home

CNN Reports NY Terrorism Threat Originated in Iraq

by TChris

According to CNN, the recent terrorist threat to the New York City subway system originated in Iraq. If this turns out to be true, the president's professed strategy of "fighting the terrorists there so we don't have to fight them here" has been a dud. We didn't have to fight Iraqi terrorists anywhere until the president invaded Iraq, creating a new threat to national security.

< Miers on the Dallas City Council | Weekend RoveGate Reading >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    If anyone has a little bit of sense about what is happening they would have no problem seeing through this Scam! Isn't it odd right after Bushbag's Speech. Poof like magic a terrorist Plot is exposed in Iraq to attact America! Wow, Gee, Looks like the Preznit was right! I'm amazed, amazed. Wait, Wait a minute, the Dept of Home land security says the entire threat is not to be believed. Hmmm Sounds to me. like somebody didn't get the memo!

    Re: CNN Reports NY Terrorism Threat Originated in (none / 0) (#2)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:48 PM EST
    Ed - So eveeryone is lying. The President, the CIA, everyone.. Gesh. TChris - No, the strategy isn't a dud, and why should it be because we have a case of them fighting back? Let's face it, nothing Bush has done or will do will statisfy you.

    Posted by JimakaPPJ at October 8, 2005 11:38 AM Ed - So eveeryone is lying. The President, the CIA, everyone.. the first accurate statement by this commenter

    Re: CNN Reports NY Terrorism Threat Originated in (none / 0) (#4)
    by Dadler on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:48 PM EST
    Jim, Everyone lied to get us into this war. Even the CIA director lied. Credibility no longer exists for this administration. They have none. Lies piled upon lies piled up strategy that seems the product of genuinely retarded minds. The perception of this as an entirely political maneuver to make the president and admin. and their utterly failed war to look more "powerful" and "protective". Yes, Jim, I believe a lot of lies are being told to us every day. By a lot of different people. And I'm basing that opinion on EXPERIENCE with these folks in the past. Bush has NOTHING but instilling fear as a weapon to keep his numbers up and his job from slipping into oblivion.

    Re: CNN Reports NY Terrorism Threat Originated in (none / 0) (#5)
    by Sailor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:48 PM EST
    from the WaPo:Administration security officials had said on Thursday the threat to New York was of "doubtful credibility," a phrase repeated earlier Friday by Bush's spokesman. I'm sure it's just a coincidence that all these terrorism alerts come when bushco is in trouble. bush is a serial liar, why would the drunk who cried wolf ever be believed again?

    TChris still hasn't noticed that Zarqawi was in Afghanistan until we drove him out - and that Iraq - pre-Invasion Iraq - welcomed him in. Of course, if he noticed that, it would blow holes in his argument.

    TChris still hasn't noticed that Zarqawi was in Afghanistan until we drove him out Please note the phrase "drove him out." Not captured, not brought to justice, not even killed, just "drove him out." Fine way t conduct a "Global War on Terror." Just have the terrorists move from country to country. Much like Osama bin Laden. Allow me to remind you that the only criminal conviction of someone related to the 9/11 attacks happened last month - in Spain.

    Please note the phrase "drove him out." Not captured, not brought to justice, not even killed, just "drove him out."
    Indeed, and Fox News is now reporting that Alaskan senators have evidence that the Zarquewy guy has burrowed deep under the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and must be drilled out immediately.

    Re: CNN Reports NY Terrorism Threat Originated in (none / 0) (#9)
    by squeaky on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:49 PM EST
    JR- It is not clear that Zarqawi is even still alive, although he has been mighty useful to the neocon war hawks who have made up a self-serving narrative about him. His links to al-Qaeda are recent as he was a bitter enemy of OBL up to two years ago. We trained him in Afghanistan during the eighties and drove him to align with OBL (2004 or 2005) as we have countless others, due to our invasion and occupation of Iraq.
    Ironically, Zarqawi did go from Jordan to Afghanistan for training back in the Eighties, in the days when the U.S. wanted help in pushing the Soviets out - guess who provided the money for his training! But Zarqawi thereafter created camps separate from those of UBL; and has ever since been seen as a competitor, not a member of UBLís team.
    David Wright For more on Zarqawi here are some links. Zarqawi Myth Cheney uses Zarqawi Zarqawi Dossier 2004 Zarqawi Dossier 2003

    CNN has been getting orders from the White House to help them conflate Iraq and Al Qaeda. This is from a CNN.com story earlier today: "More than 50 members of al Qaeda in Iraq were killed in the six-day mission, a Marines statement said." Uh were they wearing those spiffy Al Qaeda uniforms? Maybe carrying Al Qaeda ID cards?

