[Krusty]

"Do you think Saddam Hussein's regime in Iraq was DIRECTLY involved in planning, financing, or carrying out the terrorist attacks of September 11th, 2001, or not?"

Amazingly, months after the 9/11 commission stated no link found between Saddam and 9/11. A full year King George himself admits that there is no evidence of a link, a whopping 42% of Americans still answer "Yes" to this question in a recent Newsweek poll. Simply unbelievable.

http://www.pollingreport.com/iraq.htm

[MacGorilla]

Originally posted by Krusty:
"Do you think Saddam Hussein's regime in Iraq was DIRECTLY involved in planning, financing, or carrying out the terrorist attacks of September 11th, 2001, or not?"

Amazingly, months after the 9/11 commission stated no link found between Saddam and 9/11. A full year King George himself admits that there is no evidence of a link, a whopping 42% of Americans still answer "Yes" to this question in a recent Newsweek poll. Simply unbelievable.

http://www.pollingreport.com/iraq.htm

Further proof that mass brainwashing does work.

[CD Hanks]

Originally posted by MacGorilla:
Further proof that mass brainwashing does work.

I wouldn't say it's brainwashing as it is an irresponsible media, bad intelligence, and a flat out stupid populace.

[zigzag]

A large percentage of Americans couldn't find Rhode island on a map much less understand foreign affairs. The average person has a vague notion that there are a bunch of bad guys with funny names in the Middle East who want to hurt us. Iraq, Iran, Saddam, Osama bin Laden - it's all the same. The administration depends on this: it knows that the average person just wants to hear that the President is "fighting terrorism."

What's remarkable is that there are educated people on this board who persist in arguing that there was a meaningful collaboration between Saddam and al Qaeda. However, I attribute this to political loyalty rather than ignorance.`

[vmarks]

Originally posted by zigzag:
A large percentage of Americans couldn't find Rhode island on a map much less understand foreign affairs. The average person has a vague notion that there are a bunch of bad guys with funny names in the Middle East who want to hurt us. Iraq, Iran, Saddam, Osama bin Laden - it's all the same. The administration depends on this: it knows that the average person just wants to hear that the President is "fighting terrorism."

What's remarkable is that there are educated people on this board who persist in arguing that there was a meaningful collaboration between Saddam and al Qaeda. However, I attribute this to political loyalty rather than ignorance.`

Actually, the 9/11 commission did find connections between Saddam Hussein and Al-Qaida. They did not find collaboration on 9/11, but they did find connections. http://www.9-11commission.gov/hearin...atement_15.pdf - note how contradictory that statement is internally.

[Logic]

Originally posted by vmarks:
Actually, the 9/11 commission did find connections between Saddam Hussein and Al-Qaida. They did not find collaboration on 9/11, but they did find connections. http://www.9-11commission.gov/hearin...atement_15.pdf - note how contradictory that statement is internally.

Page not found

The page you requested was not found on our site. Please notify the webmaster or use our search below to find the page you are seeking.

[vmarks]

I just clicked on the link from the quoted portion of your post. it downloaded the pdf and opened it.

The link is good.

[lil'babykitten]

Originally posted by vmarks:
I just clicked on the link from the quoted portion of your post. it downloaded the pdf and opened it.

The link is good.

Page not found


The page you requested was not found on our site. Please notify the webmaster or use our search below to find the page you are seeking.

[vmarks]

One more time, I clicked it from the quoted portion in LBK's post.

It downloaded the pdf and opened it in Mac OS X's Preview.app.

It works. copy and paste the URL and make sure your browser isn't doing something stupid with text encoding to mess up the URL.

[Logic]

Originally posted by vmarks:
One more time, I clicked it from the quoted portion in LBK's post.

It downloaded the pdf and opened it in Mac OS X's Preview.app.

It works. copy and paste the URL and make sure your browser isn't doing something stupid with text encoding to mess up the URL.

Same problem

[lil'babykitten]

Originally posted by vmarks:
One more time, I clicked it from the quoted portion in LBK's post.

It downloaded the pdf and opened it in Mac OS X's Preview.app.

It works. copy and paste the URL and make sure your browser isn't doing something stupid with text encoding to mess up the URL.

Page not found

The page you requested was not found on our site. Please notify the webmaster or use our search below to find the page you are seeking.

I've tried all that, and I'm in Safari and it still doesn't work. I'm chattin to three other macnn'ers right now, doesn't work for them either...

[CD Hanks]

Clicked both links, both times recieved a "not found" error.

edit: I blame the jewish controlled media.

