A "Tale of Two "LIES"???

[Tuatara]

And compared to ISIS he doesn't look so bad. Was he being bad to people like ISIS?

Please link his terrorist connections.

isis is bad as well

there are many terrorists

ISIS is worse. Seems like saddam held them down and Iran. Bet he wouldn't let them get a nuke.

Link to these connections.

saddam killed over 100 thousand of his ow\n with chemical weapons

Link?

Been a lot more killed than that since the war started.

kdp.se

Your link only lists 5000. That's a far cry from over 100,000. Saddam was bad enough on his own merits. No reason to inflate the numbers.

 

[jon_berzerk]

isis is bad as well

there are many terrorists

ISIS is worse. Seems like saddam held them down and Iran. Bet he wouldn't let them get a nuke.

Link to these connections.

saddam killed over 100 thousand of his ow\n with chemical weapons

Link?

Been a lot more killed than that since the war started.

kdp.se

Your link only lists 5000. That's a far cry from over 100,000. Saddam was bad enough on his own merits. No reason to inflate the numbers.

damn Saddam apologists

• Al-Anfal Campaign: In 1988, the Hussein regime began a campaign of extermination against the Kurdish people living in Northern Iraq. This is known as the Anfal campaign. The attacks resulted in the death of at least 182,000 people, many of them women and children. A team of Human Rights Watch investigators determined, after analyzing eighteen tons of captured Iraqi documents, testing soil samples and carrying out interviews with more than 350 witnesses, that the attacks on the Kurdish people were characterized by gross violations of human rights, including mass executions and disappearances of many tens of thousands of noncombatants, widespread use of chemical weapons including Sarin, mustard gas and nerve agents that killed thousands, the arbitrary imprisoning of tens of thousands of women, children, and elderly people for months in conditions of extreme deprivation, forced displacement of hundreds of thousands of villagers after the demolition of their homes, and the wholesale destruction of nearly two thousand villages along with their schools, mosques, farms and power stations.[3][4]

Human rights in Saddam Hussein s Iraq - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

 

[Tuatara]

ISIS is worse. Seems like saddam held them down and Iran. Bet he wouldn't let them get a nuke.

Link to these connections.

saddam killed over 100 thousand of his ow\n with chemical weapons

Link?

Been a lot more killed than that since the war started.

kdp.se

Your link only lists 5000. That's a far cry from over 100,000. Saddam was bad enough on his own merits. No reason to inflate the numbers.

damn Saddam apologists

• Al-Anfal Campaign: In 1988, the Hussein regime began a campaign of extermination against the Kurdish people living in Northern Iraq. This is known as the Anfal campaign. The attacks resulted in the death of at least 182,000 people, many of them women and children. A team of Human Rights Watch investigators determined, after analyzing eighteen tons of captured Iraqi documents, testing soil samples and carrying out interviews with more than 350 witnesses, that the attacks on the Kurdish people were characterized by gross violations of human rights, including mass executions and disappearances of many tens of thousands of noncombatants, widespread use of chemical weapons including Sarin, mustard gas and nerve agents that killed thousands, the arbitrary imprisoning of tens of thousands of women, children, and elderly people for months in conditions of extreme deprivation, forced displacement of hundreds of thousands of villagers after the demolition of their homes, and the wholesale destruction of nearly two thousand villages along with their schools, mosques, farms and power stations.[3][4]

Human rights in Saddam Hussein s Iraq - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

I have the Human Rights Watch link right here. http://www.hrw.org/reports/1994/iraq/TEXT.htm
At the time of the investigation they said about 50,000. They now believe it was 100,000 You were right.

What I don't understand was Saddam was put on trial for the Al-Dujail incident in which he killed 148 people. He was found gulty and put to death. Why did they not try him for the Al-Anfal campaign? We know the US supported him during these attrocities. Would bringing him to court on these charges reveal much more American support than what we were led to believe> Someone had something to hide. Both Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch called Saddam's trial unfair and a Kangaroo Court.