    Re: CNN Reports NY Terrorism Threat Originated in (none / 0) (#11)
    by squeaky on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:49 PM EST
    syd-Actually they wear an insignia, so they are identifiable. If the CNN report is true that have captured 5-10% of 'al Qaeda' in Iraq. As you suggest I bet the report is as bogus as a three dollar bill.
    Another worrisome sign is that local Iraqi Sunni fundamentalists opposed to the US presence in Iraq have begun joining Monotheism and Holy War, and wearing its distinctive orange and black insignia. These have been sighted among Iraqi crowds on Haifa Street in Baghdad and in Samarra. So now there are hundreds of al-Qaeda members in Iraq where there had been none before.
    From Juan Cole a year ago. They joined al-Qiaida Oct 17 2004.
    DUBAI, Oct 17: The Tawhid wal Jihad group of Abu Mussab Al Zarqawi, the most wanted man in Iraq, has pledged allegiance to Osama bin Laden in a statement posted on Sunday on websites usually used by terrorist organizations. "We announce that Al Tawhid wal Jihad, its emir (Zarqawi) and soldiers have pledged allegiance to (leader of) mujahideen Osama bin Laden," said the statement. It was the first such public pledge by the group led by Zarqawi, whom the United States has branded Al Qaeda's chief operative in Iraq. However, the authenticity of the statement could not be verified.-AFP
    link

    Re: CNN Reports NY Terrorism Threat Originated in (none / 0) (#12)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:49 PM EST
    et al - So just because we didn't kill or capture OBL or the Z guy, all is lost.. You guys are just BHAW. I am LOL. Randy Paul - This is not a CJ investigation. We don't need to read'em their rights. Can you spel W A R???

    PPJ, OBL and Zarqawi are still on the loose as is Zawahari. Spain put a major Al Qaeda behind bars. Spain has done something to make the world safer. While I realize that for you facts are troublesome things, you should know this:
    The State Department decided to stop publishing an annual report on international terrorism after the government's top terrorism center concluded that there were more terrorist attacks in 2004 than in any year since 1985, the first year the publication covered. Several U.S. officials defended the abrupt decision, saying the methodology the National Counterterrorism Center used to generate statistics for the report may have been faulty, such as the inclusion of incidents that may not have been terrorism. Last year, the number of incidents in 2003 was undercounted, forcing a revision of the report, "Patterns of Global Terrorism." But other current and former officials charged that Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice's office ordered "Patterns of Global Terrorism" eliminated several weeks ago because the 2004 statistics raised disturbing questions about the Bush's administration's frequent claims of progress in the war against terrorism. "Instead of dealing with the facts and dealing with them in an intelligent fashion, they try to hide their facts from the American public," charged Larry C. Johnson, a former CIA analyst and State Department terrorism expert who first disclosed the decision to eliminate the report in The Counterterrorism Blog, an online journal.
    Can you spell m i s e r a b l e f a i l u r e? I can: B u s h. With you it's like shooting fish in a barrel.

    Posted by James Robertson: "TChris still hasn't noticed that Zarqawi was in Afghanistan until we drove him out" We drove him out? With a cruise missile? Which supposedly blew his leg off, but then again, he is immortal. That's why Bush avoided attacking him the three times the Pentagon said they could kill him outright. Why did 'driving him out' not work with Bin Laden? "and that Iraq - pre-Invasion Iraq - welcomed him in." And that's a lie. "US officials argue that it was at al-Qaeda's behest that he moved to Iraq and established links with Ansar al-Islam - a group of Kurdish Islamists from the north of the country." Hussein was neither Kurdish (or a friend of Kurdish Islamists). The Iraqi gov't had NO relationship with Ansar, which is, btw, pretty clearly A SAUDI ARABIAN OPERATION (Wahabist). You know, like FIFTEEN of the 19 Nine-eleven hijackers. I guess Saudi Arabia's in the clear, then, eh? When the BBC says 'from,' they mean IN the north, you know, the part the US controlled BEFORE the invasion. There is ZERO evidence that Hussein associated with Zarqawi OR Al Qaeda. No evidence that stands up to the burden of proof of killing 100,000+ civilians in the process of acquiring airbases illegally and in total violation of the UN charter, which is US law. And in total violation of the Resolution which required Bush to get a second UNSC resolution before any military action. Not that the Congress had the right to sign away its constitutional duties, but James, you just keep on spinning the lies -- it's what your keepers expect of you.

