If you like Bush & what he's done to this world, you are evil.
POSTED BY: chrisisall
UPDATED: Wednesday, July 2, 2008 19:38
VIEWED: 30693
PAGE 13 of 32
Quote:Thanks pal- I didn't know if ya wanted AU to know...
Originally posted by citizen:
Don't worry AU, Chris's computer FU is not strong. That's why he's getting me to do it :P
isall
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Salman Pak was not used to train Terrorists, a fact the CIA was aware of. Also after the invasion it was determined that Salman Pak was used to train counter-terrorism units.
No it was not used for that, but there were other camps very much like Salma Pak which were used for Terrorist training
http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/006/550k
mbzd.asp
From the Weekly Standard
Quote:
THE FORMER IRAQI REGIME OF Saddam Hussein trained thousands of radical Islamic terrorists from the region at camps in Iraq over the four years immediately preceding the U.S. invasion, according to documents and photographs recovered by the U.S. military in postwar Iraq. The existence and character of these documents has been confirmed to THE WEEKLY STANDARD by eleven U.S. government officials.
The secret training took place primarily at three camps--in Samarra, Ramadi, and Salman Pak--and was directed by elite Iraqi military units. Interviews by U.S. government interrogators with Iraqi regime officials and military leaders corroborate the documentary evidence. Many of the fighters were drawn from terrorist groups in northern Africa with close ties to al Qaeda, chief among them Algeria's GSPC and the Sudanese Islamic Army. Some 2,000 terrorists were trained at these Iraqi camps each year from 1999 to 2002, putting the total number at or above 8,000. Intelligence officials believe that some of these terrorists returned to Iraq and are responsible for attacks against Americans and Iraqis. According to three officials with knowledge of the intelligence on Iraqi training camps, White House and National Security Council officials were briefed on these findings in May 2005; senior Defense Department officials subsequently received the same briefing.
The photographs and documents on Iraqi training camps come from a collection of some 2 million "exploitable items" captured in postwar Iraq and Afghanistan. They include handwritten notes, typed documents, audiotapes, videotapes, compact discs, floppy discs, and computer hard drives. Taken together, this collection could give U.S.
intelligence officials and policymakers an inside look at the activities of the former Iraqi regime in the months and years before the Iraq war.
The discovery of the information on jihadist training camps in Iraq would seem to have two major consequences: It exposes the flawed assumptions of the experts and U.S. intelligence officials who told us for years that a secularist like Saddam Hussein would never work with Islamic radicals, any more than such jihadists would work with an infidel like the Iraqi dictator. It also reminds us that valuable information remains buried in the mountain of documents recovered in Afghanistan and Iraq over the past four years.
Nearly three years after the U.S. invasion of Iraq, only 50,000 of these 2 million "exploitable items" have been thoroughly examined. That's 2.5 percent. Despite the hard work of the individuals assigned to the "DOCEX" project, the process is not moving quickly enough, says Michael Tanji, a former Defense Intelligence Agency official who helped lead the document exploitation effort for 18 months. "At this rate," he says, "if we continue to approach DOCEX in a linear fashion, our great-grandchildren will still be sorting through this stuff."
Most of the 50,000 translated documents relate directly to weapons of mass destruction programs and scientists, since David Kay and his Iraq Survey Group--who were among the first to analyze the finds--considered those items top priority. "At first, if it wasn't WMD, it wasn't translated. It wasn't exploited," says a former military intelligence officer who worked on the documents in Iraq.
http://swyzzlestyx.com/index.html
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
It's funny how Iraq was training radical islamic terrorists, when as a secular government the radical islamic terrorists were gunning for iraq. It's kinda like if the US funded and trained Osama Bin Landen, oh, that actually happened didn't it. Ok, it's like if the US funded and trained the Taliban, ok, again, bad example...
But lets take the article head on:
"The secret training took place primarily at three camps--in Samarra, Ramadi, and Salman Pak"
Salman Pak, you conceed, was not used for such purpose, so I assume I don't need to prove it. So we have Samarra and Ramadi.
In the case of Samarra, I find nothing. I've not heard of it before, I admit, so I googled it. With the search "Samarra Terrorist Camp", I got nothing, the closest being news reports of the post invasion terrorist attacks on a mosque in the town of Samarra. So I see that as suspect at best.
Ramadi is much the same story. The only mention of Terrorist camps comes from the "Weekly Standard", which seems to have plucked the accusation from thin air.
So the main Terrorist training centres are "Salman Pak", which even the CIA knew wasn't, "Samarra" and "Ramadi" which seems to have no mention anywhere beyond the "Weekly Standards" seemingly unsupported editorial. The very fact that Samarra and Ramadi are mentioned in the same breath as Salman Pak bring them in to question, the fact that there seems to be no corroborating evidence seals the deal for me.
More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Ahhhh, but it was in the Weakly Standard, that bastion of "fair-n-balanced-ness" owned by NewsCorpse, who famously bring you other right-wing crap like Faux News and the New York Post.
But it was "confirmed by eleven officials".
