[dcolton]

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,132682,00.html

If a Saddam connection is found, is the war justified (asking liberals)

LUGANO, Switzerland — Did Saddam Hussein use any of his ill-gotten billions filched from the United Nations oil-for-food program to help fund Al Qaeda?

Investigations have shown that the former Iraqi dictator grafted and smuggled more than $10 billion from the program that for seven years prior to Saddam's overthrow was meant to bring humanitarian aid to ordinary Iraqis. And the Sept. 11 Commission has shown a tracery of contacts between Saddam and Al Qaeda (search) that continued after billions of oil-for-food dollars began pouring into Saddam's coffers and Usama bin Laden (search) declared his infamous war on the U.S.

Now, buried in some of the United Nation's own confidential documents, clues can be seen that underscore the possibility of just such a Saddam-Al Qaeda link — clues leading to a locked door in this Swiss lakeside resort. (To review a series of documents, audits and other stories related to oil-for-food, click here.)

Next to that door, a festive sign spells out in gold letters under a green flag that this is the office of MIGA, the Malaysian Swiss Gulf and African Chamber (search). Registered here 20 years ago as a society to promote business between the Gulf States and Asia, Europe and Africa, MIGA is a company that the United Nations and the U.S. government says has served as a hub of Al Qaeda finance: A terrorist chamber of commerce

[Zimphire]

There are already connections between Iraq and al Qaeda. ( a lot of al Qaeda terrorists were trained in Iraq.)

But this would def tie Saddam in with it.

[dcolton]

Originally posted by Zimphire:
There are already connections between Iraq and al Qaeda. ( a lot of al Qaeda terrorists were trained in Iraq.)

But this would def tie Saddam in with it.

I know, that is why I directed my question at the libs, who deny the connection.

[Zimphire]

Well if they are denying something that has been proven, why do you think they would buy this?

Not coming down on you dc, but these people will believe what they want regardless of the truth.

[eklipse]

Why would Saddam fund al-Qaeda?

[dcolton]

Originally posted by eklipse:
Why would Saddam fund al-Qaeda?

Why would a terrorist lay siege on a school. Fly planes into buildings?

[eklipse]

Originally posted by dcolton:
Why would a terrorist lay siege on a school. Fly planes into buildings?

Desperation.

[Zimphire]

You know eclipse, even when two people are "enemies" (Which they really werent) when you share a "foe" that tends to bring the sides together.

Saddam has been trying to "Get back" at the US the past decade. He knew he couldn't launch an attack on America under the guise of Iraq. So he probably decided to help those who also wanted to attack America and hide the fact he was involved.

That is VERY Saddam like.

[Zimphire]

Originally posted by eklipse:
Desperation.

While I don't agree it was desperation on their part. That is probably WHY Saddam helped out.

[eklipse]

Originally posted by Zimphire:
Saddam has been trying to "Get back" at the US the past decade....

He has/was?

[Zimphire]

Originally posted by eklipse:
He has/was?

Yes, you don't remember Saddam threatening the US? You don't remember Saddam putting a price on our President's head?

[thunderous_funker]

Originally posted by dcolton:
Why would a terrorist lay siege on a school. Fly planes into buildings?

You obviously didn't understand the question.

Saddam had been murdering, torturing and executing fundamentalist Jihadis for 30 years. Al'Queda was directly supported by Saddam's arch enemy Iran. Al'Queda had even called for Saddam's death.

Just because lazy people refer to all these militant groups as "terrorists" doesn't mean they all have the same agenda.

[dcolton]

Originally posted by thunderous_funker:
You obviously didn't understand the question.

Saddam had been murdering, torturing and executing fundamentalist Jihadis for 30 years. Al'Queda was directly supported by Saddam's arch enemy Iran. Al'Queda had even called for Saddam's death.

Just because lazy people refer to all these militant groups as "terrorists" doesn't mean they all have the same agenda.

Please...

[Wiskedjak]

Originally posted by dcolton:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,132682,00.html

If a Saddam connection is found, is the war justified (asking liberals)

Post rationalization is not the best way to justify an action. You can't execute a serial killer and THEN prove his guilt after the fact. Even if HE is guilty, it would be un-American to do so.