    Re: CNN Reports NY Terrorism Threat Originated in (none / 0) (#15)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:50 PM EST
    Randy Paul - So you think putting a few terrorists in jail in Spain is more important than throwing the Taliban, and al-Qaida, out of Afghanistan and killing /capturing thousands more in Iraq and Afghanistan. Uh-huh, sure. No doubt about it. But you might double check that with the female population of Afghanistan. You know, the ones being executed with a shot to the back of the head for being accused of adultery... PIL writes:
    There is ZERO evidence that Hussein associated with Zarqawi OR Al Qaeda.
    I think the two are the same, but I know what you are trying to claim, and, as usual with you, you offer no facts to back up your rants. In the meantime, check out these: Link1
    The 1998 indictment said: "Al Qaeda also forged alliances with the National Islamic Front in the Sudan and with the government of Iran and its associated terrorist group Hezbollah for the purpose of working together against their perceived common enemies in the West, particularly the United States. In addition, al Qaeda reached an understanding with the government of Iraq that al Qaeda would not work against that government and that on particular projects, specifically including weapons development, al Qaeda would work cooperatively with the government of Iraq."
    Link2
    Conveniently, such analyses ignore statements like this one from Thomas Kean, chairman of the 9/11 Commission. "There was no question in our minds that there was a relationship between Iraq and al Qaeda."
    Link3
    "In August 1998, the detainee traveled to Pakistan with a member of Iraqi Intelligence for the purpose of blowing up the Pakistan, United States and British embassies with chemical mortars." U.S. government "Summary of Evidence" for an Iraqi member of al Qaeda detained at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba
    I could continue, but I think we have the facts here. First an indictment brought three years prior to 9/11 and by the Clinton adminsitration. You know, the one more interested in Presidential Libraray donations than forcing SA to cooperate. Then we have a comment by the head of the 9/11 Commission. And finally, the comments of a detainee who was there. PIL, you make me laugh out loud.

    Jim its tough for people to take you serious you start every post talking of how you are LOL. I think your a very bright person and have made some good arguments, but your attempt to continue to blindly connect AQ and Iraq is sad. It demonstrates your lack of knowledge about the ME and the continual need to be right despite all evidence to the contrary. You have leveled yourself to the same ranting and raving that you decry on this blog.

    PPJ wote: So you think putting a few terrorists in jail in Spain is more important than throwing the Taliban, and al-Qaida, out of Afghanistan and killing /capturing thousands more in Iraq and Afghanistan. Jim, Never said that. If you can't engage someone on the merits of their argument, you just manufacture stuff. You are the king of strawmen. One need not exclude the other. Putting people in jail for terrorism is part of the solution. Don't blame me for the fact that you are unable to keep two thoughts in your simultaneously. As for "throwing the Taliban out of Afghanistan", the mission has hardly been accomplished. In any event, you completely ignored the documented proof that terrorism has worsened around the world in the last two years. I can spell W A R. Can you spell W O R S E?

    ........now let's spell L I A R S. it's amazing to me how gullible eagerly ignorant Americans have become.

    my bad.. should have said " gullible AND eagerly ignorant Americans have become. "

    Re: CNN Reports NY Terrorism Threat Originated in (none / 0) (#20)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:50 PM EST
    Randy Paul - You brought Spain up, but ignored the other. That states your position, which is what I pointed out. You are against the war, and believe that a CJ approach is better. We tried that for about 12 years, and all that happened was that the attacks became more frequent, and more violent. So, no strawman involved. Just the facts, as Sgt Friday used to say. As for Afghanistan, I would grant that it is not perfect, but so what? It is improving. Change takes time, which you don't want to admit because you are, bascially anti-Bush and anti-war. And yes, there have probably been an increase in terrorist attacks. I say probably because I have no confidence in the previous numbers, or these numbers, but it makes sense because: Violence increases when a war breakouts. We decided to be more aggressive, and that means they will be more aggeessive. We think we can win on offense. We sure as hell didn't win on defense the last 12 years.

