9/11 Commission finds no Credible link between Al Qaeda and Saddam

POSTED BY: Zoriah
UPDATED: Wednesday, July 7, 2004 14:06
VIEWED: 22022
PAGE 4 of 10

PREV PAGE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 NEXT PAGE

HERO

Friday, June 18, 2004 6:16 PM

Just wanted to note two things for the record.

1. Russia confirmed today that it had information about Iraqi sponsored terrorist operations, including plans to attack American targets both in and out of the US. Putin said that he made the info available to the US immediatly after 9/11. He still does not favor the war but states anyone who thinks there was no Iraqi-Al Qaeda link is mistaken. Note: this does not mean Iraq was involved in the 9/11 attacks, but since our policy changed to go after all who support terror, involvement in 9/11 is not a needed pretext to justify war.

2. There is no longer a credible link between US hostage Paul M. Johnson Jr's head and his body. Makes American prisoner abuse seem less dramtic, don't it just?

H

KRYPT

Friday, June 18, 2004 6:41 PM

What happened to Mr. Johnson is tragic.

What happened (and is still happening) to civilians in Iraq is also tragic.

Krypt

JASONZZZ

Friday, June 18, 2004 7:05 PM

Zoriah:

you didn't see the frontpage splash of those items in the US papers b/c they were already old news.
Those items you listed in the US frontpage are the current news.

Besides, you are taking things quite out of context.
The 9/11 Commission's task is to look at things related to the 9/11 event. The 9/11 commission chairman clearly delineats this:

"What we found is, Were there contacts between al Qaeda and Iraq? Yes. Some of them were shadowy but they were there," Commission Chairman Thomas Kean said.

"We said that there is no evidence to support the notion that al Qaeda and Saddam Hussein collaborated to produce 9/11," said Commision member James Thompson, then went on to comment that the report agreed with the administration's position that there were contacts between Iraq and al Qaeda. and also: "They may be in possession of information about contacts beyond those that we found." Thompson said. "I don't know, that wasn't any of our business. Our business was 9/11."

No link between Iraq and Al-Qaeda for the 9/11 event[/q] is quite different than "Abolutely no link between Iraq and Al-Qaeda".

JCOBB

Friday, June 18, 2004 7:49 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Ghoulman:

Below

Quote:
Yea... Nixon was innocent. Say, wasn't it the Nixon Administration that sent more and more troops to Vietnam and drafted more and more American kids to die in the jungle?

No! Your right! It was Nixon that started the war! Singlehandly too! I mean, its not like he was elected to office in the middle of the war or anything, hell that wouldn't make sense would it? I mean, its not like he deescalated the war, and pulled out American troops and accelerated the process of Vietnamization, no, no, of course not! That might be logical! I mean, lets just forget, for a moment, the fact that Johnson and Kennedy sent in hundreds of thousands of troops into Vietnam. Lets forget that Nixon removed 520,000 troops from Vietnam in about 3 years, and accelerated training of the Southern Vietnamize armed forces so they could defend themselves without American involvement. God forbid we remember that!

Did he cut off all American troops at once, (which would have been disasterous, both considering the ongoing Cold War, and the situation in Vietnam)? Absolutely not. He's not an idiot, (though don't get me wrong, Watergate wasn't exactly the brightest thing for him to do)he wanted to leave an army capable of defending itself in Vietnam that consisted of the Vietnamize. He did this. At the time America drew out of Vietnam the South Vietnamize had a sizable, and workable military force.

Quote:
*sigh* I give you the REASON Nixon was forced to end the Vietnam war - and you use that to say I'm wrong and ignorant?

You are wrong, and, as far as I can tell, still ignorant. You seem to be under the impression that Nixon *started* Vietnam, and didn't want to end it. He ran under the platform, (though the democratic canidate did as well) of ending Vietnam. You refuse to accept *facts* because doing so would completely destabalize any argument you may have had. That is not wise. Admit you were wrong and move on, thats the way to maintain, at least my, respect.

Quote:
All I'm saying is that the current War isn't motivated by anything new. It's the same Empirical agenda the Nixon White House always had. Ask Kissinger. Ask Dick Cheney.

Yes... Because as we all know it was NIXON that started Vietnam.

Come on, you are sounding more and more like a ranting lunatic and less and less like a sane person. I don't want to be so harsh on you, but it seems you are the only one with any kind of agenda here. Maybe you just got your facts confused, and thats understandable, but do some research into it bud! I think you really need to reexamine some of your beliefs and arguments.

