Steven Douglas <dsteven@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> On Apr 13, 11:03 pm, deelil...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(Dee) wrote:
> > Steven Douglas <dste...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> > > On Apr 12, 11:01 pm, deelil...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(Dee) wrote:
> > > > Steven Douglas <dste...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> > > > > On Apr 11, 11:23 pm, deelil...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(Dee) wrote:
> > > > > > Steven Douglas <dste...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> > > > > > > On Apr 10, 10:27 pm, deelil...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(Dee) wrote:
> > > > > > > > Steven Douglas <dste...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > On Apr 9, 11:13 pm, deelil...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(Dee) wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > Steven Douglas <dste...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > On Apr 8, 12:08 pm, deelil...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(Dee)
wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > Steven Douglas <dste...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > On Apr 7, 9:37 pm, deelil...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(Dee)
wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > seon ferguson <s...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > "GW Bush: War Criminal" <impe...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >wrote in message
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
>news:1hvyxqq.10y6lprgqbqe5N%impeach@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > seon ferguson <s...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> Yeah why not we tell our kids the Easter
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> bunny and Santa Clause exists so why not
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> the mythical Godman himself?
> >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Someone should expose the current WH
whopper
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > about "executive privilege" for the
fascist ploy
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that it is.
> >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > While there at it they should expose the WMD
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > myths. Its so sad some fools still believe
it.
> >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > It is sad. It's also insane. Is Cheney a bot?
Even
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >the 9/11 re****t said that al Qeada had no ties
with
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >Iraq:http://tinyurl.com/2rfoc4
> >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > There's a bit of leftist "common knowledge" that
(as
> > > > > > > > > > > > > usual) is just plain false. The 9/11 Commission
Re****t
> > > > > > > > > > > > > DID say Saddam had a loose working agreement
with bin
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Laden. That is what was believed, at the time,
by
> > > > > > > > > > > > > intelligence agencies.
> >
> > > > > > > > > > > > Not even close.
> >
> > > > > > > > > > > Another lie of the left.
> >
> > > > > > > > > > Bull****.
> >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > If newer information has disproven the old
> > > > > > > > > > > > > information, and you expected the government to
> > > > > > > > > > > > > know at the time (in advance) that the
information
> > > > > > > > > > > > > they had was wrong, that's called 20/20
hindsight.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > And one thing leftists seem to be very good at
is
> > > > > > > > > > > > > using their excellent 20/20 hindsight to its
> > > > > > > > > > > > > maximum potential for cynical political
purposes.
> >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
>http://www.9-11commission.gov/re****t/911Re****t_Ch2.htm
> >
> > > > > > > > > > > > Maybe you should read the whole thing. "But to
date
> > > > > > > > > > > > we have seen no evidence that these or the earlier
> > > > > > > > > > > > contacts ever developed into a collaborative
> > > > > > > > > > > > operational relation****p. Nor have we seen
evidence
> > > > > > > > > > > > indicating that Iraq cooperated with al Qaeda in
> > > > > > > > > > > > developing or carrying out any attacks against the
> > > > > > > > > > > > United States."
> >
> > > > > > > > > > > If you meant there was no "collaborative operational
> > > > > > > > > > > relation****p," why didn't you say that? Just saying
> > > > > > > > > > > there were "no ties" is a lie of the left.
> >
> > > > > > > > > > Silly semantics. The kind of ties that you're whinging
about
> > > > > > > > > > are completely pissant, and have been discounted in
all the
> > > > > > > > > > summaries as meaningless.
> >
> > > > > > > > > They kept reaching out to each other.
> >
> > > > > > > > Pooh. The bin Laden family has been in bed with the Bush
> > > > > > > > family for many, many years.
> >
> > > > > > > The bin Laden family you're referring to had disowned Osama.
> >
> > > > > > That's another fib.http://tinyurl.com/ys8lz8
> >
> > > > > Okay, you've managed to divert the discussion away from your
> > > > > inaccurate statement that the 9/11 Commisison Re****t said there
were
> > > > > no ties between Iraq and Al Qaeda, when you obviously meant to
say
> > > > > there was not collaborative operational relation****p (which is
not the
> > > > > same as no ties).
> >
> > > > Wrong again. And when are you planning to try to defend your total
> > > > fabrication, "[t]hey kept reaching out to each other"?
> > > If two people with no collaborative operational relation****p hold
> > > occasional meetings, over a course of years, in which they discuss
> > > combining their resources for a possible collaborative partner****p,
> > > you would consider those meetings to mean nothing? Very strange.
> >
> > What's strange is that you have no proof of these meetings, yet you
> > insist that they occurred.
>
> No, I insist that the 9/11 Commission Re****t said they occurred.
"They kept reaching out to each other." is what you said.
Holding occasional meetings, discussing resourses; which came from
*your* imagination. Well, yours and the malignant Dick Cheney's.
>This all started when you said the 9/11 Commission Re****t said there
>were "no ties" between Iraq and Al Qaeda. My entire conversation with
>you is about what the 9/11 Commission Re****t did or did not say.
That's funny, 'cause there's a ****load of words from you in this thread
that say otherwise.
>I say it said one thing, you say it said another. That's all this
>conversation is (and ever was) about.
I've just noted that isn't true. Not one single re****t could conclude
that there were ties...'cause there weren't any.
Just 10 days ago Dickie said that al Qaeda was operating inside Iraq
before his illegal invasion; _under the leader****p of Abu Musab
al-Zarqawi _who didn't ally himself with them until 2004_.
Two quotes from that link you didn't read:
"A declassified Pentagon re****t released Thursday concludes that there
was no direct cooperation between Saddam Hussein's regime and al Qeada.
But Dick Cheney, apparently, remains convinced there was."
More im****tantly:
"[T]he re****t also sheds new light on the concerted effort within the
Defense Department to establish a Saddam-al Qaeda link, despite a
consensus in the intelligence community that Iraq and al Qaeda had only
limited contacts – and that claims of deeper ties were based on dubious
or unconfirmed data."
It's called "making **** up"; something you're apparently very familiar
with. The Bush administration lied their Country into war, which is
surely illegal.
Even the 9/11 re****t said that al Qeada had no ties with Iraq.
http://tinyurl.com/2rfoc4
--
http://www.stopiranwar.com
|