    Re: CNN Reports NY Terrorism Threat Originated in (none / 0) (#21)
    by scarshapedstar on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:50 PM EST
    Oh no, Jim's busting out links from the Moonie Times and the Weekly Propaganda.

    "Please note the phrase "drove him out." Not captured, not brought to justice, not even killed, just "drove him out." Fine way t conduct a "Global War on Terror." Just have the terrorists move from country to country." Hmm - with all those Nazis that fled to South America, I guess that makes WWII a failure? Not to mention the non-prosecution of Hirohito?

    Re: CNN Reports NY Terrorism Threat Originated in (none / 0) (#23)
    by Al on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:50 PM EST
    PPJ, here's what the 9-11 commission actually concluded about the putative link between Al-Qaeda and Saddam, as reported by the Washington Post:
    The staff report said that bin Laden "explored possible cooperation with Iraq" while in Sudan through 1996, but that "Iraq apparently never responded" to a bin Laden request for help in 1994. The commission cited reports of contacts between Iraq and al Qaeda after bin Laden went to Afghanistan in 1996, adding, "but they do not appear to have resulted in a collaborative relationship. Two senior bin Laden associates have adamantly denied that any ties existed between al Qaeda and Iraq. We have no credible evidence that Iraq and al Qaeda cooperated on attacks against the United States."
    This is in total contradiction with what Bush and Cheney were spouting at the time:
    Bush, in his speech aboard an aircraft carrier on May 1, 2003, asserted: "The liberation of Iraq is a crucial advance in the campaign against terror. We've removed an ally of al Qaeda and cut off a source of terrorist funding."
    In September, Cheney said on NBC's "Meet the Press": "If we're successful in Iraq . . . then we will have struck a major blow right at the heart of the base, if you will, the geographic base of the terrorists who had us under assault now for many years, but most especially on 9/11."
    So yes, they were lying through their teeth. JR, dont' try to be clever. Unlike the surviving nazi war criminals after WW2, Al Zarqawi has not "fled". And even though I read the news pretty regularly, I seem to have missed when bin Laden surrendered.

    Re: CNN Reports NY Terrorism Threat Originated in (none / 0) (#25)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:50 PM EST
    Al - The operative phrase in your quote is:
    but they do not appear to
    So what you have is an opinion, a "guess" that there had been no connection. I linked/quoted to a statement that didn't have a qualifier, made by the head of the commission.
    Thomas Kean, chairman of the 9/11 Commission. "There was no question in our minds that there was a relationship between Iraq and al Qaeda."
    You quoted Bush:
    We've removed an ally of al Qaeda and cut off a source of terrorist funding."
    I quote from the 1998 indictment I linked to:
    In addition, al Qaeda reached an understanding with the government of Iraq that al Qaeda would not work against that government and that on particular projects, specifically including weapons development, al Qaeda would work cooperatively with the government of Iraq."
    Now I think that defines an ally... And I guess the detainee was lying. We all know you can't believe them unless they are talking about how they were tortured.... Scar - Yes, with such fictional material as United States Department of Justice Criminal Indictments and direct quotes from Thomas Keane. You are funny, Scar. You really are. Do you think no one can see through your attempt to try and confuse? Yuck, yuck, yuck, yuck... GregZ writes:
    but your attempt to continue to blindly connect AQ and Iraq is sad.
    So Thomas Keane was lying, the detainee was lying and the 1998 indictment is wrong? Come on Greg, you know better. And I promise to keep a straght face. ;-)

    Re: CNN Reports NY Terrorism Threat Originated in (none / 0) (#26)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:50 PM EST
    DA - No one is denying that this is largely a guerilla type war. That is why a country like Iraq, with its infrastructure capable of producing WMD's, must be neutralized. And why it is important to force other countries to control their own terrorists, without having to take military action.