Quote:
About the rest of what you say... I'm getting a tin-foil hat after all.

Good to know this forum has a great sense of humor.

You are a good guy, (or gal?) I just don't agree with yah bud.

I don't care, I'm still free.

SIGMANUNKI

Friday, June 18, 2004 7:55 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Hero:

2. There is no longer a credible link between US hostage Paul M. Johnson Jr's head and his body. Makes American prisoner abuse seem less dramtic, don't it just?

Lowering yourself to shock value, eh

I think that people here (being as intelligent as they are) won't fall for that. So, why don't you keep this dramatic crap to yourself.

----
"Canada being mad at you is like Mr. Rogers throwing a brick through your window." -Jon Stewart, The Daily Show

HERO

Friday, June 18, 2004 8:38 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by SigmaNunki:
Quote:
Originally posted by Hero:

2. There is no longer a credible link between US hostage Paul M. Johnson Jr's head and his body. Makes American prisoner abuse seem less dramtic, don't it just?

Lowering yourself to shock value, eh I think that people here (being as intelligent as they are) won't fall for that. So, why don't you keep this dramatic crap to yourself.

They chop off the head of a randomly chosen civilian. I mention the act and express disapproval. Call me an American, but I guess I'm just going to be the bad guy.

Lowering myself to shock value? Why, I'm just discussing the news of the day. Its supposed to rain tonight. Agassi won the French open. Kerry is looking for a VP. Terrorists chopped an innocent guys head off and didn't offend the flaming liberals infesting this board.

Sorry that last one wasn't really news. Here in Fantasyland chopping the heads off innocents is not offensive to anyone...at most its a unique form of culturally acceptable self expression. But prosecuting people for smoking pot, thats real terrorism.

H

KRYPT

Friday, June 18, 2004 8:49 PM

"Terrorists chopped an innocent guys head off and didn't offend the flaming liberals infesting this board."

Says who? Is there anyone here is not saddended by the death of Mr. Johnson?

Krypt

KRYPT

Friday, June 18, 2004 8:57 PM

An interesting item in my email today:

The Bush administration's continued assertion that Saddam Hussein had long established ties with al Qaeda exposes the administration's
inability to comprehend reality and focus on real al Qaeda threats in Afghanistan and Pakistan.

In so doing, they not only misled the country; they failed in their responsibility to do everything in their power to protect the American people.

While President Bush chased phantom al Qaeda ties in Iraq, the real al Qaeda was regrouping in Afghanistan. Video evidence of new al Qaeda training camps emerged this week. If confirmed, this evidence suggests that the shift to war in Iraq was a monumental strategic error that allowed al Qaeda to regain strength and prepare for more attacks against America and its allies.

The administration's continued insistence on a credible link between al Qaeda and Iraq is dishonest and breaks faith with the solemn obligation to protect the American people.

SIGMANUNKI

Friday, June 18, 2004 11:39 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Hero:
Lowering myself to shock value? Why, I'm just discussing the news of the day. Its supposed to rain tonight. Agassi won the French open. Kerry is looking for a VP. Terrorists chopped an innocent guys head off and didn't offend the flaming liberals infesting this board.

Perhaps you should look at the title of this thread. If you do you'll see that it's about the 9/11 thing. And I for one did see and chopping of the heads 'round then, did you? If so, I'd like a link.

Also, if you wish to discuss the chopping thing, start a new thread. I think that you'll be surprised at the lack off non-offense of the "liberals that infest this board".

Quote:
Originally posted by Hero:
But prosecuting people for smoking pot, thats real terrorism.

Oh you, where do you get your *crazy* ideas.

----
"Canada being mad at you is like Mr. Rogers throwing a brick through your window." -Jon Stewart, The Daily Show

ZORIAH

Friday, June 18, 2004 11:51 PM

I am offended by anyone getting murdered period.

I am offended by any act of terrorism, barbarism, torture, cruelty, despotism, corruption, continued systematic deception of the people....shall I go on?

To wrongs do NOT make a right.

The reasons for invading Iraq were legion, I'm just not convinced that any of them were totally credible, compelling or justified.

So the good news is that an alleged Al Qaeda leader was killed in Saudia Arabia. Can we please find Osama Bin Laden before something worse than 9/11?

PREV PAGE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 NEXT PAGE