[dcolton]

Originally posted by Wiskedjak:
Post rationalization is not the best way to justify an action. You can't execute a serial killer and THEN prove his guilt after the fact. Even if HE is guilty, it would be un-American to do so.

Please don't try to tell me what is American and unAmerican. Do I try to tell you that curling without being bored beyond belief is unCanadian?

[thunderous_funker]

Originally posted by dcolton:
Please...

Please what? Its not my fault you flunked history.

[dcolton]

Originally posted by thunderous_funker:
Please what? Its not my fault you flunked history.

How does that saying go, "the enemy of my enemy is my friend".

[Wiskedjak]

Originally posted by dcolton:
How does that saying go, "the enemy of my enemy is my friend".

Wasn't Saddam once your friend?

[dcolton]

Originally posted by Wiskedjak:
Wasn't Saddam once your friend?

Sh!t changes! I once had a fiance. Loved her then...hate her now.

[thunderous_funker]

Originally posted by dcolton:
How does that saying go, "the enemy of my enemy is my friend".

Oh well, I guess that proves it then. Nevermind 30 years of facts to the contrary.

The only proven Al'Queda linked group in Iraq before the war was Ansar Al'Islam which was hiding from Saddam in the US patrolled Kurdish region in the north.

Why would Saddam be hunting Al'Queda down and giving the billions at the same time?

[eklipse]

Originally posted by Zimphire:
Yes, you don't remember Saddam threatening the US? You don't remember Saddam putting a price on our President's head?

When did Saddam threaten the US?

[Zimphire]

Originally posted by dcolton:
How does that saying go, "the enemy of my enemy is my friend".

Exactly. If and when these things come out as being true, they will STILL say the same thing. With "Bush planted that evidence" added to it.

Like I said, nothing in going to change. They don't want to believe. So they wont. No matter what proof is shown.

I've come to accept this.

[Zimphire]

Originally posted by eklipse:
When did Saddam threaten the US?

Tell me eklipse do you not see putting a price on the leader of our country threatening?

Anyhow.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/index/iraq/iraq562.htm

BAGHDAD, Iraq (AP) - Vowing that his people's blood ''will not be shed in vain,'' President Saddam Hussein threatened Tuesday to retaliate against the United States. American aircraft attacked Iraq yet again, trying to knock out more air defense sites.

[eklipse]

Originally posted by Zimphire:
Tell me eklipse do you not see putting a price on the leader of our country threatening?

I see it as an Iraqi response to the US bombing of Iraq. Was it ever proven that Saddam himself ordered the assassination attempt?

Is that all you've got anyway?

[Zimphire]

Originally posted by eklipse:
I see it as an Iraqi response to the US bombing of Iraq. Was it ever proven that Saddam himself ordered the assassination attempt?

Is that all you've got anyway?

I just edited my post.

It doesn't matter if it is a response to us Bombing them for NOT COMPLYING.

We didn't just go in there and say "Hey lets bomb Iraq for the fun of it"

Don't back peddle.

The fact is he VOWED to retaliate. Now, how would he do such a thing eklipse?

And you know what? Last I heard the WTC attack was planed in 99.

Coincidence?

[eklipse]

Originally posted by Zimphire:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/index/iraq/iraq562.htm

BAGHDAD, Iraq (AP) - Vowing that his people's blood ''will not be shed in vain,'' President Saddam Hussein threatened Tuesday to retaliate against the United States. American aircraft attacked Iraq yet again, trying to knock out more air defense sites.

'Your blood will not be shed in vain,''

That's not a threat.

[Zimphire]

Originally posted by eklipse:
'Your blood will not be shed in vain,''

That's not a threat.

President Saddam Hussein threatened Tuesday to retaliate against the United States.

You asked me where Saddam has threatened the US.

I showed you.

Stop back peddling.

[eklipse]

Originally posted by Zimphire:
President Saddam Hussein threatened Tuesday to retaliate against the United States.

You asked me where Saddam has threatened the US.

I showed you.

Stop back peddling.

That's an editorialized headline.

[Logic]

Originally posted by eklipse:
That's an editorialized headline.

You expect him to realise that? Soon he will bring up evidence that Clinton said it. Why I don't know.........