 

[jon_berzerk]

saddam killed over 100 thousand of his ow\n with chemical weapons

Link?

Been a lot more killed than that since the war started.

kdp.se

Your link only lists 5000. That's a far cry from over 100,000. Saddam was bad enough on his own merits. No reason to inflate the numbers.

damn Saddam apologists

• Al-Anfal Campaign: In 1988, the Hussein regime began a campaign of extermination against the Kurdish people living in Northern Iraq. This is known as the Anfal campaign. The attacks resulted in the death of at least 182,000 people, many of them women and children. A team of Human Rights Watch investigators determined, after analyzing eighteen tons of captured Iraqi documents, testing soil samples and carrying out interviews with more than 350 witnesses, that the attacks on the Kurdish people were characterized by gross violations of human rights, including mass executions and disappearances of many tens of thousands of noncombatants, widespread use of chemical weapons including Sarin, mustard gas and nerve agents that killed thousands, the arbitrary imprisoning of tens of thousands of women, children, and elderly people for months in conditions of extreme deprivation, forced displacement of hundreds of thousands of villagers after the demolition of their homes, and the wholesale destruction of nearly two thousand villages along with their schools, mosques, farms and power stations.[3][4]

Human rights in Saddam Hussein s Iraq - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

I have the Human Rights Watch link right here. http://www.hrw.org/reports/1994/iraq/TEXT.htm
At the time of the investigation they said about 50,000. They now believe it was 100,000 You were right.

What I don't understand was Saddam was put on trial for the Al-Dujail incident in which he killed 148 people. He was found gulty and put to death. Why did they not try him for the Al-Anfal campaign? We know the US supported him during these attrocities. Would bringing him to court on these charges reveal much more American support than what we were led to believe> Someone had something to hide. Both Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch called Saddam's trial unfair and a Kangaroo Court.

i would like to discuss Saddam further but i got called in to work for an emergency --LOL

and this after i have retired

--LOL

i will catch up with ya later

 

[hazlnut]

In the case of GWB.... did HE KNOW Saddam had NO WMDs but LIED to the nation?

In the case of Benghazi did Obama et.al. KNOW 6 weeks before the election that Benghazi was a planned
attack but deliberately blamed the video...i.e. LIED so as to protect Obama's war on terror image?

Yes.

No.


End of story.

 

[BlindBoo]

ISIS is worse. Seems like saddam held them down and Iran. Bet he wouldn't let them get a nuke.

Link to these connections.

saddam killed over 100 thousand of his ow\n with chemical weapons

He was a very bad man. But he did it with the knowledge and support from the Raygun administration who continued aiding Saddam with out a peep about it.

and that means what

He was our very bad man. However, that he did such things was not one of the two reasons President Bush had to use to base his decision on.

there was more then two reasons

Only two.

Text of H.J.Res. 114 107th Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002 Passed Congress Enrolled Bill version - GovTrack.us

• 
  (1) reliance by the United States on further diplomatic or other peaceful means alone either (A) will not adequately protect the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq or (B) is not likely to lead to enforcement of all relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq; and
  
  (2) acting pursuant to this joint resolution is consistent with the United States and other countries continuing to take the necessary actions against international terrorist and terrorist organizations, including those nations, organizations, or persons who planned, authorized, committed or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001.
  

 

[whitehall]

Bill Clinton said there were WMD's in Iraq but nobody cares whether the Clintons tell the truth or not. Bush gave Saddam almost a year to comply with U.N. sanctions and long covered trucks were spotted traveling from Iraq to Syria. Does that mean anything? The stated mission is well documented and WMD's were low on the list.

 

[Camp]

Bill Clinton said there were WMD's in Iraq but nobody cares whether the Clintons tell the truth or not. Bush gave Saddam almost a year to comply with U.N. sanctions and long covered trucks were spotted traveling from Iraq to Syria. Does that mean anything? The stated mission is well documented and WMD's were low on the list.

