Bush links al Qaeda to Iraq militias

[maineman]

Being a liberal hack you would blame something that happened 24 years BEFORE 9-11 - while you give your guy Bily a pass

I have never given anyone a free pass. I Am, however, well aware of the impact that Beirut had on muslim extremists. I maintain close contact with many arabs from Lebanon, Egypt and Israel and their reports were chilling.

now...how about you answer the questions posed to you:

If you claim that Clinton failed to do his job, that must mean that you have some idea as to what sort of alternative actions would have created success.

How can you say that Clinton was a failure when you cannot say what he or you or anyone else could have or would have done any differently to cause a different outcome?

What would or could a republican president have done any differently? What sorts of actions were republicans urging Clinton to take that he did NOT take?

 

[red states rule]

I have never given anyone a free pass. I Am, however, well aware of the impact that Beirut had on muslim extremists. I maintain close contact with many arabs from Lebanon, Egypt and Israel and their reports were chilling.

now...how about you answer the questions posed to you:

If you claim that Clinton failed to do his job, that must mean that you have some idea as to what sort of alternative actions would have created success.

How can you say that Clinton was a failure when you cannot say what he or you or anyone else could have or would have done any differently to cause a different outcome?

What would or could a republican president have done any differently? What sorts of actions were republicans urging Clinton to take that he did NOT take?

You have an endless number of passes you give your fellow Dems

You are a proud member of the appeasement party

 

[maineman]

You have an endless number of passes you give your fellow Dems

You are a proud member of the appeasement party

why are you so afraid to answer the questions?

Is it because you really are incapable of intelligent responses?

come on. I asked you a few questions.... answer them.

If you claim that Clinton failed to do his job, that must mean that you have some idea as to what sort of alternative actions would have created success.

How can you say that Clinton was a failure when you cannot say what he or you or anyone else could have or would have done any differently to cause a different outcome?

What would or could a republican president have done any differently? What sorts of actions were republicans urging Clinton to take that he did NOT take?

 

[red states rule]

why are you so afraid to answer the questions?

Is it because you really are incapable of intelligent responses?

come on. I asked you a few questions.... answer them.

If you claim that Clinton failed to do his job, that must mean that you have some idea as to what sort of alternative actions would have created success.

How can you say that Clinton was a failure when you cannot say what he or you or anyone else could have or would have done any differently to cause a different outcome?

What would or could a republican president have done any differently? What sorts of actions were republicans urging Clinton to take that he did NOT take?

He did nothing to fight back after we were attacked

He had several chances to take out OBL - he did not

Dems saw terrorism as a crime and not as an act of war

 

[maineman]

He did nothing to fight back after we were attacked

He had several chances to take out OBL - he did not

Dems saw terrorism as a crime and not as an act of war

answer the questions

 

[red states rule]

answer the questions

Trying to avoid historical facts about Billy?

 

[maineman]

Trying to avoid historical facts about Billy?

no. I am not trying to avoid anything. I am trying to get you to participate in an adult discussion.

 

[red states rule]

no. I am not trying to avoid anything. I am trying to get you to participate in an adult discussion.

Find another adult and I will be happy to talk him/her

You want to dance not talk

 

[Bullypulpit]

So Saddma would still be in power and the UN will still be making billions in bribs and taxpayer paid ripoffs

And we would have 3,600+ soldiers, marines, sailors and airmen still alive. We would have 25,000+ of our men and women in uniform unwounded and still in possession of all of their limbs. We would have nearly $500 billion in money for problems at home, or in the pockets of American taxpayers.

And the kickbacks were paid by US corporations...in violation of the law...not US taxpayers.

 

[red states rule]

And we would have 3,600+ soldiers, marines, sailors and airmen still alive. We would have 25,000+ of our men and women in uniform unwounded and still in possession of all of their limbs. We would have nearly $500 billion in money for problems at home, or in the pockets of American taxpayers.

And the kickbacks were paid by US corporations...in violation of the law...not US taxpayers.

so you would rather have Saddam in power, with the slaughter of millions continuing, and his funding of terrorist groups going on unchecked?

We know about the UN getting the kickbacks and Saddam bribing government officials in the UK

 

[maineman]

Prioritize the threats facing America in the spring of '03.

If you put Saddam on the top of that list it is just like my previous analogy:

A gang of thugs are trying to break into my front door, my wife has accidently set the kitchen on fire, and I have termites. Time to call Terminex!

 

[red states rule]

Prioritize the threats facing America in the spring of '03.

If you put Saddam on the top of that list it is just like my previous analogy:

A gang of thugs are trying to break into my front door, my wife has accidently set the kitchen on fire, and I have termites. Time to call Terminex!

To kooks like you the only threat to Amercia is conservatives who speak out against you

 

[maineman]

so....let me get this straight. With Osama on the loose in Afghanistan in the spring of 2003, with Kim Jong Il on the verge of making a nuke and developing the ICBM capable of delivering it to America's shores, you still think that Saddam was the most clear and present danger facing us at that time? You still think that invading conquering and occupying Iraq was still the best option for the use of our military force at that time?

