| Topic: |
Science > Abortion |
| User: |
"David Hartung" |
| Date: |
25 Nov 2003 01:36:03 PM |
| Object: |
The True klansmen? |
This is an opinion piece, but this man's opinion is worth listening to!
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=35815
.
|
|
| User: "False Document" |
|
| Title: Re: The True klansmen? |
25 Nov 2003 02:32:29 PM |
|
|
"David Hartung" <dhart1ng@quixnet.net> wrote in news:DaOwb.31305$oC5.1893
@clmboh1-nws5.columbus.rr.com:
This is an opinion piece, but this man's opinion is worth listening to!
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=35815
What a hypocrite. Like the republicans have never fillibustered anything?
He's all irate over 6 judicial nominees being blocked when every other
one has been confirmed? Bush has had more nominees confirmed in 2 years
than Clinton had in 8. Remember when republicans used to say that it was
"good" to have lots of vacancies on the federal bench? What a fricking
lying hypocrite this guy is. Why is his opinion worth listening to?
Because he's a sellout?
--
"Anybody who wants to harm American troops will be found and brought to
justice. There are some that feel like if they attack us that we may
decide to leave prematurely. They don't understand what they are talking
about if that is the case. Let me finish. There are some who feel like
the conditions are such that they can attack us there. My answer is,
bring 'em on."
- George WMD Bush, July 2, 2003
And they did. Impeach Bush NOW!!! Before more young kids die.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Osprey" |
|
| Title: Re: The True klansmen? |
25 Nov 2003 03:03:27 PM |
|
|
"False Document" <bio_dudeNOSPAM@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:Xns943E9E13F42CCbiodudeNOSPAMhotmail@130.133.1.4...
"David Hartung" <dhart1ng@quixnet.net> wrote in news:DaOwb.31305$oC5.1893
@clmboh1-nws5.columbus.rr.com:
This is an opinion piece, but this man's opinion is worth listening to!
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=35815
What a hypocrite. Like the republicans have never fillibustered anything?
He's all irate over 6 judicial nominees being blocked when every other
one has been confirmed? Bush has had more nominees confirmed in 2 years
than Clinton had in 8. Remember when republicans used to say that it was
"good" to have lots of vacancies on the federal bench? What a fricking
lying hypocrite this guy is. Why is his opinion worth listening to?
Because he's a sellout?
--
"Anybody who wants to harm American troops will be found and brought to
justice. There are some that feel like if they attack us that we may
decide to leave prematurely. They don't understand what they are talking
about if that is the case. Let me finish. There are some who feel like
the conditions are such that they can attack us there. My answer is,
bring 'em on."
- George WMD Bush, July 2, 2003
Bush was right. And the terrorist, especially Al Queda are sidetracked now.
We are rooting them out, we will find them, we will kill them if need be.
Look at just what happened today? Mastermind of the USS Cole was captured.
Shame that Clinton didn't have the guts to go after him?
Since this war started we have accomplished a lot.
Shame you can't appreciate that.
And they did. Impeach Bush NOW!!! Before more young kids die.
before young kids die?
Do you realize that in Vietnam, Korea, WWII we had THOUSANDS die?
Do you realize that because we are more technological advance that we are
actually doing very well?
Do you realize the task that has to be done?
Do you realize what war is?
So what are you saying? Pull out the troops immediately?
Do you really know what you are talking about?
Do you realize that would be one of the worst mistakes we could ever make?
Finish the job that we started.
If you are such a genius, why don't you try to outsmart Donald Rumsfield and
do his job.
I can guarantee you, you wouldn't last.
Bush is actually a Genius in some ways. He has built the perfect cabinet.
Economy is doing great.
Passed a defensive budget that will take care of our troops and vets
Passed a Medicare reform
Fighting a war
History will show you that never has a active wartime president lost a
election.
And right now as it stands, I don't see anyone who can actually beat Bush.
And if anyone wants to just remove the troops and not finish the job, no way
will Americans stand for that.