[lil'babykitten]

Originally posted by CD Hanks:
edit: I blame the jewish controlled media.

[TETENAL]

Page not found for me as well.

Doesn't work in Safari and Internet Explorer.

[MacGorilla]

Originally posted by CD Hanks:
I wouldn't say it's brainwashing as it is an irresponsible media, bad intelligence, and a flat out stupid populace.

That too

[vmarks]

I'm using safari. the link works fine. I'm using the text encoding UTF-8.

At any rate, google it yourselves, it's statement 15 of the 9/11 commission- the one where they discuss who Al-Qaeda worked with, contacted, and so on. It says there one paragraph which is contradictory:

"Bin Laden also explored possible cooperation with Iraq during his time in Sudan, despite his opposition to Hussein's secular regime. Bin Laden had in fact at one time sponsored anti-Saddam Islamists in Iraqi Kurdistan. The Sudanese, to protect their own ties with Iraq, reportedly persuaded Bin Laden to cease this support and arranged for contacts between Iraq and al Qaeda. A senior Iraqi intelligence officer reportedly made three visits to Sudan, finally meeting Bin Laden in 1994. Bin Laden is said to have requested space to establish training camps, as well as assistance in procuring weapons, but Iraq apparently never responded. There have been reports that contacts between Iraq and al Qaeda also occurred after Bin Laden returned to Afghanistan, but they do not appear to have resulted in a collaborative relationship. Two senior Bin Laden associates have adamantly denied that any ties existed between al Qaeda and Iraq. We have no credible evidence that Iraq and al Qaeda cooperated on attacks against the United States."

It cannot be true both that the Sudanese arranged contacts between Iraq and bin Laden and that no "ties existed between al Qaeda and Iraq." If the first proposition is so, then the "[t]wo senior Bin Laden associates" who are the sources of the second are either lying or misinformed.

[TETENAL]

Originally posted by vmarks:
[...], but Iraq apparently never responded

[...], but they do not appear to have resulted in a collaborative relationship.

To me this actually sounds like being in support of the "not ties" theory.

Sure, some "senior agents" talked with Al Qaida, but isn't that the job of agents? I would bet American or Israeli agents talked with Al Qaida as well at some point in time. At least they should if they do their job well.

[chabig]

That link has been removed. Check out the directory itself. There is no more staff statement.

Chris

[Spoogepieces]

Works for me.

[vmarks]

http://www.cbsnews.com/htdocs/pdf/statement15.pdf

is CBS (I know, questionable given their current stance on typewritten documents) archive of the same pdf I downloaded earlier today.

[PacHead]

Originally posted by lil'babykitten:

Yes, LBK, a few million jews are responsible for all the misery and backwards ways of your 1 billion + muslim brothers & sisters.

Those jews must be some smart, smart people.

[spacefreak]

I love how liberals cite parts of the 9/11 report for supporting their argumnet that Saddam had no part in 9/11 (though he was providing logistical and financial support o the group for over a decade), but yet ignore or refuse to acknowledge the 9/11 report when it is concluded that neither Bush nor Cheney trumped up the WMD case or applied any pressure whatsoever on analysts.

Yet another example of the liberals trying to have it both ways.

Here's some good Saddam-Al Qaeda connection info...

I find it absolutely ridiculous that the liberals keep promoting their fantast that Iraq and Al Qaeda had nothing to do with each other...and tha Al Qaeda was not in Iraq pre-war. As if it were likely that Al Qaeda had cells in every country EXCEPT Iraq.

[lil'babykitten]

Originally posted by PacHead:
...all the misery and backwards ways of your 1 billion + muslim brothers & sisters....

Was that one sweeping generalisation you just made? tsk tsk. I was joking, but I know you weren't. Stop trying to cover up your bigotry! Just say it already!

[PacHead]

Originally posted by lil'babykitten:
Was that one sweeping generalisation you just made? tsk tsk. I was joking, but I know you weren't. Stop trying to cover up your bigotry! Just say it already!

Ah, so yours was a joke, but mine was not ? , ok.

[lil'babykitten]

Originally posted by PacHead:
Ah, so yours was a joke, but mine was not, ok.

Exactly. Glad you follow,

[PacHead]

Originally posted by lil'babykitten:
Exactly. Glad you follow,

I did add in a "?"

[lil'babykitten]

Originally posted by PacHead:
I did add in a "?"

Humour is wasted on you it seems.


(I haven't been serious in any of my posts in this thread. Sheesh.)

