Saddam's Terror Training Camps

[lanche]

http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/006/550kmbzd.asp

 

[RichardE]

Originally posted by: lanche
http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/006/550kmbzd.asp

You should probally copy and paste the article as well as provide your own imput or it will probally get locked.

 

[WyteWatt]

Originally posted by: RichardE

Originally posted by: lanche
http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/006/550kmbzd.asp

You should probally copy and paste the article as well as provide your own imput or it will probally get locked.

Besides, everyone knows about the Terrorist Kinderkarten kids building sand castles to, uhh, hide WMD's.

 

[Rainsford]

Two points here...

First, the weekly standard barely qualifies as a news source, it can't even reach the level of credibility and unbiased reporting reached by, say, The Washington Times. When this is reported by more trustworthy sources, I'm all ears. Secondly, in addition to being possibly false, several sections are actually false...chief among them the relationship between Islamic radicals and Saddam. Far from being an assumption of intelligence officials, the lack of cooperation between the two groups is well documented and supported, and has been reported in numerous other sources. Does this mean that Iraq didn't train radical Islamic terrorists with ties to Al Qaeda? Nope, but I'll take THIS particular story with a large block of salt.

 

[CaptnKirk]

Not to confuse the issue, but here are the facts

More data, from above

Islamic-Marxists, who's intent is to overthrow the government of Iran, a splinter group fromed by those who
captured the Americans in Teran and held them captive for 444 days back in the 1970s under Carter.

That Weekly Standard article is pure bullsh!t, and was written by a pro Bush thinktank to obscure the truth and confuse the facts.

 

[WyteWatt]

Originally posted by: Rainsford
Two points here...

First, the weekly standard barely qualifies as a news source, it can't even reach the level of credibility and unbiased reporting reached by, say, The Washington Times. When this is reported by more trustworthy sources, I'm all ears. Secondly, in addition to being possibly false, several sections are actually false...chief among them the relationship between Islamic radicals and Saddam. Far from being an assumption of intelligence officials, the lack of cooperation between the two groups is well documented and supported, and has been reported in numerous other sources. Does this mean that Iraq didn't train radical Islamic terrorists with ties to Al Qaeda? Nope, but I'll take THIS particular story with a large block of salt.

Very true. One of the editors of the Weekly Standard has his own segment on Fox News

 

[jlmadyson]

Originally posted by: WyteWatt

Originally posted by: Rainsford
Two points here...

First, the weekly standard barely qualifies as a news source, it can't even reach the level of credibility and unbiased reporting reached by, say, The Washington Times. When this is reported by more trustworthy sources, I'm all ears. Secondly, in addition to being possibly false, several sections are actually false...chief among them the relationship between Islamic radicals and Saddam. Far from being an assumption of intelligence officials, the lack of cooperation between the two groups is well documented and supported, and has been reported in numerous other sources. Does this mean that Iraq didn't train radical Islamic terrorists with ties to Al Qaeda? Nope, but I'll take THIS particular story with a large block of salt.

Very true. One of the editors of the Weekly Standard has his own segment on Fox News

Fox news, you don't say. Ah yes, but not nearly as fascinating and reliable as all the left wing blogs that are posted with stories daily in P/N. Of course, those certainly qualify as news sources.

 

[techs]

Folks before you dignify this cr*p browse the site in the post.
It is a wacko right wing site.
No credibility. Looking thru the site I see other interesting news like how Dick Cheney is prayed for in the daily prayers of over half of Iraqs citizens.
Yeah, right.

 

[kylebisme]

Weekly Standard is a mouthpiece for the ones who got us into this mess, the PNAC.

 

[conjur]

Please Include Your Own Input with Links and Articles.

 

[Rainsford]

Originally posted by: jlmadyson

Originally posted by: WyteWatt

Originally posted by: Rainsford
Two points here...

First, the weekly standard barely qualifies as a news source, it can't even reach the level of credibility and unbiased reporting reached by, say, The Washington Times. When this is reported by more trustworthy sources, I'm all ears. Secondly, in addition to being possibly false, several sections are actually false...chief among them the relationship between Islamic radicals and Saddam. Far from being an assumption of intelligence officials, the lack of cooperation between the two groups is well documented and supported, and has been reported in numerous other sources. Does this mean that Iraq didn't train radical Islamic terrorists with ties to Al Qaeda? Nope, but I'll take THIS particular story with a large block of salt.

Very true. One of the editors of the Weekly Standard has his own segment on Fox News

Fox news, you don't say. Ah yes, but not nearly as fascinating and reliable as all the left wing blogs that are posted with stories daily in P/N. Of course, those certainly qualify as news sources.

Yeah, but we're taking about THIS particular "news" story. I fail to see how left-wing blog stories make this one any more true.