.
|
|
|
| User: "False Document" |
|
| Title: Re: The True klansmen? |
25 Nov 2003 03:11:15 PM |
|
|
"Osprey" <noneedstoknow@mail.com> wrote in
news:sI6dnSF3RM4EXl6iRVn-uA@comcast.com:
before young kids die?
Do you realize that in Vietnam, Korea, WWII we had THOUSANDS die?
Do you realize that because we are more technological advance that we
are actually doing very well?
Do you realize the task that has to be done?
Do you realize what war is?
Here I thought the task was to combat terrorism. So why are we in Iraq?
So what are you saying? Pull out the troops immediately?
Do you really know what you are talking about?
Do you realize that would be one of the worst mistakes we could ever
make? Finish the job that we started.
I said nothing of the kind. Why must you put words in my mouth. What I
said was that Bush deliberately sabotaged the military operation in Iraq
with his idiotic "bring them on" *****. Bush's "look at me I'm macho
even though I went AWOL when it was my turn to serve" ***** is getting
a lot of kids killed that didn't need to die. Moreover, his pet project
is an unnecessary diversion from the real problem: terrorists. You may
have noticed that our little vacation in Iraq has not resulted in less
terrorism. It's resulted in more terrorism. Of course Bush calls that
"success." I don't.
If you are such a genius, why don't you try to outsmart Donald
Rumsfield and do his job.
A chimp could outsmart rumsfeld. This is the idiot who proclaimed that
"we know where they [WMD] are. In the area around Baghdad and Tikrit, to
the north and east a little." Oh, sorry, no.
I can guarantee you, you wouldn't last.
Bush is actually a Genius in some ways. He has built the perfect
cabinet.
Perfect fools. I mean, look how badly they got duped by bad intelligence.
That's really shocking. They should be humiliated.
Economy is doing great.
Uh, no.
Passed a defensive budget that will take care of our troops and vets
Which actually cuts benefits for veterans. Gee that's nice.
Passed a Medicare reform
Which is a pork-laden handout to the pharmaceutical industry (hey, don't
get me wrong - I work in the pharmaceutical industry - it's still pork
and it doesn't help seniors).
Fighting a war
Which one? The war on terror or the war on iraq? You think they are the
same? Please tell me you aren't that naive.
History will show you that never has a active wartime president lost a
election.
Until now.
And right now as it stands, I don't see anyone who can actually beat
Bush.
In the latest Zogby poll, "any democrat" beat Bush.
And if anyone wants to just remove the troops and not finish the job,
no way will Americans stand for that.
It really stuns me how often you wing-nuts have nothing but diametrically
oppposed extemes as choices. Either we elect Bush and follow him blindly
or we pull out all our troops from Iraq and let it sink into worse chaos
than we've already inflicted. Can you conceive of anything in between?
--
"Anybody who wants to harm American troops will be found and brought to
justice. There are some that feel like if they attack us that we may
decide to leave prematurely. They don't understand what they are talking
about if that is the case. Let me finish. There are some who feel like
the conditions are such that they can attack us there. My answer is,
bring 'em on."
- George WMD Bush, July 2, 2003
And they did. Impeach Bush NOW!!! Before more young kids die.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Osprey" |
|
| Title: Re: The True klansmen? |
25 Nov 2003 06:41:10 PM |
|
|
"False Document" <bio_dudeNOSPAM@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:Xns943EA4A6EE46biodudeNOSPAMhotmail@130.133.1.4...
"Osprey" <noneedstoknow@mail.com> wrote in
news:sI6dnSF3RM4EXl6iRVn-uA@comcast.com:
before young kids die?
Do you realize that in Vietnam, Korea, WWII we had THOUSANDS die?
Do you realize that because we are more technological advance that we
are actually doing very well?
Do you realize the task that has to be done?
Do you realize what war is?
Here I thought the task was to combat terrorism. So why are we in Iraq?
So what are you saying? Pull out the troops immediately?
Do you really know what you are talking about?
Do you realize that would be one of the worst mistakes we could ever
make? Finish the job that we started.