 

[Creek_George]

Do you think the Defeatocrats will still push for surrender in Iraq with this information

Sadly, the answer is probably yes



Bush links al Qaeda to Iraq militias
By Joseph Curl
July 25, 2007


In his most direct effort to date to connect al Qaeda to the Iraq war, President Bush yesterday cited declassified intelligence to tie terrorists operating in Iraq with September 11 mastermind Osama bin Laden, saying new evidence "clearly establishes this connection."

Taking direct aim at Democrats who charge the president has exaggerated the al Qaeda presence in Iraq, Mr. Bush declared that the highest echelon of bin Laden's terrorist organization has masterminded the foreign insurgency in Iraq, dispatching terrorists to the country to fight U.S. forces there.

"Al Qaeda in Iraq is a group founded by foreign terrorists, led largely by foreign terrorists, and loyal to a foreign terrorist leader — Osama bin Laden," the president said in a speech at an Air Force base in Charleston, S.C.

"They know they're al Qaeda. The Iraqi people know they are al Qaeda. People across the Muslim world know they are al Qaeda. And there's a good reason they are called al Qaeda in Iraq. They are al Qaeda. In. Iraq," he said, making dramatic pauses for emphasis.

Just a day after Democrats held a presidential debate in Charleston — and every candidate rejected the Bush administration's justification for remaining in Iraq — Mr. Bush laid out his case that the war is the central front in the global battle against Islamic extremism.

"There's a debate in Washington about Iraq. ... Some say that Iraq is not part of the broader war on terror. They complain when I say that the al Qaeda terrorists we face in Iraq are part of the same enemy that attacked us on September 11, 2001. They claim that the organization called al Qaeda in Iraq is an Iraqi phenomenon, that it's independent of Osama bin Laden and that it's not interested in attacking America."

The president said that view would "be news to Osama bin Laden."

"He's proclaimed that the 'third world war is raging in Iraq.' Osama bin Laden says, 'The war is for you or for us to win. If we win it, it means your defeat and disgrace forever.' I say that there will be a big defeat in Iraq and it will be the defeat of al Qaeda," Mr. Bush said to applause.

for the complete article

http://washingtontimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070725/NATION/107250073/1001

Every time you turn a corner...you have a new story to tell.

Story #1..Weapons of Mass Destuction..al Qaeda was never a factor in the fabrication with that story.

Story #2..Operaration Iraqi Freedom...I watched him live on T.V...the sincerity this was all about..was freedom at that phase...

Strory #3..The accomplisment with this so called.."bologna government"..a puppet government...who has not accomplished squat..

How many break-throughs have we read about in the so called.."freedom we put in place there"...??

Are we safer...Is our interest over there..more than oil??...Something smells so dam bad.....

We could have rebuilt America...with all those Tax Dollars.

There is not..and probably not at all worth mentioning that any kind of Intelligence ever existed.. that any links to Osama bin Laden in Iraq were ever credible,before all this crap...Bush would of put that on the table NOW...to justify those old moon landing photos he used,to show what a danger this Iraq was to America....Sad thing is...nobody looked at this failure of what he tried to pull on the American People as a hoax...This is so "F" uped..it's like we all fell for the the Roswell Landing...

I know dam well if we pull out..the terrorist will gain ground there.

We'll keep sending our troops to the sandbox we made...while the embassy we build..gets all the more fortified...

Mr.Bush..you know dam well where Osama bin Laden is.......Are you keeping him alive for a reason??

This Iraq War..where no threats even existed before..you claim now as a justification to contribute to the battle against terrorism.

If you..Mr.Bush do not know where Osama bin Laden is.....then 911 in itself has had no justice served in the greatest terror attack on U.S. Soil..We've had no payback..and little justice has been served..but outing a bunch of Talibani in rule..in the drug capital country of the world...It's funny as hell...that every year it's a record crop over there,that takes place as well..every dam years since we've been there.

Iraq has been the big news....What the hell have the American people heard..as how the hunt goes on for Osama?????

It's so dam funny....He's hiding in the mountains somewhere...and we..and Oasma claims himself he orchestrated 911......

NONE..NOTA!!...ZILCH!!!...Now is not that funny?....We make world news out of hanging Saddam.....The SOB had had nothing to do with this..(war on terror)..let alone even one grain of sand in Iraq did....Am I right???

As far as this post claiming who would surrender..a Lib?...I look at this bullshit as a voter..I was damed shocked..I very well could say I felt secure with a Con in office after 911....

I felt justice would be served...more swift than a Lib..But I know now..that even Gore would of got who was accountable....even Jesse Jackon.

If anyone reads this dam post..would you not agree Mr.Bush started this war?...A president we elected helped push this thing along...

This was not his advisors running to him...that a threat existed.This was a group of assholes who felt it was..a thing to do..911 gave them an opportunity...

