Powell's 'thick file' on Iraq looks pretty thin today.

[Gonad the Barbarian]

Originally posted by: Dari

Originally posted by: BarneyFife

Originally posted by: Dari
on a personal level, another reason why I support the iraqi campaign is because of the celebrations that went on in iraq after the 9/11 tragedy. Iraq was the ONLY country who's government officially supported al-Qaeda's attack on us. No other government; not even The Talibans in Afghanistan; not the fanatical Ayatollahs in Iran, not even psycho Kim in North Korea. Every country on the globe, including the aforementioned nations, sent their flowers and/or condolences. Iraq officially celebrated.

Everyone knew that Afghanistan wasn't going to be only country attacked after 9/11. The official celebrations in that arab capital was further reasons, among many others, to get rid of Hussein. Who's laughing now?

That's a lie. Saddam never supported that attack officially.



http://www.cnn.com/2001/WORLD/meast/09/20/gen.iraq.saddam/
http://abcnews.go.com/sections/world/DailyNews/STRIKES_saddam011023_email.html

WRONG, my stupid friend.
link

feeling embarrassed?

You've been OWNED!!!

Not with that he hasn't, that's detailing Iraqi news sources, not official government statements. You can argue that the government was in control of the newspapers, but without direct quotes from officals it's at best unnofficial support.

 

[Dari]

Originally posted by: DealMonkey
Where does it say in that article that Saddam officially supported the attack? The Iraqi papers, sure, but Saddam? You could make a leap and say the papers in Iraq were essentially mouthpieces for Saddam I guess... But why are you changing the subject Dari? The topic at hand is why is every single talking-point from Powell's little charade in front of the U.N. seemingly full of crap? Huh? Or do you want to wave your flag some more and tell us how much the Iraqis love us now?

Are you that stupid? The Iraqi press were the mouthpiece of Hussein. Do you think they could've said all that without his consent?

as for Powell's claim, prove that they were untrue and I'll acknowledge it.

 

[tnitsuj]

Originally posted by: Dari

Originally posted by: DealMonkey
Where does it say in that article that Saddam officially supported the attack? The Iraqi papers, sure, but Saddam? You could make a leap and say the papers in Iraq were essentially mouthpieces for Saddam I guess... But why are you changing the subject Dari? The topic at hand is why is every single talking-point from Powell's little charade in front of the U.N. seemingly full of crap? Huh? Or do you want to wave your flag some more and tell us how much the Iraqis love us now?

Are you that stupid? The Iraqi press were the mouthpiece of Hussein. Do you think they could've said all that without his consent?

as for Powell's claim, prove that they were untrue and I'll acknowledge it.

"prove that they were untrue" ahhh the neocon refrain throughout this incident.

Space aliens come down from the sky every night and anally rape me without ever actually removing my body from its bed or leaving any evidence. Prove that it is untrue.

 

[Dari]

Space aliens come down from the sky every night and anally rape me without ever actually removing my body from its bed or leaving any evidence.

Space aliens = Mr. Big

Leave your sadistic fantasies out of the forums, freak.

EDIT: In other words, you can't prove that they were untrue, right?

 

[Czar]

Originally posted by: Dari

Space aliens come down from the sky every night and anally rape me without ever actually removing my body from its bed or leaving any evidence.

Space aliens=Mr. Big

Leave your sadistic fantasies out of the forums, freak.

EDIT: In other words, you can't prove that they were untrue, right?

prove to us that they were true

 

[tnitsuj]

Originally posted by: Dari

Space aliens come down from the sky every night and anally rape me without ever actually removing my body from its bed or leaving any evidence.

Space aliens=Mr. Big

Leave your sadistic fantasies out of the forums, freak.

EDIT: In other words, you can't prove that they were untrue, right?

It's impossible to prove a negative.

 

[Dari]

Originally posted by: Czar

Originally posted by: Dari

Space aliens come down from the sky every night and anally rape me without ever actually removing my body from its bed or leaving any evidence.

Space aliens=Mr. Big

Leave your sadistic fantasies out of the forums, freak.

EDIT: In other words, you can't prove that they were untrue, right?

prove to us that they were true

you want proof, go to the institutions that were making the claims. I didn't make them. I support them. Hell, I supported Operation Iraqi Freedom because of the windfall of opportunities that it'll offer. For me, his reasons, given and ungiven, were good enough. Those that are saying it was a lie, either prove it was a lie or ask the gov't to give you the sources and documents they have on file, classified and un-classified.