    Re: CNN Reports NY Terrorism Threat Originated in (none / 0) (#28)
    by Al on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:50 PM EST
    OK, let's deal with PPJ's insistence that the chair of the 9-11 commission was certain that there was a relationship between AQ and Saddam. Here is a more extended segment of the transcript where Kean pronounces the words that PPJ extracts, so we can be more aware of the context:
    KEAN: Well, there was no question in our minds that there was a relationship between Iraq and Al Qaida. At one point, there was thought maybe even Al Qaida would find sanctuary in Iraq. And there were conversations that went on over a number of years, sometimes successful, sometimes unsuccessfully. While we don't know about weapons collaboration, particularly chemical collaboration, there was a suspicion in the Clinton administration that when they fired that bomb at that factory, that if, in fact, there were chemicals there, they may have come from Iraq. So there was a relationship. Having said that, we have found no relationship whatever between Iraq and the attack on 9/11. That just doesn't exist. So I think we are very careful in our wording in using that word "collaborative relationship." I mean, that's what we found. It's language that's evidence-based. HAMILTON: In further response, I think there's a very large distinction between evidence of conversations that might have occurred between Iraq and Al Qaida, on the one hand, and an emerging strategy or emerging assistance -- concrete -- on the other. And what we do not have, as the chairman said, is any evidence of a concrete collaborative operational agreement. Conversations, yes, but nothing concrete.
    In fact, a lot more concrete collaboration came of Donald Rumsfeld's conversations with Saddam than AQ's. PPJ's attempt to suggest that the 9-11 commission chair confirmed the lies of Bush and Cheney is disingenuous. Regardless, it is quite clear from these statements that there isn't the slightest shred of evidence that the conversations between AQ and Saddam ever led to anything. PPJ also resorts to the by now classic Rumsfeldism: "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence". In other words, we would have to prove that there was no collaboration. Rubbish: PPJ would have to prove that there was, since that's what he's claiming. Of course, he can't do that, so he equivocates. It's pretty clear to me: In the red corner, we have Cheney never failing to mention Iraq and 9-11 in the same breath. The obvious inference was that Saddam was connected to the World Trade Center massacre, and it worked. A majority of Americans believed at the time that this was true. In the blue corner, we have the 9-11 commission unequivocally saying that there was no link between the two. Here it is again: "we have found no relationship whatever between Iraq and the attack on 9/11. That just doesn't exist". Saddam's "weapons of mass destruction" didn't exist either. Those "mobile chemical weapons labs" that Powell lied about in the UN Security Council didn't exist either. Go back and explain to your bosses that it doesn't work any more, PPJ. People are getting wise.

    Re: CNN Reports NY Terrorism Threat Originated in (none / 0) (#30)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:50 PM EST
    Pil writes:
    ...but I know what you are trying to claim, and, as usual with you, you offer no facts to back up your rants. I offered a series of facts, and you are a liar.
    PIL, you have a potty mouth which I normally ignore because your rantings are such wonderful weapons against the Left. But just because you type something, no matter how wonderful your inflated ego says you are, a "fact" is not established. And calling someone a "liar" because they disagree with you is juvenile to the max and demonstrate how out of control you can become. Provides some links, if you can. Read a dictionary and use words as they are defined, if you can. You write:
    Link1 That link makes an assertion unsubstantiated by any facts.
    Oh, really? Are you telling us that the indictment was totally false because we haven't been to court? Are you saying this, which was also in Link1, is a lie?
    In fact, during President Clinton's eight years in office, there were at least two official pronouncements of an alarming alliance between Baghdad and al Qaeda. One came from William S. Cohen, Mr. Clinton's defense secretary. He cited an al Qaeda-Baghdad link to justify the bombing of a pharmaceutical plant in Sudan.
    I wrote:
    " Thomas Kean, chairman of the 9/11 Commission. "There was no question in our minds that there was a relationship between Iraq and al Qaeda.""
    So Kean is lying, and is soooooo powerful he was able to overcome all the Demos on the commission. PIL, that is a stupid position. Even for you. I quoted Kean because he made a definitive statement after seeing all the information, including the part we didn't see. And of course the detainee is lying. Uh-huh. Sure. No doubt. Anyone who disagrees with you is a liar, aren't they? Is he also a racist?