[thunderous_funker]

stop derailing the thread. Whether or not Saddam ever threatened the US and under what circumstances has little or no bearing.

Money from the Oil for Food program lined lots of pockets including the vice president of the United States. Does that mean Cheney has links to Al'Queda?

The Bush family did a lot of business with BCCI which also funded terrorism around the globe. Does tha mean the Bush family has links to Al'Queda?

[Zimphire]

Originally posted by eklipse:
That's an editorialized headline.

Spin somewhere else.

Your backpedaling and total denial make you lose credibility.

At least when I am wrong I can admit it.

Why can't you?

He indeed did threaten the US. RIGHT BEFORE the 9/11 attack started in it's planning.

[dcolton]

Welcome to MacNN, where some members will defend terrorists to the bitter end.

[Zimphire]

Originally posted by dcolton:
Welcome to MacNN, where some members will defend terrorists to the bitter end.

And will purposely coerce themselves in denial even when the facts SMACK them straight in the face.

[thunderous_funker]

Originally posted by dcolton:
Welcome to MacNN, where some members will defend terrorists to the bitter end.

You mean like when Ronald Reagan said the Contras (who raped and murdered nuns, torched villages and slaughtered women and children) were the same as America's Founding Fathers?

What this thread really proves is that some people will never tire of re-writting history to support the administration's hair-brained schemes.

[Zimphire]

Strawman No one here has been re-writing anything.

[Zimphire]

Not only that.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,132709,00.html

WASHINGTON_—_Fallen Iraqi President Saddam Hussein (search) did not have stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction, but left signs that he had idle programs he someday hoped to revive, the top U.S. weapons inspector in Iraq concludes in a draft report due out soon.

According to people familiar with the 1,500-page report, the head of the Iraq Survey Group (search), Charles Duelfer, will find that Saddam was importing banned materials, working on unmanned aerial vehicles in violation of U.N. agreements and maintaining a dual-use industrial sector that could produce weapons.
Duelfer also says Iraq only had small research and development programs for chemical and biological weapons.

As Duelfer puts the finishing touches on his report, he concludes Saddam had intentions of restarting weapons programs at some point, after suspicion and inspections from the international community waned.

[Wiskedjak]

Originally posted by Zimphire:
Exactly. If and when these things come out as being true, they will STILL say the same thing. With "Bush planted that evidence" added to it.

Like I said, nothing in going to change. They don't want to believe. So they wont. No matter what proof is shown.

I've come to accept this.

I will believe that there was a connection between Saddam and al Qaeda if actual/verified evidence emerges proving a connection. Faux evidence always leaves me a bit wary.

[Zimphire]

Originally posted by Wiskedjak:
I will believe that there was a connection between Saddam and al Qaeda if actual/verified evidence emerges proving a connection. Faux evidence always leaves me a bit wary.

“There have been several confirmed sightings of Islamic fundamentalists from Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and Gulf states being trained in terror tactics at the Iraqi intelligence camp at Salman Pak,” said Khidir Hamza, Iraq’s former nuclearweapons chief, in sworn testimony before the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee on July 31, 2002. “The training involved assassination, explosions, and hijacking.”xvi “This camp is specialized in exporting terrorism to the whole world,” former Iraqi army captain Sabah Khodada told PBS’s FrontlineTV program in an October 14, 2001 interview.xvii Khodada, who worked at Salman Pak, said, “Training includes hijacking and kidnapping of airplanes, trains, public buses, and planting explosives in cities . . . how to prepare for suicidal operations.” Khodada added, “We saw people getting trained to hijack airplanes. . . . They are even trained how to use utensils for food, like forks and knives provided in the plane.” A map of the camp that Khodada drew from memory for Frontlineclosely matches satellite photos of Salman Pak, further bolstering his credibility.xviii sider these disturbing facts: •The Philippine government expelled Hisham al Hussein, the second secretary at Iraq’s Manila embassy, on February 13, 2003. Cell phone records indicate that the Iraqi diplomat had spoken with Abu Madja and Hamsiraji Sali, leaders of Abu Sayyaf, just before and just after their al Qaeda-allied Islamic militant group conducted an attack in Zamboanga City. Abu Sayyaf’s nail-filled bomb exploded on October 2, 2002, injuring 23 individuals and killing two Filipinos and U.S. Special Forces Sergeant First Class Mark Wayne Jackson, age 40. As Dan Murphy wrote in the Christian Science Monitorlast February 26, those phone records bolster Sali’s claim in a November 2002 TV interview that the Iraqi diplomat had offered these Muslim extremists Baghdad’s help with joint missions.xix

http://www.hudson.org/files/publicat...damarticle.pdf

[PacHead]

What a nice autumn it will be. Bush victory, and further uncovering of the corrupt UN. I'm waiting to see many criminal heads get busted. Practically all non-American. What an enormous evil scandal, and the US is not involved or behind it ?