Clinton's response to not allowing inspectors to do their jobs were to bomb Iraq until they agreed to allow the inspectors to do their jobs and search for WMD's that violated the UN agreement. He didn't start a long drawn out war that cost trillions of dollars and thousands of lives. See the difference?
The covered trucks were just as likely carrying looted treasure instead of WMD's. Saddam's family was moving from Iraq to Syria at the same time that the trucks were going there. Much of his treasure trove of art and stockpiles of gold were missing when Iraq became occupied. What became of it?
Finally, it would be interesting to learn about these missions or reasons for going to war that put WMD's way down the list of reasons for going to war with Iraq.

 

[healthmyths]

Bill Clinton said there were WMD's in Iraq but nobody cares whether the Clintons tell the truth or not. Bush gave Saddam almost a year to comply with U.N. sanctions and long covered trucks were spotted traveling from Iraq to Syria. Does that mean anything? The stated mission is well documented and WMD's were low on the list.

Clinton's response to not allowing inspectors to do their jobs were to bomb Iraq until they agreed to allow the inspectors to do their jobs and search for WMD's that violated the UN agreement. He didn't start a long drawn out war that cost trillions of dollars and thousands of lives. See the difference?
The covered trucks were just as likely carrying looted treasure instead of WMD's. Saddam's family was moving from Iraq to Syria at the same time that the trucks were going there. Much of his treasure trove of art and stockpiles of gold were missing when Iraq became occupied. What became of it?
Finally, it would be interesting to learn about these missions or reasons for going to war that put WMD's way down the list of reasons for going to war with Iraq.

Were you around the week of September 18, 2001?

The 2001 anthrax attacks in the United States, also known as Amerithrax from its Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) case name, occurred over the course of several weeks beginning on Tuesday, September 18, 2001, one week after the September 11 attacks. Letters containing anthrax spores were mailed to several news media offices and two DemocraticU.S. Senators, killing five people and infecting 17 others. According to the FBI, the ensuing investigation became "one of the largest and most complex in the history of law enforcement".[1]

False report of Bentonite
The potent additive is known to have been used by only one country in producing biochemical weapons — Iraq. . . . t is a trademark of Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein's biological weapons program .It is a trademark of Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein's biological weapons program.
2001 anthrax attacks - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Looks like a duck, quack's like a duck... maybe Saddam was responsible for Anthrax attacks.
Again in context of a week earlier 9/11... most of us Americans were concerned and now our mail has been
tampered with by whom??? We don't know!!!

 

[edthecynic]

Bill Clinton said there were WMD's in Iraq but nobody cares whether the Clintons tell the truth or not. Bush gave Saddam almost a year to comply with U.N. sanctions and long covered trucks were spotted traveling from Iraq to Syria. Does that mean anything? The stated mission is well documented and WMD's were low on the list.

Clinton's response to not allowing inspectors to do their jobs were to bomb Iraq until they agreed to allow the inspectors to do their jobs and search for WMD's that violated the UN agreement. He didn't start a long drawn out war that cost trillions of dollars and thousands of lives. See the difference?
The covered trucks were just as likely carrying looted treasure instead of WMD's. Saddam's family was moving from Iraq to Syria at the same time that the trucks were going there. Much of his treasure trove of art and stockpiles of gold were missing when Iraq became occupied. What became of it?
Finally, it would be interesting to learn about these missions or reasons for going to war that put WMD's way down the list of reasons for going to war with Iraq.

Were you around the week of September 18, 2001?

The 2001 anthrax attacks in the United States, also known as Amerithrax from its Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) case name, occurred over the course of several weeks beginning on Tuesday, September 18, 2001, one week after the September 11 attacks. Letters containing anthrax spores were mailed to several news media offices and two DemocraticU.S. Senators, killing five people and infecting 17 others. According to the FBI, the ensuing investigation became "one of the largest and most complex in the history of law enforcement".[1]

False report of Bentonite
The potent additive is known to have been used by only one country in producing biochemical weapons — Iraq. . . . t is a trademark of Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein's biological weapons program .It is a trademark of Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein's biological weapons program.
2001 anthrax attacks - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Looks like a duck, quack's like a duck... maybe Saddam was responsible for Anthrax attacks.
Again in context of a week earlier 9/11... most of us Americans were concerned and now our mail has been
tampered with by whom??? We don't know!!!