I said nothing of the kind. Why must you put words in my mouth. What I
said was that Bush deliberately sabotaged the military operation in Iraq
with his idiotic "bring them on" *****. Bush's "look at me I'm macho
even though I went AWOL when it was my turn to serve" ***** is getting
a lot of kids killed that didn't need to die. Moreover, his pet project
is an unnecessary diversion from the real problem: terrorists. You may
have noticed that our little vacation in Iraq has not resulted in less
terrorism. It's resulted in more terrorism. Of course Bush calls that
"success." I don't.
If you are such a genius, why don't you try to outsmart Donald
Rumsfield and do his job.
A chimp could outsmart rumsfeld. This is the idiot who proclaimed that
"we know where they [WMD] are. In the area around Baghdad and Tikrit, to
the north and east a little." Oh, sorry, no.
I can guarantee you, you wouldn't last.
Bush is actually a Genius in some ways. He has built the perfect
cabinet.
Perfect fools. I mean, look how badly they got duped by bad intelligence.
That's really shocking. They should be humiliated.
You think that this is the first cabinet that had bad intelligence?
You are not very bright are you?
Economy is doing great.
Uh, no.
Uh yes
http://www.foxnews.com/printer_friendly_story/0,3566,104015,00.html
Third-Quarter GDP Revised Full Point Upward
Tuesday, November 25, 2003
WASHINGTON - The economy roared ahead at an astounding 8.2 percent annual
rate in the third quarter, the fastest pace in nearly two decades and a much
stronger performance than previously thought. It raises hope that a long
spell of lackluster business activity is finally over.
The revised gross domestic product (GDP), released by the Commerce
Department (search) Tuesday, was a full percentage point higher than the 7.2
percent growth rate estimated a month ago.
The new estimate, based on more complete data, reflected stronger investment
by business on new equipment and software, less severe cuts in companies'
inventories and more brisk spending on residential projects.
Those were the main factors behind the upward revision to third-quarter GDP,
which measures the value of all goods and services produced within the
United States and is considered the broadest barometer of the country's
economic health.
The 8.2 percent growth rate - more than double the 3.3 percent pace
registered in the second quarter - represented the best showing since the
first quarter of 1984, when the economy surged at a 9 percent pace.
Economists were predicting third-quarter GDP would be revised up, with
estimates ranging from a 7.3 percent pace to an 8 percent pace.
Near rock-bottom short-term interest rates and President Bush's third round
of tax cuts motivated businesses and consumers to spend and invest more,
helping the economy to move at such a fast clip in the third quarter,
economists say. The next challenge is making sure the rebound is lasting.
The Bush administration believes the economy is poised for solid growth and
stronger job creation in the months ahead. That is politically important to
Bush as he heads into the 2004 campaign. Democrats, however, blame Bush for
the loss of 2.3 million jobs since he took office in January 2001 and argue
that the tax cuts contributed to the record 2003 budget deficit.
For out-of-work Americans, though, it probably doesn't feel like much of an
economic recovery. Only recently has the battered labor market showed signs
of improving. In October, the unemployment rate (search) improved
fractionally, to 6 percent, as the economy added jobs for the third straight
month.
Steady improvements in job creation and in capital investment are crucial
ingredients for the economic recovery to be self sustaining, economists say.
Analysts believe the economy will grow at a slower, but still healthy rate
of at least 4 percent in the current October-to-December period as some of
the stimulus provided by the tax cuts and a surge in mortgage refinancing
fade.
Against this backdrop, Federal Reserve (search) policy-makers are expected
to hold a key short-term interest rate steady at a 45-year low of 1 percent
at its next meeting on Dec. 9.
In the GDP report, consumers continued to do their part to keeping the
economy going. They boosted spending in the third quarter at a 6.4 percent
rate. That was up from a 3.8 pace in the second quarter, but down slightly
from the 6.6 percent rate previously estimated for the third quarter.
Especially encouraging was a 18.4 percent growth rate in business investment
in new equipment and software in the third quarter. That was even stronger
than the 15.4 percent pace previously estimated for the quarter and up from
a 8.3 percent pace in the second quarter.