    Re: CNN Reports NY Terrorism Threat Originated in (none / 0) (#31)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:50 PM EST
    DA writes:
    Saddam's "weapons of mass destruction" didn't exist either. Those "mobile chemical weapons labs" that Powell lied about in the UN Security Council didn't exist either.
    And tell us, why did Saddam a two million dollar bribe to an inspector?"
    Rolf Ekeus, the Swede who led the UN's efforts to track down the weapons from 1991 to 1997, said that the offer came from Tariq Aziz, Saddam's foreign minister and deputy. Mr Ekeus told Reuters news agency that he had passed the information to the Volcker Commission. "I told the Volcker people that Tariq [Aziz] said a couple of million was there if we report right. My answer was, 'That is not the way we do business in Sweden.' " A clean report from Mr Ekeus's inspectors would have been vital in lifting sanctions against Saddam's regime
    So let me see... I have done nothing wrong, so I think I will bribe the cops. Uh-huh. Sure. Makes sense... NOT! I think, DA, that someone is stuck on stupid, and that someone isn't me. DA writes:
    In other words, we would have to prove that there was no collaboration.
    Huh? All three links say there was collaboration. In detail. Nice try and slide away, but you got tagged. DA writes:
    PPJ's attempt to suggest that the 9-11 commission chair confirmed the lies of Bush and Cheney is disingenuous.
    I gave a direct quote. It isn't based on the 9/11 attack, which you try to make it out to be, but it definitely states that there was a relationship. From your comment: (Keane said)
    So I think we are very careful in our wording in using that word "collaborative relationship." I mean, that's what we found. It's language that's evidence-based.
    That you choose to believe that two enemies of the US, after establishing a "collaborative relationship" would be working together is astounding.
    "collaborate" 1 : to work jointly with others or together especially in an intellectual endeavor 2 : to cooperate with or willingly assist an enemy of one's country and especially an occupying force 3 : to cooperate with an agency or instrumentality with which one is not immediately connected
    DA, you're getting PIL's disease. Each of you think words mean what you want them to mean.

    Re: CNN Reports NY Terrorism Threat Originated in (none / 0) (#32)
    by soccerdad on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:50 PM EST
    deleted - commenter warned

    Randy Paul - You brought Spain up, but ignored the other. That states your position, which is what I pointed out. You are against the war, and believe that a CJ approach is better. We tried that for about 12 years, and all that happened was that the attacks became more frequent, and more violent. Puerile Poppycock Jim: You must have a reading comprehension problem. Here's what I wrote: Putting people in jail for terrorism is part of the solution. The only war I opposed is the needless one in Iraq. I never wrote that I opposed the action in Afghanistan. Are you so self-deluded now that you believe you can read people's minds? You're the only one ignoring things, to wit the evidence that the number of terrorist acts has increased in the past two years. Empirical evidence that the so-called GWOT as it is being conducted is not successful as the number of acts of terrorism have increased. Soccerdad has it right. From now on your strawman, disingenous arguments are going to be ignored. You are incapable of engaging anyone on the merits of their argument.

    Jim, on the potty: "Are you telling us that the indictment was totally false because we haven't been to court? Are you saying this, which was also in Link1, is a lie?" An indictment is an allegation. An assertion of facts is not a fact. "In fact, during President Clinton's eight years in office, there were at least two official pronouncements" Assertions. Hearsay. As now demonstrated by the INABILITY of the Bush Liars to make good on any of their promises and ASSERTIONS OF ALREADY HAVING THE EVIDENCE. Bush said he had definitive proof. Cheney said he had definitive proof. Rice, Rumsfeld, Powell -- all claimed, asserted, that they had the proof already in their hands. THEY LIED. They didn't have the proof, what they had was the assertion, assertions they used to promote and carry on an ILLEGAL INVASION, which is a war crime, but more specifically something called: An Impeachment Offense. Which is also an assertion, which we very much need to take to court, aka the US Senate, where these felons can explain how it is that proof they said they had and would show us in time, turned out to be nothing but their own flatus. "So Kean is lying," Correct. "and is soooooo powerful he was able to overcome all the Demos on the commission." Moot. "I quoted Kean because he made a definitive statement after seeing all the information, including the part we didn't see." You quoted Kean because you need a convenient, non-attested, LIE. Forget committees and commissions. Let's put the evidence before the whole Senate, like the Constitution DEMANDS. "And of course the detainee is lying. Uh-huh. Sure. No doubt. Anyone who disagrees with you is a liar, aren't they? Is he also a racist?" Pathetic. He was tortured. If you were tortured you would tell your captors that you eat green cheese out of George Bush's anus on a daily basis. Assertions made under torture are most often LIES. That's according to our own military experts, before Bush turned the screws. Bush is the racist. You're just the eater of his effluent.

