Pentagon: Saddam Hussein's Iraq had no links to Al Qaeda
- Thread starter Tibu
- Start date
Playboypenguin
Moderator
you don't actually have to do it, you just have to create the perception and then use it as an excuse while the puppet govt looks the other way.
Playboypenguin
Moderator
..or just gullible and easily led by oil companies, private contact companies, and other suppliers of war time needs who are making a fortune in cost plus percentage and no bid contracts.
The report does not state there was no AlQ in Iraq, it states there was not 'operational' link to AlQ. The semantics game again. And it not only doesn't state that Saddam's Iraq wasn't involved in terrorism, it states the OPPOSITE.
The article in the OP from CNN admits:
Although the double mindedness of many here won't be admitted, it has become shamelessly obvious in this, and 'the other' thread. Semantics games are rebuked there but reveled in here. The details and exact text are parsed there, and ignored here, the validity of 'the mass media' is denounced there and swallowed up here. The credibility of government reports is not only denounced there but if someone were to reference a government report they were mocked as silly for considering anything the government told you as truthful. Which is it? Or is it that repeated line of 'only believing what you WANT to believe'. Surly you don't just accept CNN's reports as accrurate. Or do you only check the accuracy of the 'mass media' when it conflicts with what you THINK or FEEL the truth is?
Let's look at what ELSE the report says without relying on just CNN.
http://www.nysun.com/article/72906
If you would like to obtain a copy you can request one at the URL below...
http://www.jwfc.jfcom.mil/webapps/forms/USJFCOM/feedback.jsp
Request your copy in the feedback field. I got a pretty quick response saying that if I provide my mailing address a CD of the report would be mailed. I guess it is a very large file. Odds are it will surface on the net soon anyway.
The report's findings again are NOT that Saddam's Iraq wasn't entangled in terrorism. Our assertion before Operation Iraqi Freedom was that they were, and that seems to be confirmed, and that their efforts were a threat to the US, also seems to be confirmed. Those that were 'testifying' (admittedly inappropriate term but was applied in another thread by another poster) about WMDs and th threat of Iraq (People 'brainwashed' by Bush I suppose):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ePb6H-j51xE
This looks like a thread that is going to reveal alot about some posters. Will the claim of wanting to know vs. wanting what you think/feel affirmed stand or will the blindness of disdain and double mindedness shown be confirmed as now the reports are being spun left.
18 pages in 3 days?
The article in the OP from CNN admits:
Although the double mindedness of many here won't be admitted, it has become shamelessly obvious in this, and 'the other' thread. Semantics games are rebuked there but reveled in here. The details and exact text are parsed there, and ignored here, the validity of 'the mass media' is denounced there and swallowed up here. The credibility of government reports is not only denounced there but if someone were to reference a government report they were mocked as silly for considering anything the government told you as truthful. Which is it? Or is it that repeated line of 'only believing what you WANT to believe'. Surly you don't just accept CNN's reports as accrurate. Or do you only check the accuracy of the 'mass media' when it conflicts with what you THINK or FEEL the truth is?
Let's look at what ELSE the report says without relying on just CNN.
http://www.nysun.com/article/72906
If you would like to obtain a copy you can request one at the URL below...
http://www.jwfc.jfcom.mil/webapps/forms/USJFCOM/feedback.jsp
Request your copy in the feedback field. I got a pretty quick response saying that if I provide my mailing address a CD of the report would be mailed. I guess it is a very large file. Odds are it will surface on the net soon anyway.
The report's findings again are NOT that Saddam's Iraq wasn't entangled in terrorism. Our assertion before Operation Iraqi Freedom was that they were, and that seems to be confirmed, and that their efforts were a threat to the US, also seems to be confirmed. Those that were 'testifying' (admittedly inappropriate term but was applied in another thread by another poster) about WMDs and th threat of Iraq (People 'brainwashed' by Bush I suppose):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ePb6H-j51xE
This looks like a thread that is going to reveal alot about some posters. Will the claim of wanting to know vs. wanting what you think/feel affirmed stand or will the blindness of disdain and double mindedness shown be confirmed as now the reports are being spun left.
18 pages in 3 days?
The usual way to uncover the "conspiracy" is just to follow the money. Who's making out will let you know what's going on.
http://money.cnn.com/2007/02/01/news/companies/exxon/index.htm
That article names exxon but they're all making record profits in a time when there's supply problems yadda yadda yadda. Just google "oil company profits 2007".
Anybody know somebody who's heavily involved in the oil industry?
Not to mention the weapons manufacturers who are finding a very good home for your tax dollars and the money you are borrowing to fund your empire.
http://www.marketwatch.com/news/sto...x?guid={9A92A3D0-1EC6-469D-8C7B-94D7AB30B340}
This only mentions Lockheed Martin but, yet again, it's a bumper time for a lot of people.
The right people will always have a good war. Everybody else is screwed.