Sorry, I need better proof. All you've provided, as AwwCrapper always says, are "opinions".
Mike
"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence[sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero, Real World Event Discussions
I can't help the sinking feeling that my country is now being run by people who read "1984" not as a cautionary tale, but rather as an instruction manual. - Michael Mock
The Myrmidons were an ancient nation of very brave and skilled warriors as described in Homer's Iliad, and were commanded by Achilles. - Wikipedia
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
In the case of Samarra, I find nothing. I've not heard of it before, I admit, so I googled it. With the search "Samarra Terrorist Camp", I got nothing, the closest being news reports of the post invasion terrorist attacks on a mosque in the town of Samarra. So I see that as suspect at best.
Ramadi is much the same story. The only mention of Terrorist camps comes from the "Weekly Standard", which seems to have plucked the accusation from thin air.
Oh, Cit, you silly - don't you know that Google is a left-biased search engine?
;)
Mike
"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence[sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero, Real World Event Discussions
I can't help the sinking feeling that my country is now being run by people who read "1984" not as a cautionary tale, but rather as an instruction manual. - Michael Mock
The Myrmidons were an ancient nation of very brave and skilled warriors as described in Homer's Iliad, and were commanded by Achilles. - Wikipedia
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
So, when Tenent says to Bush, it's a slam dunk, you say Bush is lying. But when Bush wants to point out that OTHER intelligence agencies have their own view on things, Tenent is suddenly 100% correct, trust worthy and his words are pure gold ?
See " inconsistent " in the dictionary, if you will.
And no, the 'slam dunk' remark was about Iraq having wmds, not that we needed more vetting. That's nothing but back peddling to cover one's tracks.
Bush is an odd cat. He'll not place blame on anyone, even when it's clear that they're to blame. He has come out and said mistakes were made, but only in so much as how things were done, not w/ the decisions made to GO to war.
Keeping Tenent, when clearly he should have been replaced , was part of W's plan to reach out and show the Dems and lifers in D.C. that he wanted to do things different. It only ended up costing him.
I'm not talking campaign promises, but specific comments about Iraq, Saddam and WMD. Dems who were all for taking action before suddenly flip flop after the insurgency starts up, things aren't going so well, and they've all forgotten who it was that was FOR this war in the beginning.
And I'd expect you to conveniently overlook the FACT that EVERYONE from Clinton, Kennedy, Kerry and so on were saying Saddams WMD program had to be stopped , as far back as 1998.
UNDERSTAND THIS - It's impossible for Bush to have been lying about Iraq if the DEMOCRATS SAID IT FIRST!
you keep THAT in mind, why don't ya ?
It is not those who use the term "Islamo-Fascism" who are sullying the name of Islam; it is the Islamo-Fascists. - Dennis Prager
" They don't like it when you shoot at 'em. I worked that out myself. "
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
So, when Tenent says to Bush, it's a slam dunk, you say Bush is lying. But when Bush wants to point out that OTHER intelligence agencies have their own view on things, Tenent is suddenly 100% correct, trust worthy and his words are pure gold ?
You must have a problem with reading comprehension. Read my words again:
Quote:
I know you like to blame it entirely on him, and Tenet will even accept his part of the blame (proving that he's not a Republican in the process), but according to Tenet, the "slam dunk" remark was him making the case that we needed more investigation and vetting. He says that us needing more corroboration was a "slam dunk" - not that Saddam having WMD was. So far, his is the only account of that conversation that has been committed to paper, so unless we have a transcript of Oval Office tapes of the day, we may never know if he's telling the truth or not.
But Tenet DOES claim an amount of responsibility for many of the failures of 9/11 and after - something Bush has NEVER done (even claiming in one interview not to have made any mistakes).
So whose account rings truer? Oh, I'm sorry... whose OPINION rings more true?
100% true? Pure gold? Hardly. I pointed out that TENET (his name is George Tenet, NOT "Tenent" - apparently you have a writing comprehension problem as well) gave HIS account of it, and other than Bob Woodward's, it's the only account we've got on record.
You seem to be saying that Bob Woodward's word on this matter is 100% true, pure gold. Is that the case?
Quote:
UNDERSTAND THIS - It's impossible for Bush to have been lying about Iraq if the DEMOCRATS SAID IT FIRST!
"Impossible"? What if they were lying (er, I mean "passing along wrong information" since those are clearly not the same thing, as you've so often asserted)? If they were wrong, and Bush repeats it, does him saying it automatically make it right?
Quote:
And I'd expect you to conveniently overlook the FACT that EVERYONE from Clinton, Kennedy, Kerry and so on were saying Saddams WMD program had to be stopped , as far back as 1998.
Everyone. Every single member of the House and the Senate. Not a single one of them was against the war? You state that as a clearcut, undeniable FACT. And for the record, saying "Saddam's WMD programs must be stopped" is not the same as saying "We must invade Iraq, NOW!" If it were, we'd already have invaded North Korea, Pakistan, and Iran. We haven't, so I have to conclude that wanting a program to cease and invading a nation aren't exactly the same thing.