    "And what we do not have, as the chairman said, is any evidence of a concrete collaborative operational agreement." And therefore "THE FACTS WERE BEING FIXED AROUND THE POLICY." (Downing Street Minutes) Which is an impeachable offense-- lying to the people and their representatives about the basis for war on an innocent country. A racist theory at its heart.

    Re: CNN Reports NY Terrorism Threat Originated in (none / 0) (#37)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:51 PM EST
    Randy Paul wrote:
    The only war I opposed is the needless one in Iraq
    Okay, you're not anti-war, just wars that you don't like. So why do we bother to have elections? Randy and the anti-war Left will just ignore the results and run their own foreign policy. Terrorist attacks increasing? I agreed with that, perhaps you didnít read:
    And yes, there have probably been an increase in terrorist attacks. I say probably because I have no confidence in the previous numbers, or these numbers, but it makes sense because: Violence increases when a war breakouts. We decided to be more aggressive, and that means they will be more aggeessive. We think we can win on offense. We sure as hell didn't win on defense the last 12 years.
    Let me revisit the above paragraph. You do understand that during a war you have an increase in violence, don't you? But, tell us. What would you do to solve the problem? SD - Obviously you can't refute my points. So you just come with the personal attacks. You're right. Nothing has changed. Darkly writes:
    PPJ, we are talking about the same guy who thought that he wouldn't get invaded....
    Let me get this straight. He thought he wouldn't be invaded. He had no WMDs... So he offers the UN inspector a $2 million dollar bribe. BTW - Do you have any other reasons for him to NOT try and bribe the inspector? I can always use another proof about Iraq having WMD's. And if you want more proof regarding the terrorist connection: Link
    There have been several recent developments. One month ago, Jordan's King Abdullah explained to the Arabic-language newspaper al Hayat that his government had tried before the Iraq war to extradite Abu Musab al Zarqawi from Iraq. "We had information that he entered Iraq from a neighboring country, where he lived and what he was doing. We informed the Iraqi authorities about all this detailed information we had, but they didn't respond." He added: "Since Zarqawi entered Iraq before the fall of the former regime we have been trying to have him deported back to Jordan for trial, but our efforts were in vain."
    BTW - When you quit the "TTFN Whizzy," I'll stop the "Darkly" PIL writes:
    Jim, on the potty: "Are you telling us that the indictment was totally false because we haven't been to court? Are you saying this, which was also in Link1, is a lie?"
    No. PIL. The potty mouth comment was in direct response to you. From your 4:38PM comment:
    (PPJ wrote/PIL quoted) "but I know what you are trying to claim, and, as usual with you, you offer no facts to back up your rants." (PIL wrote) I offered a series of facts, and you are a liar.
    So, you called me a liar. Don't try to confuse the issue by making a comment about the indictment. You call people liars a lot, PIL and you call people racists. Ranting is fine PIL, but I'm going to note every time you go over the top like you did in that comment. And I would agree an indictment is just that. But what we are looking at is a series of events. A series of evidence, not just the indictment. We have the 911 commission saying there were contacts. We have the detainee's comments. We have the King of Jordan's comments. And we have this from my above Link:
    .....there is the evidence. In 1992 the Iraqi Intelligence services compiled a list of its assets. On page 14 of the document, marked "Top Secret" and dated March 28, 1992, is the name of Osama bin Laden, who is reported to have a "good relationship" with the Iraqi intelligence section in Syria. The Defense Intelligence Agency has possession of the document and has assessed that it is accurate. In 1993, Saddam Hussein and bin Laden reached an "understanding" that Islamic radicals would refrain from attacking the Iraqi regime in exchange for unspecified assistance, including weapons development. This understanding, which was included in the Clinton administration's indictment of bin Laden in the spring of 1998, has been corroborated by numerous Iraqis and al Qaeda terrorists now in U.S. custody. In 1994, Faruq Hijazi, then deputy director of Iraqi Intelligence, met face-to-face with bin Laden. Bin Laden requested anti-ship limpet mines and training camps in Iraq. Hijazi has detailed the meeting in a custodial interview with U.S. interrogators. In 1995, according to internal Iraqi intelligence documents first reported by the New York Times on June 25, 2004, a "former director of operations for Iraqi Intelligence Directorate 4 met with Mr. bin Laden on Feb. 19." When bin Laden left Sudan in 1996, the document states, Iraqi intelligence sough "other channels through which to handle the relationship, in light of his current location." That same year, Hussein agreed to a request from bin Laden to broadcast anti-Saudi propaganda on Iraqi state television. In 1997, al Qaeda sent an emissary with the nom de guerre Abdullah al Iraqi to Iraq for training on weapons of mass destruction. Colin Powell cited this evidence in his presentation at the UN on February 5, 2003. The Senate Intelligence Committee has concluded that Powell's presentation on Iraq and terrorism was "reasonable."
    So look at the total, PIL. It's all in front of you.