 

[BarneyFife]

Originally posted by: Dari

Originally posted by: BarneyFife

Originally posted by: Dari
on a personal level, another reason why I support the iraqi campaign is because of the celebrations that went on in iraq after the 9/11 tragedy. Iraq was the ONLY country who's government officially supported al-Qaeda's attack on us. No other government; not even The Talibans in Afghanistan; not the fanatical Ayatollahs in Iran, not even psycho Kim in North Korea. Every country on the globe, including the aforementioned nations, sent their flowers and/or condolences. Iraq officially celebrated.

Everyone knew that Afghanistan wasn't going to be only country attacked after 9/11. The official celebrations in that arab capital was further reasons, among many others, to get rid of Hussein. Who's laughing now?

That's a lie. Saddam never supported that attack officially.



http://www.cnn.com/2001/WORLD/meast/09/20/gen.iraq.saddam/
http://abcnews.go.com/sections/world/DailyNews/STRIKES_saddam011023_email.html

WRONG, my stupid friend.
link

feeling embarrassed?

You've been OWNED!!!

Are you going to produce facts or are you going to do what you do best which is name calling, make immature statements like "You've been 0wn3d", and skirt the issues? Your true colors are showing.

 

[Dari]

Originally posted by: BarneyFife

Originally posted by: Dari

Originally posted by: BarneyFife

Originally posted by: Dari
on a personal level, another reason why I support the iraqi campaign is because of the celebrations that went on in iraq after the 9/11 tragedy. Iraq was the ONLY country who's government officially supported al-Qaeda's attack on us. No other government; not even The Talibans in Afghanistan; not the fanatical Ayatollahs in Iran, not even psycho Kim in North Korea. Every country on the globe, including the aforementioned nations, sent their flowers and/or condolences. Iraq officially celebrated.

Everyone knew that Afghanistan wasn't going to be only country attacked after 9/11. The official celebrations in that arab capital was further reasons, among many others, to get rid of Hussein. Who's laughing now?

That's a lie. Saddam never supported that attack officially.



http://www.cnn.com/2001/WORLD/meast/09/20/gen.iraq.saddam/
http://abcnews.go.com/sections/world/DailyNews/STRIKES_saddam011023_email.html

WRONG, my stupid friend.
link

feeling embarrassed?

You've been OWNED!!!

Are you going to produce facts or are you going to do what you do best which is name calling, make immature statements like "You've been 0wn3d", and skirt the issues? Your true colors are showing.

this coming from the guy who supports the death of US citizens, wherever it may be.

 

[DealMonkey]

Originally posted by: Dari

Originally posted by: DealMonkey
Where does it say in that article that Saddam officially supported the attack? The Iraqi papers, sure, but Saddam? You could make a leap and say the papers in Iraq were essentially mouthpieces for Saddam I guess... But why are you changing the subject Dari? The topic at hand is why is every single talking-point from Powell's little charade in front of the U.N. seemingly full of crap? Huh? Or do you want to wave your flag some more and tell us how much the Iraqis love us now?

Are you that stupid? The Iraqi press were the mouthpiece of Hussein. Do you think they could've said all that without his consent?

as for Powell's claim, prove that they were untrue and I'll acknowledge it.

Are you that much of a jackass? You're assuming all kinds of things. Namely that every Iraqi paper has Saddam line-item everything they publish. Prove they do. That lame link you provided doesn't say anything about Saddam saying jack squat. But back on-topic, Powell made the claims, you back them up, so prove they ARE true. You don't see any of us sitting around making claims. It's the responsibility of the administration to show the claims made before the war to be true. That hasn't happened. Period. End of story.

 

[Dari]

Originally posted by: DealMonkey

Originally posted by: Dari

Originally posted by: DealMonkey
Where does it say in that article that Saddam officially supported the attack? The Iraqi papers, sure, but Saddam? You could make a leap and say the papers in Iraq were essentially mouthpieces for Saddam I guess... But why are you changing the subject Dari? The topic at hand is why is every single talking-point from Powell's little charade in front of the U.N. seemingly full of crap? Huh? Or do you want to wave your flag some more and tell us how much the Iraqis love us now?

Are you that stupid? The Iraqi press were the mouthpiece of Hussein. Do you think they could've said all that without his consent?

as for Powell's claim, prove that they were untrue and I'll acknowledge it.