[Wiskedjak]

Originally posted by Zimphire:
“There have been several confirmed sightings of Islamic fundamentalists from Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and Gulf states being trained in terror tactics at the Iraqi intelligence camp at Salman Pak,” said Khidir Hamza, Iraq’s former nuclearweapons chief, in sworn testimony before the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee on July 31, 2002. “The training involved assassination, explosions, and hijacking.”xvi “This camp is specialized in exporting terrorism to the whole world,” former Iraqi army captain Sabah Khodada told PBS’s FrontlineTV program in an October 14, 2001 interview.xvii Khodada, who worked at Salman Pak, said, “Training includes hijacking and kidnapping of airplanes, trains, public buses, and planting explosives in cities . . . how to prepare for suicidal operations.” Khodada added, “We saw people getting trained to hijack airplanes. . . . They are even trained how to use utensils for food, like forks and knives provided in the plane.” A map of the camp that Khodada drew from memory for Frontlineclosely matches satellite photos of Salman Pak, further bolstering his credibility.xviii sider these disturbing facts: •The Philippine government expelled Hisham al Hussein, the second secretary at Iraq’s Manila embassy, on February 13, 2003. Cell phone records indicate that the Iraqi diplomat had spoken with Abu Madja and Hamsiraji Sali, leaders of Abu Sayyaf, just before and just after their al Qaeda-allied Islamic militant group conducted an attack in Zamboanga City. Abu Sayyaf’s nail-filled bomb exploded on October 2, 2002, injuring 23 individuals and killing two Filipinos and U.S. Special Forces Sergeant First Class Mark Wayne Jackson, age 40. As Dan Murphy wrote in the Christian Science Monitorlast February 26, those phone records bolster Sali’s claim in a November 2002 TV interview that the Iraqi diplomat had offered these Muslim extremists Baghdad’s help with joint missions.xix

http://www.hudson.org/files/publicat...damarticle.pdf

I'm sorry, but I don't see anything in there about any connection between Saddam and al Qaeda. There was mention representatives Saddam meeting with representatives of al Qaeda, but, if true, that is no more significant than Rumsfeld meeting with Saddam.

As to al Qaeda training in Iraq ... well, they trained in the US as well.

[PacHead]

Originally posted by Wiskedjak:
I'm sorry, but I don't see anything in there about any connection between Saddam and al Qaeda. There was mention representatives Saddam meeting with representatives of al Qaeda, but, if true, that is no more significant than Rumsfeld meeting with Saddam.

As to al Qaeda training in Iraq ... well, they trained in the US as well.

Terrorists training at Iraqi terrorist training camps ? Learning hijacking techniques etc ? No connection ?

OK

[Wiskedjak]

Originally posted by PacHead:
Terrorists training at Iraqi terrorist training camps ? Learning hijacking techniques etc ? No connection ?

As Zim is so proud to point out, connections between Iraq and al Qaeda do not mean connections between Saddam and al Qaeda. The 9/11 terrorists and an America connection since much of their flight training took place on American soil. Does that mean there's a connection between the US President and al Qaeda?

[dcolton]

Originally posted by Wiskedjak:
As Zim is so proud to point out, connections between Iraq and al Qaeda do not mean connections between Saddam and al Qaeda. The 9/11 terrorists and an America connection since much of their flight training took place on American soil. Does that mean there's a connection between the US President and al Qaeda?

Many of the terrorists came to the US via Canada. Does that mean there is a connection between a lax immigration policy and Canada harbouring terrorists.

[Wiskedjak]

Originally posted by dcolton:
Many of the terrorists came to the US via Canada. Does that mean there is a connection between a lax immigration policy and Canada harbouring terrorists.