So YOU keep THAT in mind, why dontcha.
Although I do see that you've moderated your position on Bush's lies. You now accept that he IS a liar, but you've narrowed your focus only to the prelude to the invasion of Iraq. I *guess* that counts as some sort of progress...
Mike
"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence[sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero, Real World Event Discussions
I can't help the sinking feeling that my country is now being run by people who read "1984" not as a cautionary tale, but rather as an instruction manual. - Michael Mock
The Myrmidons were an ancient nation of very brave and skilled warriors as described in Homer's Iliad, and were commanded by Achilles. - Wikipedia
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
It's impossible for Bush to have been lying about Iraq if the DEMOCRATS SAID IT FIRST!
So if I were to say that the Holocaust never happened, that wouldn't be a lie in your view, because others like Ahmedinejad said it first, thereby making it TRUE when I say it. Is that how logic works in your flawed little brain?
After all, how do *I* absolutely know with any certainty that it did happen? I wasn't there, I haven't talked to any survivors or camp guards, so I have no firsthand knowledge of it being "real"...
(For the record, I know the Holocaust happened. I'm using it to point out the absurdity of the argument 'Crapper's put forth.)
Mike
"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence[sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero, Real World Event Discussions
I can't help the sinking feeling that my country is now being run by people who read "1984" not as a cautionary tale, but rather as an instruction manual. - Michael Mock
The Myrmidons were an ancient nation of very brave and skilled warriors as described in Homer's Iliad, and were commanded by Achilles. - Wikipedia
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
The thing about the ranch comment is that it was a lie, an exaggeration is still a lie, albeit a small one, I lived in Texas for two years while I was in the Army and I married a Texas woman, believe me I know all about Texas...However the fact stands that an exaggeration is a lie.
Kwicko there is some basis to the idea that Google is at least favorable to the Jewish community, try Googling Jew. It comes up for the number one search that they are offended by their results! That said there is no way for a robot to be left or right.
Auraptor Tenet doesn't need to be in the picture if you don't want him to be. Joe Wilson, the ambassador to Niger stated that there was no yellow cake uranium coming from Niger, the French were in control of the mines, and they were not about to Give Saddam nuclear capability. There was no indication whatsoever of the existence of any nuclear capability. This is fact, someone went to jail over it and Bush pardoned him. That's right Bush pardoned a traitor, once again I am alluding to the Valerie Plame incident.
Moving on as there should really be no debate about that issue anymore. There was evidence of Saddam using poison gas and other horrific weapons on his own people, these weapons were ahem...of American build sad to say. There was no longer any proof of him having them. The only person who said otherwise was "Curveball" an Iraqi defector, who's testimony was questionable at best. He was a drunk (Alcohol is a no-no for Muslims), and was being paid for information. His testimony was disregarded by the non-Us government that he worked for and the office of the president when they were told this told the analysts to take another look at the evidence for a war in Iraq. This information was released all over the internet and television sources, even I believe to a piece on Fox news. The act of having analysts look over old evidence is not normal procedure. It is called data mining. This means the the information as not allowed to get to congress or the president without first saying what it was supposed to say to jive with an already pre-conceived decision that was made.
So I ask you as I believe Kwicko asked, is the president a lackey or a leader? If he is the leader choosing to cover himself as any good politician would do, then he is good enough to cover his tracks. However, the people whom he chose to surround himself with were all people he was aware were neo-cons, many who were part of PNAC, a group that openly stated they were hoping for a "Pearl Harbor like event" that would allow a faster ability to create permanent basis in the middle east as forward operating bases. They admit that freely. Or is the president some duped idiot going along with what he is told. As scary as it is I'd rather go with the first option.
Oh just a point of note,as far as the Dems flip-flopping, the information that they wre given was cherry picked and many of the same information that the president had seen have been omitted from what was sent to congress for security reasons. In other words they were only shown what they were supposed to see so that they would be in favor of the war. After the actual facts had been released, such as the war would be a long drawn out war, the information to go to war had come from a known unreliable source, there was no uranium, etc. Of course they were going to change their position, not to mention that the dems tried very early on to bring the troops back, but were told that by allowing war in Afghanistan, they had authorized war wherever the president needed to go in the war on terror. I know you remember what I am talking about. Not to mention that when Bush did go in he did not listen to Gen. Shinseki, and forced him to resign because he advised against the president's plan.
Speaking of random memories about Bush I just remembered a few odd things. Remember when he choked on a pretzel? Or how about the time a protester threw a live grenade on the stage he was at but it didn't go off. This guy has got to have a horseshoe up his butt or somethi
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
When there are no heroes where will we turn?[/
How many of you are Vet's ? Anyone serve in Iraq?
I did . I saw what the Iraqi people had to put up with and I am glad that we liberated them .
People seem to forget 9/11. Just like in Firefly,
people forgot Serenity Valley.It's okay to have opinions on politicks but to say people are evil just because they do not agree with you is wrong.
To answer the question above, the answer is ourselfs.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME