Hmmmm...

Discussion in 'Current Events' started by Bullypulpit, Oct 6, 2004.

  1. Bullypulpit
    Offline

    Bullypulpit Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2004
    Messages:
    5,849
    Thanks Received:
    378
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Columbus, OH
    Ratings:
    +379
    <center><h2><a href=http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/news/nation/9836946.htm?1c>Iraq-al Qaeda tie called unlikely</a></h2></center>

    <blockquote><b>A new review by the Central Intelligence Agency undercut the Bush administration's case that Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein was linked to Islamic terrorists.</b>

    BY WARREN P. STROBEL, JONATHAN S. LANDAY AND JOHN WALCOTT

    Knight Ridder News Service

    WASHINGTON - A new CIA assessment undercuts the White House claim that Saddam Hussein maintained ties to al Qaeda, saying there is no conclusive evidence that the regime harbored terrorist Abu Musab al Zarqawi, U.S. officials said Monday.

    The CIA review, which the officials said was requested some months ago by Vice President Dick Cheney, is the latest assessment that calls into question one of President Bush's key justifications for last year's U.S.-led invasion of Iraq.

    The new assessment follows the independent Sept. 11 commission's finding that there was no ''collaborative relationship'' between the former Iraqi regime and Osama bin Laden's terrorist network.</blockquote>

    Hmmm...The electrical field from Cheney's pacemaker must be interfering with his ability to distinguish reality from the salacious fantasy the administration continues to spin about Osama and Saddam being in bed together. Either that, or his weakened heart isn't getting enough oxygen to his brain. They're begining to make sexual deviants look normal.
     
  2. dilloduck
    Offline

    dilloduck Diamond Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2004
    Messages:
    53,240
    Thanks Received:
    5,552
    Trophy Points:
    1,850
    Location:
    Austin, TX
    Ratings:
    +6,403
    Bully--listen very carefully--this is a global war on terrorism ! The administration has tried very hard to convince liberals that al qaeda was and is in Iraq while they SHOULD be stressing that al qaeda is not the ONLY terrorist group that is intent on attacking the US. The death of bin laden will not--repeat NOT stop the terrorists organization"S" from pursuing their barbaric cause. Hope that helps ya see why the US is at war in numerous places. ( yes I know---there are other "rogue" countries but they are NOT being ignored! )
     
  3. jimnyc
    Offline

    jimnyc ...

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2003
    Messages:
    10,113
    Thanks Received:
    244
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    New York
    Ratings:
    +246
    Yeah, sure looks like Saddam was on the track to sainthood! Bully, you look more silly as each day towards the election nears.
     
  4. Adam's Apple
    Offline

    Adam's Apple Senior Member

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2004
    Messages:
    4,092
    Thanks Received:
    445
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +447
    Why is it so hard to believe that Al Quada was in Iraq when it has cells in at least 80 other countries? What possible reason could Al Quada have for not establishing cells in Iraq? Isn't Iraq similar to all the other countries where Al Quada operates? I wouldn't put too much stock in what the CIA says about Al Quada. They sure didn't seem to be on top of things during the 9/11 Commission hearings.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  5. Bullypulpit
    Offline

    Bullypulpit Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2004
    Messages:
    5,849
    Thanks Received:
    378
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Columbus, OH
    Ratings:
    +379
    Well, it can't be any sillier than Dubbyuh already looks eating crow. His reason for going to war with Iraq was that Saddam had WMD's on hand and was ready to use them against targets in America. His rationale for war has been totally discredited. :bang3:
     
  6. dmp
    Offline

    dmp Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 12, 2004
    Messages:
    13,088
    Thanks Received:
    741
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Enterprise, Alabama
    Ratings:
    +741

    I fixed that for you...
     
  7. Bullypulpit
    Offline

    Bullypulpit Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2004
    Messages:
    5,849
    Thanks Received:
    378
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Columbus, OH
    Ratings:
    +379
    Yet Dubbyuh persists in the notion that military might will spell the end of terrorism. This shows how utterly he, and his administration, fail to understand the nature of the enemy. The more firepower you indiscriminately throw at targets, the more collateral damage caused, the more civilians killed unintentionally, the more fertile the ground for terrorism. Keep the pressure on militarily, be very certain of targets, and give the people the tools they need to rebuild their country instead of awarding unbid contracts to Halliburton, KBR and others to hire outside contractors to do it. Then, we'll see some progress.
     
  8. Bullypulpit
    Offline

    Bullypulpit Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2004
    Messages:
    5,849
    Thanks Received:
    378
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Columbus, OH
    Ratings:
    +379
    Dubbyuh went to war not because of Saddam's intentions, but because of the certainty of his possession of WMD's. Mr. Duefel's report sent that rationale plunging into the deepest abyss.

    No matter how one might wish to spin the issue, Dubbyuh and his cronies misled America into war, this alone warrants their impeachment for high crimes and misdemeanors. Even worse was the deliberate sexing-up of intelligence by the Administration in order to justify their misguided foreign adventurism.
     
  9. dilloduck
    Offline

    dilloduck Diamond Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2004
    Messages:
    53,240
    Thanks Received:
    5,552
    Trophy Points:
    1,850
    Location:
    Austin, TX
    Ratings:
    +6,403
    One would think that Kerry would be for immediately pulling us out of this war that:
    We were "misled"into.
    was in wrong place.
    was at the wrong time.

    Don't tell me we are stuck there now so we have to keep fighting. He screamed for the US to pull out of Viet Nam in the 70s. Why isn't he doing so now? I think we all know the answer to that !!!!
     
  10. eric
    Online

    eric Guest

    Ratings:
    +0
    Bully, let me make this concept real simple so you can understand it, since you have never been in any real position of authority or command. When you are the top decision maker, be it the government, or a corporation, you can not possibly you must rely on other people to gather and complile information you need to make your decisions. If the information provided to you is faulty, and you make a wrong decision, yes utimately you are responsible for that decision, BUT, that is in no way the same thing as lying !!!!

    Being the top officer, you shoulder the responsibility for everything, and you do your best to surround yourself with competent people, but hey, everyone makes mistakes, and I can tell you from personal experience, there are no perfect employees.

    So stop with this lying crap, he was simply provided bad information, which by the way came also from the British, French, German, and Russian intelligence services. Starts to make you look very foolish; like you are blinded so much by hate that you have lost the sight of truth !
     

Share This Page