Are you that much of a jackass? You're assuming all kinds of things. Namely that every Iraqi paper has Saddam line-item everything they publish. Prove they do. That lame link you provided doesn't say anything about Saddam saying jack squat. But back on-topic, Powell made the claims, you back them up, so prove they ARE true. You don't see any of us sitting around making claims. It's the responsibility of the administration to show the claims made before the war to be true. That hasn't happened. Period. End of story.

I'm not part of the administration, asshole. I can't prove the claims. I can only, if I choose to, support them. The onus is on either the government to prove they are telling the truth or on the those that claim the gov't is lying. The argument is between you and the gov't.

As for Hussein, the argument is extremely moot as to whether or not his prints were on those articles. You are an ass for believing otherwise.

 

[Gaard]

Dari, I can't seem to find the word 'support' anywhere in the story you linked to. Can you help me out?

 

[Dari]

Originally posted by: Gaard
Dari, I can't seem to find the word 'support' anywhere in the story you linked to. Can you help me out?

Use the thesaurus, you'll find a lot of words in the link that could roughly be replaced with "support."

 

[Gaard]

Which of these do you think fits?

****************************88

Entry Word: support
Function: verb
Text: 1
Synonyms BEAR 10, abide, brook, endure, go, stand, ||stick, stomach, swallow, take
2 to favor actively in the face of opposition <support an unpopular economic policy>
Synonyms advocate, back, backstop, champion, side (with), uphold
Related Word applaud, approve, endorse, favor, plunk (for), pull (for), root; adopt, embrace, espouse; defend, maintain, sustain
Idioms align oneself with, be on (someone's) side, take (someone's) side
Contrasted Words battle, combat, counter, fight, oppose; withstand
Antonyms buck
3 to supply what is needed for sustenance <support his family>
Synonyms maintain, provide (for)
Idioms boil the pot, bring home the bacon, make a living for, take care of
4 to hold up in position by serving as a foundation or base for <pillars supporting an arch>
Synonyms bear up, bolster, brace, buttress, carry, prop, shore (up), sustain, upbear, uphold
Related Word stand
5 to keep from yielding, sinking, or losing courage or stability <her friends supported her during the crisis>
Synonyms bolster, buoy (up), prop, sustain, underprop, uphold; ENCOURAGE 1
Related Word encourage; fortify, stiffen, strengthen

 

[Dari]

Originally posted by: Gaard
Which of these do you think fits?

****************************88

Entry Word: support
Function: verb
Text: 1
Synonyms BEAR 10, abide, brook, endure, go, stand, ||stick, stomach, swallow, take
2 to favor actively in the face of opposition <support an unpopular economic policy>
Synonyms advocate, back, backstop, champion, side (with), uphold
Related Word applaud, approve, endorse, favor, plunk (for), pull (for), root; adopt, embrace, espouse; defend, maintain, sustain
Idioms align oneself with, be on (someone's) side, take (someone's) side
Contrasted Words battle, combat, counter, fight, oppose; withstand
Antonyms buck
3 to supply what is needed for sustenance <support his family>
Synonyms maintain, provide (for)
Idioms boil the pot, bring home the bacon, make a living for, take care of
4 to hold up in position by serving as a foundation or base for <pillars supporting an arch>
Synonyms bear up, bolster, brace, buttress, carry, prop, shore (up), sustain, upbear, uphold
Related Word stand
5 to keep from yielding, sinking, or losing courage or stability <her friends supported her during the crisis>
Synonyms bolster, buoy (up), prop, sustain, underprop, uphold; ENCOURAGE 1
Related Word encourage; fortify, stiffen, strengthen

How about HAILS?

 

[BaliBabyDoc]

Dari, I'm sure Saddam got a chuckle out of 9/11 . . . unfortunately being an arsehole is not an international crime . . . if it was several members of the Bush administration would be on lockdown.

 

[Gaard]

Does this sound about right to you?

on a personal level, another reason why I support the iraqi campaign is because of the celebrations that went on in iraq after the 9/11 tragedy. Iraq was the ONLY country who's government officially hailed al-Qaeda's attack on us. No other government; not even The Talibans in Afghanistan; not the fanatical Ayatollahs in Iran, not even psycho Kim in North Korea. Every country on the globe, including the aforementioned nations, sent their flowers and/or condolences. Iraq officially celebrated.

Everyone knew that Afghanistan wasn't going to be only country attacked after 9/11. The official celebrations in that arab capital was further reasons, among many others, to get rid of Hussein. Who's laughing now?



I also would like to question this statement by you...Iraq officially celebrated. Can you explain this? I'm not understanding you.