Yeah sure, the Iraqis picked Democrats and the "Liberal" media to attack. YOU probably put that in Wiki. The FBI actually traced the anthrax to a sample at Fort Detrick, Maryland labeled RMR-1029.

Here is who the FBI said did it, and nowhere does it say the anthrax came from Iraq:

FBI Closing the Anthrax Investigation

This afternoon during a press conference, Department of Justice and FBI officials highlighted some of the information contained in the just-released Amerithrax documents, explaining why charges were about to be brought against anthrax researcher Dr. Bruce Ivins, who took his own life before those charges could be filed.

U.S. Attorney Jeff Taylor, District of Columbia, said that normally evidence against a suspect who has not been charged is not publicly released, in part because of the presumption of innocence. “But,” added Taylor, “because of the extraordinary public interest in this investigation...we are compelled to take the extraordinary step of providing the victims, their families, Congress, and the American public with an overview of some recent developments as well as some of our conclusions.”

Because of Ivins’ death, the government will not be able to present its case in court. But according to Assistant Director in Charge Joseph Persichini, FBI Washington Field Office, “Bruce Ivins was responsible for the death, sickness, and fear brought to our country by the 2001 anthrax mailings.”

The Amerithrax investigation is one of the largest and most complex investigations ever conducted by law enforcement. The Amerithrax Task Force, comprised of 17 special agents and 10 U.S. postal inspectors, has conducted more than 9,100 interviews, executed more than 70 searches, and followed leads across six continents. Along the way, a brand new science was developed that ultimately led to the big break in the case.

That science—creating a DNA equivalent of a fingerprint—allowed investigators to pinpoint the origins of the anthrax. The FBI Laboratory, in conjunction with the best experts in the scientific community, developed four highly sensitive and specific tests to detect the unique qualities of the anthrax used in the 2001 attacks. This took several years to accomplish, but in early 2005 the groundbreaking research successfully identified where the anthrax used in the mailings had come from.

Another key piece of evidence was provided when investigators were able to identify a limited geographic area where the anthrax envelopes were purchased based on a forensic investigation that revealed printing defects in certain batches of envelopes.

 

[jon_berzerk]

saddam killed over 100 thousand of his ow\n with chemical weapons

He was a very bad man. But he did it with the knowledge and support from the Raygun administration who continued aiding Saddam with out a peep about it.

and that means what

He was our very bad man. However, that he did such things was not one of the two reasons President Bush had to use to base his decision on.

there was more then two reasons

Only two.

Text of H.J.Res. 114 107th Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002 Passed Congress Enrolled Bill version - GovTrack.us

• 
  (1) reliance by the United States on further diplomatic or other peaceful means alone either (A) will not adequately protect the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq or (B) is not likely to lead to enforcement of all relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq; and
  
  (2) acting pursuant to this joint resolution is consistent with the United States and other countries continuing to take the necessary actions against international terrorist and terrorist organizations, including those nations, organizations, or persons who planned, authorized, committed or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001.

you know better then that

or maybe you dont

but you should

Whereas in 1990 in response to Iraq’s war of aggression against and illegal occupation of Kuwait, the United States forged a coalition of nations to liberate Kuwait and its people in order to defend the national security of the United States and enforce United Nations Security Council resolutions relating to Iraq;

Whereas after the liberation of Kuwait in 1991, Iraq entered into a United Nations sponsored cease-fire agreement pursuant to which Iraq unequivocally agreed, among other things, to eliminate its nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons programs and the means to deliver and develop them, and to end its support for international terrorism;

Whereas the efforts of international weapons inspectors, United States intelligence agencies, and Iraqi defectors led to the discovery that Iraq had large stockpiles of chemical weapons and a large scale biological weapons program, and that Iraq had an advanced nuclear weapons development program that was much closer to producing a nuclear weapon than intelligence reporting had previously indicated;