Spending on residential projects grew at a whopping 22.7 percent pace in the
third quarter, also better than the sizable 20.4 percent growth rate first
estimated and up from a 6.6 percent pace in the second quarter.
Fewer cuts to business inventories in the third quarter resulted in a 0.16
percentage-point increase to GDP in that three-month period, compared with a
0.67 percentage-point reduction to GDP as previously estimated.
Another factor in the upward revision to GDP in the third quarter: Slightly
stronger spending by state and local governments. These governmental bodies
boosted spending at a 2.3 percent pace, up from a 1.3 percent growth rate
previously estimated.
http://www.foxnews.com/printer_friendly_story/0,3566,99563,00.html
New Jobless Claims Lowest in Eight Months
Thursday, October 09, 2003
WASHINGTON - New claims for unemployment insurance fell last week to their
lowest level in eight months, a hopeful sign that companies may be having a
bit more faith in the staying power of the economic recovery and thus are
easing the pace of layoffs.
The Labor Department (search) reported Thursday that for the work week
ending Oct. 4 new applications for jobless benefits dropped by a seasonally
adjusted 23,000 to 382,000, the best showing since Feb. 8.
That marked a better performance than analysts were forecasting. They were
predicting claims would dip to 395,000 last week.
New claims hit a high this year of 459,000 in the middle of April. With
claims last week dipping below 400,000, a level associated with a sluggish
labor market. Economists are encouraged that the pace of firings may now be
stabilizing.
The more stable, four-week moving average of new claims, which smoothes out
weekly fluctuations, declined by 11,500 last week to 393,500, also the
lowest level since Feb. 8.
The number of unemployed people collecting jobless benefits for more than a
week also went down by 7,000 - to 3.6 million for the week ending Sept. 27,
the most recent period for which that information is available.
Hopeful signs on the labor market front come as the economy, which grew at a
annual rate of 3.3 percent in the April-to-June quarter of this year, is
believed to have picked up more speed and grown at a rate of around 5
percent in the July-to-September quarter, economists said.
For the first time in eight months, the economy actually added jobs in
September - 57,000 of them - helping to keep the nation's unemployment rate
at 6.1 percent, the government reported last week.
While that employment report offered hope that job seekers may be seeing
better days ahead, economists said steady improvement in the battered job
market will take time. They said companies will want profits to get stronger
and feel more confident in the vigor of the economic rebound before they go
on a hiring and spending spree.
Federal Reserve (search) Chairman Alan Greenspan (search) and his colleagues
are expected to hold a main short-term interest rate at a 45-year low of 1
percent when they meet next on Oct. 28, economists said. By holding rates at
such low levels, businesses and consumers might be more inclined to boost
spending and investment, something that would lift economic growth.
Weekly Jobless Numbers Fall Sharply
Thursday, November 20, 2003
http://www.foxnews.com/printer_friendly_story/0,3566,103614,00.html
WASHINGTON - Fewer U.S. workers filed new applications for unemployment
benefits last week, a sign that companies may be feeling better about the
economic recovery's staying power and are slowing the pace of layoffs.
The Labor Department (search) reported Thursday that for the week ending
Nov. 15, new claims for jobless benefits declined by a seasonally adjusted
15,000 to 355,000. For seven straight weeks claims have been below the
400,000 mark, suggesting that the job market is turning a corner.
Economists believe the worst of the layoffs is over. Claims hit a high this
year of 459,000 in the middle of April and have slowly drifted downward.
The more stable four-week moving average (search) of claims, which smooths
out week-to-week fluctuations, fell by 9,000 to 367,250 last week, the best
showing since the week ending Feb. 24, 2001.
The nation's unemployment rate dipped to 6 percent in October as the economy
added jobs for the third straight month, a promising note for the labor
market, which has seen millions of jobs evaporate over the last three years.
The economy roared ahead at a 7.2 percent annual rate in the third quarter,
the fastest pace in nearly two decades. Analysts believe the economy will
grow at a solid 4 percent pace in the current quarter.