I think there is a whole shit load of dirty laundry to answer for.

I just think..any asshole who supports the Con point of view in all this..should go over there..Because every soldier that exits that horrible shit hole..will vote Lib.

I think you should be ashamed of yourself...speaking for the troops serving the cause...and you using your political jargon to justify the stupidity of a failure.

If I was elected..I'd have the heart not to keep 150,000 of our troops over there...because of your belief in a president..that said to attack the wrong hill.

To justify toppling the Government of Iraq..as a War On Terror.....hahahaha...Well ya did it...

You idiots gota sit down...explain it to the Libs...Maybe meet halfway..because you did make a hornets nest out the place.

Don't expect me..or ask more to go there..for your so called big mistake..that thus opened a misquito breeding ground....

I don't want nothing to do with your so called war on Terror...Your dam Party..It proved itself beyond a doubt..

We attacked the wrong target..and we are tied up there..You also ignore the facts claimed to all of us..why we attacked.

You'll even use the excuse Libs & Cons voted for this alike....Wake up buddy...welcome to the world of politics...(shaking my head).

I'll vote for the leading Lib...don't give a rats ass if she/he wants a large portion of my taxes to go to goat study milk programs..But that here..than being responsible for the Iraqi Freedom Milk Foundation.

Another factor..on how all your asses vote..is a spritual way of what represents you...To feel that a president who talks to God..and will sit with the Pope..claiming peace & freedom is just a man...Anybody can talk to God..and most Libs are God fearing folk as well.

I personaly question you all....in any paltform this administarion has used..to make you cast a vote....As far as tax dollars goes..give me an "F"ing break....Talking to God..and as a religious point of view?....Whatever...Your so called perfect intentions..don't make a perfect leader.

I went into detail on a variety of points of view...for this post...The reason is...The poster of this message posts...for the sake of posting.

I'm surprised you let him get away with what he does post....It's total proganda what this guy does post..in everything he posts...

I don't mean ban him...edit his posts..or say you do things this way..or else...(smile).

I'd make it a full time job..if I had the time,to respond to anything this guy had to say...

A month..or two back..they'd think the guy owned the place...

If there is anything sad..as he so claimed...This would be the reason.

Claiming Bush links al Qaeda to Iraq militias...is like old news claiming my balls are attched to my dick....

Don't worry..if the Pope kisses this guy on the forhead....he'd get re-elected again..3rd term...hahahaha...It would be appoved by a 49/51 margin....(shaking my head).

The way things are going for Libs...even David Duke would stand a chance with the feud going on..in the Lib Party.....

Keep up the good Posting Red Staes Rule...you're actualy the only chance we have..for those that have to read your spew...to cast a vote any other possible way.....

 

[SpidermanTuba]

Do you think the Defeatocrats will still push for surrender in Iraq with this information

Sadly, the answer is probably yes



Bush links al Qaeda to Iraq militias
By Joseph Curl
July 25, 2007


In his most direct effort to date to connect al Qaeda to the Iraq war, President Bush yesterday cited declassified intelligence to tie terrorists operating in Iraq with September 11 mastermind Osama bin Laden, saying new evidence "clearly establishes this connection."

Taking direct aim at Democrats who charge the president has exaggerated the al Qaeda presence in Iraq, Mr. Bush declared that the highest echelon of bin Laden's terrorist organization has masterminded the foreign insurgency in Iraq, dispatching terrorists to the country to fight U.S. forces there.

"Al Qaeda in Iraq is a group founded by foreign terrorists, led largely by foreign terrorists, and loyal to a foreign terrorist leader — Osama bin Laden," the president said in a speech at an Air Force base in Charleston, S.C.

"They know they're al Qaeda. The Iraqi people know they are al Qaeda. People across the Muslim world know they are al Qaeda. And there's a good reason they are called al Qaeda in Iraq. They are al Qaeda. In. Iraq," he said, making dramatic pauses for emphasis.

Just a day after Democrats held a presidential debate in Charleston — and every candidate rejected the Bush administration's justification for remaining in Iraq — Mr. Bush laid out his case that the war is the central front in the global battle against Islamic extremism.

"There's a debate in Washington about Iraq. ... Some say that Iraq is not part of the broader war on terror. They complain when I say that the al Qaeda terrorists we face in Iraq are part of the same enemy that attacked us on September 11, 2001. They claim that the organization called al Qaeda in Iraq is an Iraqi phenomenon, that it's independent of Osama bin Laden and that it's not interested in attacking America."

The president said that view would "be news to Osama bin Laden."

"He's proclaimed that the 'third world war is raging in Iraq.' Osama bin Laden says, 'The war is for you or for us to win. If we win it, it means your defeat and disgrace forever.' I say that there will be a big defeat in Iraq and it will be the defeat of al Qaeda," Mr. Bush said to applause.

for the complete article

http://washingtontimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070725/NATION/107250073/1001

Ahh, yeah, if the president says its true, it must be true. Right!