    Re: CNN Reports NY Terrorism Threat Originated in (none / 0) (#39)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:51 PM EST
    Darkly - No, I just think it is just a stupid thing to do. It is, of course, just a variation of a personal attack, which you know is a no-no. So I offerred you, and do so again, a chance to get back into a discussion mode without it. You don't want to. Enjoy the results, Darkly. Not that I haven't known this, but you will never believe that there was a link between Iraq and the terrorist, because that would splinter your position and remove an attack position. So kindly disregard all of the evidence to the contrary. Including what David Kay said... You do remember him, don't you? I mean his treport is a cornerstone of the Left....
    ...Little noticed in weapons inspector David Kay's recent remarks was his observation that Iraq was not less dangerous than assumed but more dangerous: "I actually think what we learned during the inspection made Iraq a more dangerous place, potentially, than, in fact, we thought it was even before the war." What Kay means is that terrorists were traveling through a country where free-lancing scientists had nuclear, biological, and chemical programs underway -- erratic weapons programs even Hussein wasn't aware of that these terrorists could have easily exploited: "We know that terrorists were passing through Iraq. And now we know that there was little control over Iraq's weapons capabilities. I think it shows that Iraq was a very dangerous place. The country had the technology, the ability to produce, and there were terrorist groups passing through the country -- and no central control." Up until the war started Iraqi scientists were "actively working to produce a biological weapon using the poison ricin," says Kay.


    Re: CNN Reports NY Terrorism Threat Originated in (none / 0) (#41)
    by Edger on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:51 PM EST
    Whizzy:
    ...another proof about Iraq having WMD's.
    In April 2003, Fleischer claimed: "But make no mistake--as I said earlier--we have high confidence that they have weapons of mass destruction. That is what this war was about and it is about." In a March 2003 address to the nation, Bush said: "Intelligence gathered by this and other governments leaves no doubt that the Iraq regime continues to possess and conceal some of the most lethal weapons ever devised." In August 2002, Cheney insisted: "Simply stated, there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons of mass destruction." 2001: Powell & Rice Declare Iraq Has No WMD and Is Not a Threat (WMV file - video link) "Living is easy with eyes closed, misunderstanding all you see." ---Lennon/McCartney "Were you even in the room on the day you lost your mind?" ---Edgey TTFN, Whizzy.

    Re: CNN Reports NY Terrorism Threat Originated in (none / 0) (#42)
    by Sailor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:52 PM EST
    Gee, somehow this thread was originally about how bushco said the terrerist threat came from iraq, (heh, heh ...[/bush]) And somehow it's still bogus! Just every other terrer alert, level orange, duct tape & visqueen scare was before! And before every bushlicker says 'hey, see how good he's done!', I'd like everyone to appreciate how much my lion repellent has saved the US throughout history.