target on the map! You call that scared?
post #40 of 444
Quote:
Originally posted by jimmac
Answer me this : Why not? I'm not being obtuse. It's just that when you have an arsenal of any size and you've gotten rid of it. If some stuff's lying around left what differnce does it make? It's not complete.

You are clearly not thinking this through.

It was precisely hidden in homes and who know where else. Why go through all of that for a piece of scrap?

To say it was 'just lying around" is spin to the max.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
This thread is locked  
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › No ties to Al-Qaeda. No weapons of mass destruction. No danger to U.S. security.