Uh Huh...

[Bullypulpit]

...Despite their protestations to the contrary, the links between Al Qaeda and Saddam Hussein remain as unsubstantiated as the existence of Iraq's WMD's. Evidence of said connection was trotted out earlier this week, and promptly discredited.

Of note though, was the statement from the 9/11 Commission on Sunday, that Al Qaeda had "... a lot more active contacts, frankly, with Iran and with (<i>our good friend and ally</i> ) Pakistan...". But without any proven links between Al Qaeda and Iraq, the Administration's jusstification for a war of aggression against a not even third rate military power simply vanish.

If you want to continue to believe Dubbyuh and his neocon handlers, that's your choice. I won't say "I told you so..." when the whole thing falls apart like a paper-bag full of diarrhea.

 

[Annie]

Originally posted by Bullypulpit
...Despite their protestations to the contrary, the links between Al Qaeda and Saddam Hussein remain as unsubstantiated as the existence of Iraq's WMD's. Evidence of said connection was trotted out earlier this week, and promptly discredited.

Of note though, was the statement from the 9/11 Commission on Sunday, that Al Qaeda had "... a lot more active contacts, frankly, with Iran and with (<i>our good friend and ally</i> ) Pakistan...". But without any proven links between Al Qaeda and Iraq, the Administration's jusstification for a war of aggression against a not even third rate military power simply vanish.

If you want to continue to believe Dubbyuh and his neocon handlers, that's your choice. I won't say "I told you so..." when the whole thing falls apart like a paper-bag full of diarrhea.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,3604,314700,00.html

http://edition.cnn.com/WORLD/meast/9902/13/afghan.binladen/

 

[dilloduck]

OH go ahead---I know you have a whole list of I told you sos' since you hate Bush so much. Post em all so we can see how right you are.

 

[Bullypulpit]

Originally posted by Sir Evil
Bully - the link between Saddam and terrorism exists, perhaps it was not Al Qaeda. WMD's have not been found, can you provide any proof that they never did?

You are making it out as if these are the sole reasons for the war in Iraq, it's a lot more than these two issue's!!

The Administration's rationales for war in Iraq started with the immediate threat that Saddam's weapons of mass dextruction posed to America and the rest of the world. No such weapons were ever found...Strike one. Then, it was to make America and the rest of the world safer from terrorism. More people have died in the year since the war in Iraq started than before, very nearly doubled...Strike two. Then, it was to liberate the Iraqi people from an oppressive dictatorship and lead them into the light of democracy. Iraqis are being sold a bill of goods in the form of a puppet government propped up by the US military and the level of violence continues to spiral ever higher...Strike THREE! YER OUTTA HERE!

The reasons for war with Iraq have morphed so many time you need a racing form to keep track of them all. Admit it, you don't even believe the sorry little peckerwood anymore. Your support is nothing more than a reflexive response to the percieved threat to your own narrow, blinkered world-view. Have a nice day.

 

[insein]

Originally posted by Bullypulpit
The Administration's rationales for war in Iraq started with the immediate threat that Saddam's weapons of mass dextruction posed to America and the rest of the world. No such weapons were ever found...Strike one. Then, it was to make America and the rest of the world safer from terrorism. More people have died in the year since the war in Iraq started than before, very nearly doubled...Strike two. Then, it was to liberate the Iraqi people from an oppressive dictatorship and lead them into the light of democracy. Iraqis are being sold a bill of goods in the form of a puppet government propped up by the US military and the level of violence continues to spiral ever higher...Strike THREE! YER OUTTA HERE!

The reasons for war with Iraq have morphed so many time you need a racing form to keep track of them all. Admit it, you don't even believe the sorry little peckerwood anymore. Your support is nothing more than a reflexive response to the percieved threat to your own narrow, blinkered world-view. Have a nice day.

You know since you do live in an alternate dimension where nothing contrary to your ideals is allowed, i think it is you with the narrow, blinkered world view.

 

[Bullypulpit]

Originally posted by Kathianne
http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,3604,314700,00.html

http://edition.cnn.com/WORLD/meast/9902/13/afghan.binladen/

Sorry dear...Old news, long since discredited.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Bully, it's not true that a lie repeated often enough becomes the truth. So give it a rest.

 

[Annie]

Originally posted by Bullypulpit
Sorry dear...Old news, long since discredited.

No sweetpea, not discredited. CNN brought up again today.

 

[insein]

Originally posted by Bullypulpit
Sorry dear...Old news, long since discredited.

Would you prefer the WSJ reporting on Saddam's own files?

http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110005133

 

[insein]

Perhaps you'd like to See where the Terrorists in the Jordan plot got their training.

http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast.../jordan.terror/

And their Weapons...

http://www.debka.com/article.php?aid=482

 

[tim_duncan2000]

the links between Al Qaeda and Saddam Hussein remain as unsubstantiated as the existence of Iraq's WMD's

1) The links are not unsubstantiated

2) You mean the WMDs that Democrats and many world leaders and just about everyone said were there?

 

[jon_forward]

The President of Russia himself has stated that he gave G.W information about A.Q.s involvement with Iraq and saddam. PUBLICLY! sorry to see you still cant hear or see anything that doesnt fit your ideas of how the world should be. maybe if you dropped your hatred for our C.I.C you would be have the ability to see that not all is as moore and croonies profess to portrey. I hear folks are now bemoaning the fact that we have attacked a country that didnt attack us first. What a load of Bully-####. In pre 9/11 thinking countries WERE defined by their borders. How do you define the nation of terrorist? where are the borders that hold the extremist with in set lines? Get with it Bully, even Pres. Clinton is supporting G.W on the IRAQI LIBERATION . Its time you opened your eyes to what this world has become, its not G.Ws fault dumbass, its because of the terrorist the world is the way it is.

 

[dilloduck]

Originally posted by Bullypulpit
The Administration's rationales for war in Iraq started with the immediate threat that Saddam's weapons of mass dextruction posed to America and the rest of the world. No such weapons were ever found...Strike one. Then, it was to make America and the rest of the world safer from terrorism. More people have died in the year since the war in Iraq started than before, very nearly doubled...Strike two. Then, it was to liberate the Iraqi people from an oppressive dictatorship and lead them into the light of democracy. Iraqis are being sold a bill of goods in the form of a puppet government propped up by the US military and the level of violence continues to spiral ever higher...Strike THREE! YER OUTTA HERE!

The reasons for war with Iraq have morphed so many time you need a racing form to keep track of them all. Admit it, you don't even believe the sorry little peckerwood anymore. Your support is nothing more than a reflexive response to the percieved threat to your own narrow, blinkered world-view. Have a nice day.

Hey Ump--- problem is that you have been so indoctrinated by Clinton that you don't even know how to listen to facts anymore. It's an art that I'm sure you can learn. You still even call it a "perceived threat" . I can assure you that they want to kill you and are making plans to kill Americans as we speak. Hope your not there when the next attack occurs on our soil.