Oh, and of course, your foreign policy is being run to suit Israel.
http://money.cnn.com/2007/02/01/news/companies/exxon/index.htm
That article names exxon but they're all making record profits in a time when there's supply problems yadda yadda yadda. Just google "oil company profits 2007".
Anybody know somebody who's heavily involved in the oil industry?
Not to mention the weapons manufacturers who are finding a very good home for your tax dollars and the money you are borrowing to fund your empire.
http://www.marketwatch.com/news/sto...x?guid={9A92A3D0-1EC6-469D-8C7B-94D7AB30B340}
This only mentions Lockheed Martin but, yet again, it's a bumper time for a lot of people.
The right people will always have a good war. Everybody else is screwed.
Oh, and of course, your foreign policy is being run to suit Israel.
RedneckFur
New member
With whats been happening in the last few years in both worldwide and local politics and finances, i've got only one thing to say...
Third world America, here we come!
Third world America, here we come!
Sometimes you just have to use common sense. There are all kinds of reports out there, but the fact is a lot of people have WMD's. A lot of countries want to do us harm. I am sure Hussein was one of them, but his top priority was his own survival, and making terrorist attacks on the US was simply not in his interest. BTW, I am not on the left, I am on the right, and I think the Iraq war was a diaster from the beginning.
Conspiracy theories aren't allowed in L&P and I believe the topic of the thread is the report titled "Saddam and Terrorism: Emerging Insights from Captured Iraqi Documents".
Iraq having WMDs was propogated by Saddam himself to his own peril. HE wanted it elieved wether it was true or not. His inability to do direct damage to the US with weapons of mass destruction is a reason for his alliences with terrorist groups that were able to hurt us and Isreal.
Iraq having WMDs was propogated by Saddam himself to his own peril. HE wanted it elieved wether it was true or not. His inability to do direct damage to the US with weapons of mass destruction is a reason for his alliences with terrorist groups that were able to hurt us and Isreal.
Well it is a weak argument as war takes weapons, fuel, vehicles, and a whole plethora of logistical support. That companies are providing that is hardly a 'conspiracy'.
And 'why we are there' is also off topic.
(My instincts tell me Google is being hit hard by some folks right now
)
And 'why we are there' is also off topic.
(My instincts tell me Google is being hit hard by some folks right now
)arktravler
New member
If the "intel" we had before the invasion was flawed.... as it appears to have been, what makes you so sure of this intel?
A PDF of the report can be found at: http://a.abcnews.com/images/pdf/Pentagon_Report_V1.pdf
Nothing like the actual text to debunk spin.
Let the reading begin..............
The report is from 600,000 pages of Saddam Hussains documents. HIS documentation of HIS activities.
From the actual report:
Nothing like the actual text to debunk spin.
Let the reading begin..............
The report is from 600,000 pages of Saddam Hussains documents. HIS documentation of HIS activities.
From the actual report:
Well Nate, despite the obvious attempt at thread veer I'll answer, you may open another thread on THAT subject should you wish to pursuit the discussion past that.....
-We have not had any other terrorist attacks in the US. What value the lives of American civilians are worth you may theorize on in the new thread.
-We ARE fighting them there instead of here. A stated intention if I recall.
-They are currently running AWAY from us instead of TOWARD us. Pakistan looks like their current destination.
That said only to answer the question. Like I said, the topic can be pursued in a new thread should it really be something you wish to explore and not an obvious attempt at thread veer.
-We have not had any other terrorist attacks in the US. What value the lives of American civilians are worth you may theorize on in the new thread.
-We ARE fighting them there instead of here. A stated intention if I recall.
-They are currently running AWAY from us instead of TOWARD us. Pakistan looks like their current destination.
That said only to answer the question. Like I said, the topic can be pursued in a new thread should it really be something you wish to explore and not an obvious attempt at thread veer.
Saddam Hussein's Iraq had no links to Al Qaeda
Just another fact I never understood. Osama Bin Laden was Saudi. The 9/11 hijackers were Saudi. conclusion: lets invade Iraq. What? How did that happen? I have been asking that question for a long time, and so far all I get is someone changing the subject for an answer.
George read my lips: The 9/11 attack was by Saudi terrorist....not Iraqi terrorist....Saudi terrorist. That's as in Saudi Arabia.
Did you ever think that maybe when George was putting pins in the map to track the terrorist he just got off aim, and no one in his cabinet had the nerve to tell him. Except Colin Powell, and George told him to take a hike.
Just another fact I never understood. Osama Bin Laden was Saudi. The 9/11 hijackers were Saudi. conclusion: lets invade Iraq. What? How did that happen? I have been asking that question for a long time, and so far all I get is someone changing the subject for an answer.
George read my lips: The 9/11 attack was by Saudi terrorist....not Iraqi terrorist....Saudi terrorist. That's as in Saudi Arabia.
Did you ever think that maybe when George was putting pins in the map to track the terrorist he just got off aim, and no one in his cabinet had the nerve to tell him. Except Colin Powell, and George told him to take a hike.