Even as the economy grows, it will still take time for the labor ma
ket to
fully turn around, economists say. And, an influx of job seekers motivated
by an improved economic climate could cause the unemployment rate to rise in
the months ahead if job creation isn't strong enough, economists say.
The Federal Reserve (search), wanting to see more improvement in the jobs
picture, is expected to hold a main short-term interest rate at a 45-year
low of 1 percent when it meets next on Dec. 9. Economists believe rates
could stay near rock-bottom levels into part of 2004.
http://www.foxnews.com/printer_friendly_story/0,3566,100245,00.html
Social Security Recipients to Get Hike in Benefits
Thursday, October 16, 2003
WASHINGTON - Social Security (search) beneficiaries will get a 2.1 percent
cost-of-living increase next year, providing an extra $19 a month for the
typical retiree.
Next year's boost, announced Thursday by the Social Security Administration
(search), is up from this year's increase of 1.4 percent, but still reflects
an economy with low inflation.
The increase begins in January and covers more than 51 million Americans. It
is tied to an index of consumer prices, the government's chief measure of
inflation.
Monthly benefit checks have been adjusted automatically since 1975 to
protect retirees' income from erosion by rising inflation.
The average monthly benefit for retirees will rise from $903 to $922. For
the average couple receiving benefits, the monthly check will jump from
$1,492 to $1,523, an increase of $31.
The maximum monthly benefit for disabled workers will increase from $844 to
$862.
But for most older Americans, much of the increase will be wiped out by a
13.5 percent hike in Medicare premiums that also takes effect next year.
Premiums will rise $7.90 a month to $66.60.
Medicare is very much on the minds of lawmakers in Congress (search) with
political attention turning to next year's election. Both parties are eager
to reach an agreement this year, with President Bush urging action on the
issue.
House and Senate leaders working on a Medicare prescription drug bill moved
closer to a consensus Wednesday night on requiring higher-income seniors to
pay more than other beneficiaries for coverage.
If enacted, that would mark a historic policy shift for a program that has
always provided a standard benefit at a fixed price for every participant.
When Medicare began in 1967, premiums were set at $3 a month. Next year's
13.5 percent increase is the third-largest in the program's history.
The largest premium increase was in 1988, at 38.5 percent, followed by 1993,
when the jump was 15.1 percent.
As for Social Security, the largest annual increase was 14.3 percent in
1980, reflecting double-digit inflation of that era. Adjustments in the past
decade have remained under 3 percent with inflation pressures moderating.
The annual adjustment is based on third-quarter consumer price changes in
2002 through the third quarter of this year. This allows the Social Security
Administration time to get the raises included in January checks.
The Social Security Administration also announced that for working
Americans, the maximum annual earnings subject to taxes next year will rise
to $87,900 from $97,000. That means a tax increase for about 9.2 million of
the 156 million workers who will pay Social Security taxes next year.
Bush campaigned in 2000 on the idea of letting younger workers invest a
portion of their payroll taxes in the stock market to help shore up future
funding for the retirement system.
Instead, Social Security has taken a back seat to the war on terrorism and
even Medicare, which analysts say faces a greater funding crisis.
In Congress, lawmakers are working on compromise legislation to add a
prescription drug benefit to Medicare as well as overhaul the basic health
care program.
Republicans in particular want to inject competition into Medicare by
inviting private insurers to compete for seniors' health care dollars,
arguing that would modernize the 38-year-old government program as well as
hold down future government spending.
Key lawmakers reported a growing consensus late Wednesday for the historic
step of requiring higher-income seniors to pay more for their Medicare than
other beneficiaries.
The development marked an important step toward agreement on an overall
Medicare prescription drug bill. But lawmakers said no details had yet been
settled.
http://www.foxnews.com/printer_friendly_story/0,3566,98385,00.html
Second-Quarter GDP Revised Up
Friday, September 26, 2003
WASHINGTON - Healthy consumer spending nudged economic growth ahead at a
slightly faster second-quarter pace than previously thought, the Commerce
Department (search) said Friday, setting the stage for a second-half surge
in growth.