Whereas Iraq, in direct and flagrant violation of the cease-fire, attempted to thwart the efforts of weapons inspectors to identify and destroy Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction stockpiles and development capabilities, which finally resulted in the withdrawal of inspectors from Iraq on October 31, 1998;

Whereas in Public Law 105-235 (August 14, 1998), Congress concluded that Iraq’s continuing weapons of mass destruction programs threatened vital United States interests and international peace and security, declared Iraq to be in ‘material and unacceptable breach of its international obligations’ and urged the President ‘to take appropriate action, in accordance with the Constitution and relevant laws of the United States, to bring Iraq into compliance with its international obligations’;

Whereas Iraq both poses a continuing threat to the national security of the United States and international peace and security in the Persian Gulf region and remains in material and unacceptable breach of its international obligations by, among other things, continuing to possess and develop a significant chemical and biological weapons capability, actively seeking a nuclear weapons capability, and supporting and harboring terrorist organizations;

Whereas Iraq persists in violating resolution of the United Nations Security Council by continuing to engage in brutal repression of its civilian population thereby threatening international peace and security in the region, by refusing to release, repatriate, or account for non-Iraqi citizens wrongfully detained by Iraq, including an American serviceman, and by failing to return property wrongfully seized by Iraq from Kuwait;

Whereas the current Iraqi regime has demonstrated its capability and willingness to use weapons of mass destruction against other nations and its own people;

Whereas the current Iraqi regime has demonstrated its continuing hostility toward, and willingness to attack, the United States, including by attempting in 1993 to assassinate former President Bush and by firing on many thousands of occasions on United States and Coalition Armed Forces engaged in enforcing the resolutions of the United Nations Security Council;

and there is more

 

[Camp]

Bill Clinton said there were WMD's in Iraq but nobody cares whether the Clintons tell the truth or not. Bush gave Saddam almost a year to comply with U.N. sanctions and long covered trucks were spotted traveling from Iraq to Syria. Does that mean anything? The stated mission is well documented and WMD's were low on the list.

Clinton's response to not allowing inspectors to do their jobs were to bomb Iraq until they agreed to allow the inspectors to do their jobs and search for WMD's that violated the UN agreement. He didn't start a long drawn out war that cost trillions of dollars and thousands of lives. See the difference?
The covered trucks were just as likely carrying looted treasure instead of WMD's. Saddam's family was moving from Iraq to Syria at the same time that the trucks were going there. Much of his treasure trove of art and stockpiles of gold were missing when Iraq became occupied. What became of it?
Finally, it would be interesting to learn about these missions or reasons for going to war that put WMD's way down the list of reasons for going to war with Iraq.

Were you around the week of September 18, 2001?

The 2001 anthrax attacks in the United States, also known as Amerithrax from its Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) case name, occurred over the course of several weeks beginning on Tuesday, September 18, 2001, one week after the September 11 attacks. Letters containing anthrax spores were mailed to several news media offices and two DemocraticU.S. Senators, killing five people and infecting 17 others. According to the FBI, the ensuing investigation became "one of the largest and most complex in the history of law enforcement".[1]

False report of Bentonite
The potent additive is known to have been used by only one country in producing biochemical weapons — Iraq. . . . t is a trademark of Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein's biological weapons program .It is a trademark of Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein's biological weapons program.
2001 anthrax attacks - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Looks like a duck, quack's like a duck... maybe Saddam was responsible for Anthrax attacks.
Again in context of a week earlier 9/11... most of us Americans were concerned and now our mail has been
tampered with by whom??? We don't know!!!

Your Wikipedia link states at the very top of the page that the neutrality of the article is in dispute. The history of it shows changes being made as recently as two weeks ago and if you navigate to the talk page explanations are made in detail about why it can not be trusted to be accurate. That said, it actually refutes the point you are trying to make and supports the FBI version.