 

[Dari]

Originally posted by: BaliBabyDoc
Dari, I'm sure Saddam got a chuckle out of 9/11 . . . unfortunately being an arsehole is not an international crime . . . if it was several members of the Bush administration would be on lockdown.

I said that was one of my personal reasons for supporting the war. I remember the chuckles and "cowboy mentality" quips from saddam very well. Vengeance is truly sweet.

 

[DealMonkey]

Originally posted by: Gaard
Does this sound about right to you?

on a personal level, another reason why I support the iraqi campaign is because of the celebrations that went on in iraq after the 9/11 tragedy. Iraq was the ONLY country who's government officially hailed al-Qaeda's attack on us. No other government; not even The Talibans in Afghanistan; not the fanatical Ayatollahs in Iran, not even psycho Kim in North Korea. Every country on the globe, including the aforementioned nations, sent their flowers and/or condolences. Iraq officially celebrated.

Everyone knew that Afghanistan wasn't going to be only country attacked after 9/11. The official celebrations in that arab capital was further reasons, among many others, to get rid of Hussein. Who's laughing now?



I also would like to question this statement by you...Iraq officially celebrated. Can you explain this? I'm not understanding you.

Yeah, basically Dari's excuse to go to war boils down to: (1) They laughed at us, (2) Somehow it boosts his bottom line. So he's essentially profiting from the war. Wow, great reasons to bomb them out of existance...

 

[Dari]

Originally posted by: Gaard
Does this sound about right to you?

on a personal level, another reason why I support the iraqi campaign is because of the celebrations that went on in iraq after the 9/11 tragedy. Iraq was the ONLY country who's government officially hailed al-Qaeda's attack on us. No other government; not even The Talibans in Afghanistan; not the fanatical Ayatollahs in Iran, not even psycho Kim in North Korea. Every country on the globe, including the aforementioned nations, sent their flowers and/or condolences. Iraq officially celebrated.

Everyone knew that Afghanistan wasn't going to be only country attacked after 9/11. The official celebrations in that arab capital was further reasons, among many others, to get rid of Hussein. Who's laughing now?



I also would like to question this statement by you...Iraq officially celebrated. Can you explain this? I'm not understanding you.

My God, can't you put 1+1 together? Fvck. Do I have to spell it out for you? The man, via his media outlets, hailed the attacks. In other words, whether or not he had anything to do with it, he supported the attacks on us. No one hails something without supporting it. Since Saddam is representative of Iraq, and since the media outlets are his mouthpiece, then the government officially supported the 9/11 attacks.

 

[Gaard]

Can I ask why you say he hailed the attacks. Is stating why you think something happened the same as hailing it?

 

[Dari]

Originally posted by: Gaard
Can I ask why you say he hailed the attacks. Is stating why you think something happened the same as hailing it?

Read my previous post. And, word to the wise, you need to start using the masses of atoms above your neck. Think.

 

[Gaard]

You mean your chuckles and 'cowboy mentality' quips post? So those two things mean that he supported the attacks? Why don't you just admit the fact that you support the war, not because Saddam supported the attacks on the WTC, but because he laughed about them. Which, IMA, aren't the same thing.

 

[BarneyFife]

Originally posted by: Dari

Originally posted by: Gaard
Can I ask why you say he hailed the attacks. Is stating why you think something happened the same as hailing it?

Read my previous post. And, word to the wise, you need to start using the masses of atoms above your neck. Think.

Stop insulting everyone and show us where Saddam hailed the attacks and where Iraq officially celebrated? Did they have a fireworks show and invite Tom Jones to sing "Sex bomb"?

 

[CaptnKirk]

The day after the 9/11 attacks, FOX News brought out some old video clips of a bunch of Arabs jumping up and down
doing their 'Street Hop' celebration - like they always show on TV, and alledged that it was Iraqi's celebrationg over
the attack on America by Al Queda. At this time common Iraqi people didn't know Jack about it, they don't have open source coverage.
They showed it to the ignorant American Media stooges, and they bought the act - thought that they really did celebtate it.
Months later they retracted their allegation, only claimed that they had shown typical events in Iraq, not 9/11 celebration.

Early formativre days of FOX Media shilling of the Pro-Bush Patriotic message - it attracts viewers, ignorant viewers.
Viewers who really don't want the true circumstances, just reactionary vengance seeking viewers.
"See them damn Ragheads jumpin' round cheering our destruction ! Let's get the posse & head 'em off at the pass."

Closest info I could find was vauge - and about Palestinians