Absolutely. Canada lets in MANY people it shouldn't (but, remember, the US let them in too). However, that is a different issue.

If training in Iraq connects terrorists to Saddam, then training in the US connects terrorists to the US President and training in Canada connects terrorists to the Canadian Prime Minister. Fortunately, I'm not the one who believes that simply training in a country connects terrorists to the leader of that country. I'm afraid I don't believe that a nation's leaders can be held responsible for the actions of the people in that nation (unless, of course, those people take orders from the leader in question).

Did Saddam conspire with terrorist organizations? Yes. Did Saddam conspire with EVERY terrorist organization? No. Did Saddam conspire with al Qaeda? So far, there isn't any solid evidence to support that particular conspiracy theory.

[dcolton]

Originally posted by Wiskedjak:
Absolutely. Canada lets in MANY people it shouldn't (but, remember, the US let them in too). However, that is a different issue.

If training in Iraq connects terrorists to Saddam, then training in the US connects terrorists to the US President and training in Canada connects terrorists to the Canadian Prime Minister. Fortunately, I'm not the one who believes that simply training in a country connects terrorists to the leader of that country. I'm afraid I don't believe that a nation's leaders can be held responsible for the actions of the people in that nation (unless, of course, those people take orders from the leader in question).

Did Saddam conspire with terrorist organizations? Yes. Did Saddam conspire with EVERY terrorist organization? No. Did Saddam conspire with al Qaeda? So far, there isn't any solid evidence to support that particular conspiracy theory.

So Abu Gharib, despite the lack of seriousness, wasn't Bush's fault...right?

[Wiskedjak]

Originally posted by dcolton:
So Abu Gharib, despite the lack of seriousness, wasn't Bush's fault...right?

Originally posted by Wiskedjak:
(unless, of course, those people take orders from the leader in question)

... or, take orders from the people who take orders from the leader in question.

I don't know if the events at Abu Gharib were Bush's fault. So far, there isn't any solid evidence to support that particular conspiracy theory.

[dcolton]

Originally posted by Wiskedjak:
... or, take orders from the people who take orders from the leader in question.

I don't know if the events at Abu Gharib were Bush's fault. So far, there isn't any solid evidence to support that particular conspiracy theory.

For a canuck...you are pretty cool.
Just thought I would share that with you!


edit: After seeing those pictures in the lounge...Wow, just woe. One day I will have to venture a little further than NIagra

[olePigeon]

Originally posted by Zimphire:
At least when I am wrong I can admit it.

[ebuddy]

Did Saddam conspire with terrorist organizations? Yes.

Uppp, that's enough for me. Bye Saddam! Remember, this is a WoT, not a WoAQ. Al Quada is all, but gone from the face of the earth. Osama Bin Laden (if even alive) has all, but been rendered completely useless. History will remember Bush and America kindly. They'll think of others as...well complacent.

I've yet to hear what those in oppostion to our action in Iraq support. You don't believe Saddam was a threat to democracy in the Middle East? Afterall, democracy is what we're fighting for. This plan will squeeze Iran between democracies. Amazing to me how most folks latch on to the WMD argument yet fail to realize the full intent behind our actions. "To change the face of the Middle East". How many times does he have to say this? Bush has authored books on it, numerous speeches, and press conferences. This is his platform. Democratic societies are more peaceful societies. Google anything you want, the above is irrefutable. Do you want a more peaceful world? Join us in the fight. If you want partisan bickering UK style, terrorism, insurgents, dictatorships that hold back International aid to fortify their terrorist networks by spending the critical humanitarian resources on weaponry, starvation, oppression, persecution for gender, religion, and race, third-world state of health care, and commonplace mass genocides...oppose us, but don't come crying to us when the threat comes to you. We're trying to do something about it. That is, other than initiate a 15th UN resolution stating; "no seriously, if you don't comply when then we'll...we'll DRAFT ANOTHER RESOLUTION!" At least, this way I won't have to endure the statement 12 years from now...BUSH SHOULD'VE STOPPED THIS THREAT AT IT'S INCEPTION!!!

[angaq0k]

Originally posted by dcolton:
(...)

If

(...)

Exactly.