Was Iraq connected to the September 11th, 2001 attacks?

[LordJezo]

Originally posted by: classy
Everybody in America believed Bush's "intelligence" and supported the act of war. But now its clear it was a lie. Plain and simple. The man lied.

So did Clinton, Kerry, Liberman, Blair, etc.

Everyone lied. Guess we need to string them all up.

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: LordJezo

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: LordJezo

Originally posted by: Spencer278


You do knew that Clinton information would old. Are you saying that bush gather no new intelligence on iraq the whole time he was president.

Yeah.. more false information from the same people by the same people.

Where was the huge outcry when Clinton bombed Iraq?

Besides the shrill pitched whine of "Wag the Dog" given by the Clinton Haters there wasn't because no American lives were lost and it was relatively inexpensive.

Oh.

So because Clinton did a half arsed job and didn't finish what needed to be done it was okay then.

Makes sense.

What needed to be done and how would have Clinton have been able to get the support from the Republican Controlled Congress to achieve what you think needed to be done?

 

[classy]

Originally posted by: LordJezo

Originally posted by: classy
Everybody in America believed Bush's "intelligence" and supported the act of war. But now its clear it was a lie. Plain and simple. The man lied.

So did Clinton, Kerry, Liberman, Blair, etc.

Everyone lied. Guess we need to string them all up.

One thing is for certain we see Clinton was at least putting forth the effort to nail thess guys. As for everyone else they believed a lie of Bush, big difference.

 

[alchemize]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: LordJezo

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: LordJezo

Originally posted by: Spencer278


You do knew that Clinton information would old. Are you saying that bush gather no new intelligence on iraq the whole time he was president.

Yeah.. more false information from the same people by the same people.

Where was the huge outcry when Clinton bombed Iraq?

Besides the shrill pitched whine of "Wag the Dog" given by the Clinton Haters there wasn't because no American lives were lost and it was relatively inexpensive.

Oh.

So because Clinton did a half arsed job and didn't finish what needed to be done it was okay then.

Makes sense.

What needed to be done and how would have Clinton have been able to get the support from the Republican Controlled Congress to achieve what you think needed to be done?

So what you are saying is, the Democrats were all ready to invade afghanistan, overthrow the taliban, destroy Al Qaida. But the obstructionist Republicans were blocking them.

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: alchemize

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: LordJezo

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: LordJezo

Originally posted by: Spencer278


You do knew that Clinton information would old. Are you saying that bush gather no new intelligence on iraq the whole time he was president.

Yeah.. more false information from the same people by the same people.

Where was the huge outcry when Clinton bombed Iraq?

Besides the shrill pitched whine of "Wag the Dog" given by the Clinton Haters there wasn't because no American lives were lost and it was relatively inexpensive.

Oh.

So because Clinton did a half arsed job and didn't finish what needed to be done it was okay then.

Makes sense.

What needed to be done and how would have Clinton have been able to get the support from the Republican Controlled Congress to achieve what you think needed to be done?

So what you are saying is, the Democrats were all ready to invade afghanistan, overthrow the taliban, destroy Al Qaida. But the obstructionist Republicans were blocking them.

No not at all. I responding to LJ's comment that Clinton did a half assed job in Iraq by bombing them when they kicked out the inspectors and when they tried to Kill Dub's Daddy. BTW, the attempt on the Dub's Daddy's life was the last terrorist attempt by Iraq against America. Obviously the message they got from Clinton was pretty effective.

 

[LordJezo]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn


So what you are saying is, the Democrats were all ready to invade afghanistan, overthrow the taliban, destroy Al Qaida. But the obstructionist Republicans were blocking them.

No not at all. I responding to LJ's comment that Clinton did a half assed job in Iraq by bombing them when they kicked out the inspectors and when they tried to Kill Dub's Daddy. BTW, the attempt on the Dub's Daddy's life was the last terrorist attempt by Iraq against America. Obviously the message they got from Clinton was pretty effective.[/quote]

And that message was what?

-Don't bother us and you can go on your merry way supporting terrorism and raping your women all you like and we wont bother you one bit-

Gee.. good message.

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: classy
Everybody in America believed Bush's "intelligence" and supported the act of war. But now its clear it was a lie. Plain and simple. The man lied.