[constrictor]

Originally posted by zigzag:
A large percentage of Americans couldn't find Rhode island on a map much less understand foreign affairs.

And this, my friends, is our President's base.

[CreepingDeth]

Originally posted by constrictor:
And this, my friends, is our President's base.

If that be true, that Kerry's base is a bunch of self-loathing Americans that'd rather pick up hookers than to pick up a date.

We can play this game.

Besides, an average person with common sense is better than a rocket scientist with no sense.

[zigzag]

Originally posted by vmarks:
Actually, the 9/11 commission did find connections between Saddam Hussein and Al-Qaida. They did not find collaboration on 9/11, but they did find connections. http://www.9-11commission.gov/hearin...atement_15.pdf - note how contradictory that statement is internally.

Contacts do not equal collaborations. How many times does this have to be stated before people grasp it?

As someone else said, your citation does more to disprove a collaboration than to prove one. The apparent overtures had no apparent consequences. We've occupied Iraq for over a year, have interrogated all or most of the important figures, have confiscated the documents and the laptops, and there is no evidence of a collaboration. The idea that a relationship with al Qaeda justified an invasion of Iraq is nonsense.

[Orion27]

Doesn't matter. Iraq materially aided and abetted the enemy while ignoring UN resolutions to disarm. Plus one for the Bush Doctrine. Second, somebody was going to be be singled out for retribution for 911. Trust me when I say we were going to make a point to everyone. Iraq was was chosen and we hope the lesson is learned. Witness the recent deadline put forward on Iran. The French and German credibility are at stake here. Without the invasion of Iraq, we'd be dealing with two armies now instead of just Iran.
I just have to enjoy the liberal tolerance for tyrrany and oppression. That is why George Bush will enjoy reelection as President. The liberals here who denigrate the American people as fools and worse are the saddest of the lot.

Originally posted by zigzag:
Contacts do not equal collaborations. How many times does this have to be stated before people grasp it?

As someone else said, your citation does more to disprove a collaboration than to prove one. The apparent overtures had no apparent consequences. We've occupied Iraq for over a year, have interrogated all or most of the important figures, have confiscated the documents and the laptops, and there is no evidence of a collaboration. The idea that a relationship with al Qaeda justified an invasion of Iraq is nonsense.

[zigzag]

Originally posted by Orion27:
I just have to enjoy the liberal tolerance for tyrrany and oppression.

a) I'll match my intolerance for tyranny and oppression with yours anytime. In fact, it was my primary reason for supporting the forcible overthrow of Saddam, and for giving Bush the benefit of the doubt on the WMD rationale. But even when you fight tyranny and oppression, you have to do it in a prudent, effective, and credible way.

b) I don't recall most (I say most - there are a couple of refreshing exceptions) of todays hawks ranting about tyranny or oppression when Clinton was in office or when, in 2000, they supported a candidate who ran on an anti-nation-building platform. They mostly talk about it now because the administration's other rationales have fallen flat.

[dcmacdaddy]

Originally posted by vmarks:
One more time, I clicked it from the quoted portion in LBK's post.

It downloaded the pdf and opened it in Mac OS X's Preview.app.

It works. copy and paste the URL and make sure your browser isn't doing something stupid with text encoding to mess up the URL.

Page not found


The page you requested was not found on our site. Please notify the webmaster or use our search below to find the page you are seeking.

[dcmacdaddy]

Originally posted by Orion27:
Doesn't matter. Iraq materially aided and abetted the enemy while ignoring UN resolutions to disarm. Plus one for the Bush Doctrine. Second, somebody was going to be be singled out for retribution for 911. Trust me when I say we were going to make a point to everyone. Iraq was was chosen and we hope the lesson is learned. Witness the recent deadline put forward on Iran. The French and German credibility are at stake here. Without the invasion of Iraq, we'd be dealing with two armies now instead of just Iran.
I just have to enjoy the liberal tolerance for tyrrany and oppression. That is why George Bush will enjoy reelection as President. The liberals here who denigrate the American people as fools and worse are the saddest of the lot.

See italics above. How about we single out the guy who orchestrated the attacks, you know,
the guy the President doesn't care about any more, Osama bin Laden. I would have been
fully supportive of Bush's policies if we had invaded and occupied Afghanistan until Osama
bin Laden was caught and brought to justice, and the WHOLE of Afghanistan was brought
under control of the government currently in power there.