Gross domestic product (search), or GDP, grew at a revised 3.3 percent
annual rate in the three months from April to June, up from a 3.1 percent
rate reported a month ago that Wall Street economists had expected to be
unchanged.
The second-quarter pace of expansion was more than double the 1.4 percent
posted in each of the two preceding quarters and was the strongest since a 4
percent advance in the third quarter last year.
Many forecasters anticipate GDP growth is set to accelerate to rates of four
percent or higher in the third and fourth quarters, supported by a buoyant
housing market and by lean inventories that imply businesses have more
incentive to make new investments.
Exceptionally robust defense spending - up 45.8 percent in the second
quarter for the strongest quarterly growth since 1951 in the Korean War
era - added impetus to growth in the spring and may last for some time as
U.S. involvement in Iraq and elsewhere continues.
Consumer spending increased at a 3.8 percent annual rate in the second
quarter, nearly double the first quarter's 2 percent - significant since
spending by consumers on goods and services fuels two-thirds of national
economic activity.
Analysts said the upwardly revised GDP report buttressed predictions for a
continuing pickup in activity.
"This is again very positive and it suggests there's good forward momentum
in the economy," said economist John Silvia of Wachovia Securities in
Charlotte, N.C.
Silvia added that good growth and low inflation suggested no need for the
Federal Reserve (search) to raise interest rates before next year - further
undergirding the pace of expansion.
The dollar strengthened after the report on GDP - a gauge of total goods and
services produced within U.S. borders - in the apparent belief the U.S.
economy will continue to outperform Europe and Japan.
The report contained one sour note, as Commerce reported corporate profits
after taxes shrank 5.0 percent in the second quarter, deeper than the 3.4
percent drop reported a month ago and a contrast with the first quarter's
3.8 percent rise.
Non-residential investment, generally taken as a measure of businesses'
willingness to expand, grew at a 7.3 percent pace in the second quarter -
not quite as strong as the 8 percent increase estimated a month ago but a
major improvement from the first quarter when it contracted at a 4.4 percent
rate.
Most key indicators support a view expressed by private forecasters, as well
as by Bush administration officials including Treasury Secretary John Snow,
that GDP growth will top four percent during the final six months of this
year.
Sales of new and existing homes in August, reported on Thursday, were strong
and interest rates remain relatively low, while manufacturing has been
showing tentative signs of revival from a deep slump.
The GDP report showed businesses drew down inventories at a $17.6 billion a
year rate in the second quarter compared with a $4.8-billion increase in the
first three months of the year. This was a solid indication that companies
can safely ramp up production or consider investment in new production
operations once they feel certain demand will remain firm.
Passed a defensive budget that will take care of our troops and vets
Which actually cuts benefits for veterans. Gee that's nice.
Sorry, but wrong again
Passed a Medicare reform
Which is a pork-laden handout to the pharmaceutical industry (hey, don't
get me wrong - I work in the pharmaceutical industry - it's still pork
and it doesn't help seniors).
Sorry, wrong again.
Fighting a war
Which one? The war on terror or the war on iraq?
All linked
You think they are the
same? Please tell me you aren't that naive.
Yes, in one way they are the same, another they are different.
History will show you that never has a active wartime president lost a
election.
Until now.
Wrong.
But tell you what, why don't you go ahead and make a prediction now, and
stick around.
Tell us who is going to beat Bush
And right now as it stands, I don't see anyone who can actually beat
Bush.
In the latest Zogby poll, "any democrat" beat Bush.
Show it
And if anyone wants to just remove the troops and not finish the job,
no way will Americans stand for that.
It really stuns me how often you wing-nuts have nothing but diametrically
oppposed extemes as choices. Either we elect Bush and follow him blindly
or we pull out all our troops from Iraq and let it sink into worse chaos
than we've already inflicted. Can you conceive of anything in between?
Are you suggesting that we remove the troops immediately and not finish the
job?
--
"Anybody who wants to harm American troops will be found and brought to
justice. There are some that feel like if they attack us that we may
decide to leave prematurely. They don't understand what they are talking
about if that is the case. Let me finish. There are some who feel like
the conditions are such that they can attack us there. My answer is,
bring 'em on."