His entire administration deceived the nation (Cheney, Powell, and Rice included)

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: LordJezo

Originally posted by: Red Dawn


So what you are saying is, the Democrats were all ready to invade afghanistan, overthrow the taliban, destroy Al Qaida. But the obstructionist Republicans were blocking them.

No not at all. I responding to LJ's comment that Clinton did a half assed job in Iraq by bombing them when they kicked out the inspectors and when they tried to Kill Dub's Daddy. BTW, the attempt on the Dub's Daddy's life was the last terrorist attempt by Iraq against America. Obviously the message they got from Clinton was pretty effective.

And that message was what?

-Don't bother us and you can go on your merry way supporting terrorism and raping your women all you like and we wont bother you one bit-

Gee.. good message.[/quote]
No the message was if you attack America, Americans or American interests you will suffer dire consequences.

BTW, it was the First Bush who gave the message to Hussien that it was ok to kill and rape his own people by going back on his word to help them overthrow Hussien right after the first Gulf War. They revolted expecting the US and the Coalition to follow through on their promises of support and were left high and dry and suffered greatly because of it.

 

[Bulk Beef]

I'm still hoping for some actual words from your two examples, Red. Remember that an implication that Iraq had a connection to AQ and an implication that Iraq had a connection to 9-11 are two different things.

In fact, now that I'm thinking about it, if you really wanted to read between the lines, one could interpret

Imagine those 19 hijackers with other weapons and other plans -- this time armed by Saddam Hussein.

to mean that Saddam was not involved with 9-11.

Are you reading something different than I am?

 

[ElFenix]

saudi arabia did. they're next. iraq is a very nice staging ground

 

[TommyVercetti]

In spirit probably. Majority of the Muslim Iraqis were possibly very sypathetic towards the terrorits and I am sure were celeberating.

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: TommyVercetti
In spirit probably. Majority of the Muslim Iraqis were possibly very sypathetic towards the terrorits and I am sure were celeberating.

That's why I wouldn't have sacrificed one American Soldiers life for their so called liberation.

 

What country had a Boeing aircraft set up for training terrorists.
What country had a terrorist training camp called Salman Pak.
What country had the money to pull off 9-11.
What country had realtions with terrorist gorups.
What country wanted the US military disabled.
What country wanted revenge on Bush.

Iraq may not have pulled off 9-11 itself, but Iraq assisted with training, funding and safe haven for the people who pulled it off.

john

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: jdhoeffken
What country had a Boeing aircraft set up for training terrorists.
What country had a terrorist training camp called Salman Pak.
What country had the money to pull off 9-11.
What country had realtions with terrorist gorups.
What country wanted the US military disabled.
What country wanted revenge on Bush.

Iraq may not have pulled off 9-11 itself, but Iraq assisted with training, funding and safe haven for the people who pulled it off.

john

And the proof is???

 

[Orsorum]

Originally posted by: jdhoeffken
What country had a Boeing aircraft set up for training terrorists.
What country had a terrorist training camp called Salman Pak.
What country had the money to pull off 9-11.
What country had realtions with terrorist gorups.
What country wanted the US military disabled.
What country wanted revenge on Bush.

Iraq may not have pulled off 9-11 itself, but Iraq assisted with training, funding and safe haven for the people who pulled it off.

john

Prove it.

 

[lozina]

Originally posted by: jdhoeffken
What country had a Boeing aircraft set up for training terrorists.
What country had a terrorist training camp called Salman Pak.
What country had the money to pull off 9-11.
What country had realtions with terrorist gorups.
What country wanted the US military disabled.
What country wanted revenge on Bush.

Iraq may not have pulled off 9-11 itself, but Iraq assisted with training, funding and safe haven for the people who pulled it off.

john

So we should attack.... America ???

They were trained at a flight school in Florida... they found safe haven in apartments in several states, and they were funded by some corrupt Muslim charities in the USA. (They didn't need much funding anyway- $1000 for the basic flight training? They didn't need to buy the planes)

 

[conjur]

http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/world/iraq/salman_pak.htm

 

[classy]

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: classy
Everybody in America believed Bush's "intelligence" and supported the act of war. But now its clear it was a lie. Plain and simple. The man lied.

His entire administration deceived the nation (Cheney, Powell, and Rice included)

You got it. Bunch of no good thugs and crooks. But Condy Rice is still sweet looking. Damn shame she's a republican.