All I would like to hear is one Administration official ADMIT they screwed up on the
whole issue of WMD--Please, please tell me where they are if you know--and confess
that because of the screw-up we've got to stay there now and make things right.

[constrictor]

Originally posted by Orion27:
Iraq was was chosen and we hope the lesson is learned.

The lesson has definitely been learned. Other predominantly Muslim countries can be sure that the US military will fail to definitively overthrow them when it is hamstrung by the weak orders of its CIC. All this at the expense of the American economy. The lesson is clear: what reason have the terrorists to stop now?

[Zimphire]

Originally posted by Krusty:
"Do you think Saddam Hussein's regime in Iraq was DIRECTLY involved in planning, financing, or carrying out the terrorist attacks of September 11th, 2001, or not?"

Amazingly, months after the 9/11 commission stated no link found between Saddam and 9/11. A full year King George himself admits that there is no evidence of a link, a whopping 42% of Americans still answer "Yes" to this question in a recent Newsweek poll. Simply unbelievable.

http://www.pollingreport.com/iraq.htm

Yup, and many of them were Democrats.

Bush never said Saddam had any connection with 9/11.

The only people I hear making such claims are Democrats. And they have usually read it from other Democrats repeating it hoping it will be known as the truth.

Just like the "The only reason Bush gave to go into Iraq was WMD" fallacy that so many leftists embrace.

[Zimphire]

Originally posted by constrictor:
The lesson has definitely been learned. Other predominantly Muslim countries can be sure that the US military will fail to definitively overthrow them when it is hamstrung by the weak orders of its CIC. All this at the expense of the American economy. The lesson is clear: what reason have the terrorists to stop now?

What planet are you living on?

[Invictus]

Originally posted by Krusty:
"Do you think Saddam Hussein's regime in Iraq was DIRECTLY involved in planning, financing, or carrying out the terrorist attacks of September 11th, 2001, or not?"

Amazingly, months after the 9/11 commission stated no link found between Saddam and 9/11. A full year King George himself admits that there is no evidence of a link, a whopping 42% of Americans still answer "Yes" to this question in a recent Newsweek poll. Simply unbelievable.

http://www.pollingreport.com/iraq.htm

Well that's getting better actually. It used to be in the upper 60's at one point. Maybe even higher.

I hope they're asking people that actually have an IQ.

[constrictor]

Originally posted by Zimphire:
What planet are you living on?

The one where you claw tooth and nail for lesser taxation yet refuse to work hard enough to make more money than your welfare-hording friends. Amusing place.

[Zimphire]

Originally posted by constrictor:
The one where you claw tooth and nail for lesser taxation yet refuse to work hard enough to make more money than your welfare-hording friends. Amusing place.

Ah yes, the choice to do such a thing. It is here indeed.

Good thing not everyone chooses it.

But what does this have to do with your original comment?

[constrictor]

Originally posted by Zimphire:
Ah yes, the choice to do such a thing. It is here indeed.

Good thing not everyone chooses it.

But what does this have to do with your original comment?

You and your knee-jerking. Amazing.

[Zimphire]

Originally posted by constrictor:
You and your knee-jerking. Amazing.

Knee jerking? How did I knee jerk?

And again, what did it have to do with your original comment?

[constrictor]

Originally posted by Zimphire:
Knee jerking? How did I knee jerk?

And again, what did it have to do with your original comment?

And another. Too much caffeine this morning?

[Zimphire]

I didn't think you'd answer me. Typical.

BTW you might wanna look up the word "knee-jerk'

Requesting you to answer a question that has been asked isn't a knee-jerk.

[constrictor]

Originally posted by Zimphire:
I didn't think you'd answer me. Typical.

BTW you might wanna look up the word "knee-jerk'

Requesting you to answer a question that has been asked isn't a knee-jerk.

Projecting again, I see. You're turning into a typical liberal.

[boots]

Could you please get back on topic? Tit-for-tat can go PM.

[Zimphire]

Originally posted by constrictor:
Projecting again, I see. You're turning into a typical liberal.

[deedar]

Originally posted by CD Hanks:
I wouldn't say it's brainwashing as it is an irresponsible media, bad intelligence, and a flat out stupid populace.

One out of three ain't bad.

[voodoo]

Originally posted by Zimphire:
If YOU have this man on your ignore list then: you're welcome.

He he I remember when you pulled that stupid trick on me. Ah good times.

I think it is obvious to EVERYONE you have been SMACKED DOWN!



Grasping at straws.

[constrictor]

Originally posted by Zimphire:

Such substance. You knee-jerking wanna-be liberal.