 

[glenn1]

Prove it.

This isn't a criminal case where there's a burden to establish guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. I think some are looking for Law and Order type evidence or a dramatic courtroom confession to "prove" there was a connection.

Let's look at this as if it were a criminal case, however, and see how Team Bush did in nailing it down.

1. Motive: I think this is somewhat self-evident.
2. Means: Iraq had means. Maybe not WMD means, but means to aid and abet terrorists at least.
3. Intent: The weakest part of the Bush "case" against Saddam. Casting it as an "an enemy of my enemy is my friend" is still a weak way to show that Iraq had knowingly and materially assisted terrorist organizations.
4. Evidence: Again, largely circumstancial. However, in the court of public opinion, you can (and leaders often do) articulate a case for pursuing a particular policy based on circumstancial evidence.


I think the main point, however, is that the court of public opinion is subject to the continuing feedback of the "jury" (the voters). They can go back and remove the "prosecutor" (the leader) if they felt they were misled when he stated his case.

 

[DoubleL]

It was my understanding that he made his decision based on the intelligence that Hussein had WMDs, intelligence provided by the Bush administration. Am I wrong?

Yes you are wrong, Kerry had the same info that Bush did

I think Iraq had something to do with 9/11 one way or the other,

 

Just a few links on Salman Pak, Iraq, 911 connection.

www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/gunning/interviews/khodada.html

www.newsmax.com/showinside.shtm

www.nationalreview.com/murdock/murdock040703.asp

www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/iraq/salman-pak-east.htm

http://politics.guardian.co.uk/archive/article/0,,4296646,00.html


john

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: jdhoeffken
Just a few links on Salman Pak, Iraq, 911 connection.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/gunning/interviews/khodada.html

http://www.newsmax.com/showinside.shtm

http://www.nationalreview.com/murdock/murdock040703.asp

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/iraq/salman-pak-east.htm

http://politics.guardian.co.uk/archive/article/0,,4296646,00.html


john

Turn on that option for Auto parse URLs. And prefix them properly.

 

[SuperTool]

Originally posted by: alchemize

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: LordJezo

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: LordJezo

Originally posted by: Spencer278


You do knew that Clinton information would old. Are you saying that bush gather no new intelligence on iraq the whole time he was president.

Yeah.. more false information from the same people by the same people.

Where was the huge outcry when Clinton bombed Iraq?

Besides the shrill pitched whine of "Wag the Dog" given by the Clinton Haters there wasn't because no American lives were lost and it was relatively inexpensive.

Oh.

So because Clinton did a half arsed job and didn't finish what needed to be done it was okay then.

Makes sense.

What needed to be done and how would have Clinton have been able to get the support from the Republican Controlled Congress to achieve what you think needed to be done?

So what you are saying is, the Democrats were all ready to invade afghanistan, overthrow the taliban, destroy Al Qaida. But the obstructionist Republicans were blocking them.

Congress can declare war, that the president has to execute. Why didn't GOP Congress declare war on terror and afghanistan?

 

[conjur]

http://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/?030512fa_fact

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 Britain?s 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 airplane?which appeared to be used for counter-terrorism training?when 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. ?That?s Hollywood rinky-dink stuff,? the former agent said. ?They train in basements. You don?t 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.

 

[0roo0roo]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: LordJezo

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: LordJezo

Originally posted by: Spencer278


You do knew that Clinton information would old. Are you saying that bush gather no new intelligence on iraq the whole time he was president.

Yeah.. more false information from the same people by the same people.

Where was the huge outcry when Clinton bombed Iraq?

Besides the shrill pitched whine of "Wag the Dog" given by the Clinton Haters there wasn't because no American lives were lost and it was relatively inexpensive.

Oh.

So because Clinton did a half arsed job and didn't finish what needed to be done it was okay then.

Makes sense.

What needed to be done and how would have Clinton have been able to get the support from the Republican Controlled Congress to achieve what you think needed to be done?

lol, clinton probably destroyed whatever wmd saddam had left when he ordered the air/missle strkes against iraq and frankly considering repubs thought clinton and his talk of wmds wag the dog/alarmist bs throughout that entire time its rather disengeuous of them to be so huffed up about wmds now.