Yep, and that is what is happening. Al Queda is being drawn in, we are
capturing more, and terrorist are disrupted.
The last thing Al Queda or any terrorist organization wants is peace and
stabalization in the middle east.
Figure it out.
- George WMD Bush, July 2, 2003
And they did. Impeach Bush NOW!!! Before more young kids die.
It is sad in a way, that you have absolutely no clue as to what you are
talking about.
Typical though
.
|
|
|
| User: "Hogans Goat" |
|
| Title: Re: The True klansmen? |
28 Nov 2003 05:31:54 PM |
|
|
Here's a cheerful little earful from Osprey:
"False Document" <bio_dudeNOSPAM@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:Xns943EA4A6EE46biodudeNOSPAMhotmail@130.133.1.4...
"Osprey" <noneedstoknow@mail.com> wrote in
news:sI6dnSF3RM4EXl6iRVn-uA@comcast.com:
before young kids die?
Do you realize that in Vietnam, Korea, WWII we had THOUSANDS die?
Do you realize that because we are more technological advance that
we are actually doing very well?
Do you realize the task that has to be done?
Do you realize what war is?
Here I thought the task was to combat terrorism. So why are we in
Iraq?
So what are you saying? Pull out the troops immediately?
Do you really know what you are talking about?
Do you realize that would be one of the worst mistakes we could
ever make? Finish the job that we started.
I said nothing of the kind. Why must you put words in my mouth. What
I said was that Bush deliberately sabotaged the military operation in
Iraq with his idiotic "bring them on" *****. Bush's "look at me
I'm macho even though I went AWOL when it was my turn to serve"
***** is getting a lot of kids killed that didn't need to die.
Moreover, his pet project is an unnecessary diversion from the real
problem: terrorists. You may have noticed that our little vacation in
Iraq has not resulted in less terrorism. It's resulted in more
terrorism. Of course Bush calls that "success." I don't.
If you are such a genius, why don't you try to outsmart Donald
Rumsfield and do his job.
A chimp could outsmart rumsfeld. This is the idiot who proclaimed
that "we know where they [WMD] are. In the area around Baghdad and
Tikrit, to the north and east a little." Oh, sorry, no.
I can guarantee you, you wouldn't last.
Bush is actually a Genius in some ways. He has built the perfect
cabinet.
Perfect fools. I mean, look how badly they got duped by bad
intelligence. That's really shocking. They should be humiliated.
You think that this is the first cabinet that had bad intelligence?
Not at all, it's just that 9/11 was the most colossal *****-up in the
history of the world, and Dim Son was behind the wheel.
Economy is doing great.
Uh, no.
Uh yes
http://www.foxnews.com/printer_friendly_story/0,3566,104015,00.html
Third-Quarter GDP Revised Full Point Upward
http://www.foxnews.com/printer_friendly_story/0,3566,99563,00.html
New Jobless Claims Lowest in Eight Months
Thursday, October 09, 2003
Weekly Jobless Numbers Fall Sharply
Thursday, November 20, 2003
http://www.foxnews.com/printer_friendly_story/0,3566,103614,00.html
A whole point? That's success?
When the economy is hemorrhaging a quart of blood per hour and you reduce
the quart to a half quart, you don't get to jump up and scream, "The
patient is cured!" It only means you're getting better at stopping the
bleeding.
If the economy is doing so great, why is Wall Street afraid to bet on it?
They had confidence when Clinton was in charge, and they went "all in" on
America then. If you crash the economy, you don't get credit for the
"miraculous comeback" half way thru. If Bush triples the Dow like
Clinton did, (which would be up to 33,000) I'll *consider* voting for the
*****.
Say your company buys 1000 widgets a day to convert to profitable ultra-
widgets. When the owner's idiot son takes over, he crashed ultra-widgets
production to 10 per day. Three years later, the owner's idiot son
raises production to 30 widgets a day. Do you scream what a genius the
monkey is for "tripling" production of widgets? Or do you wonder why the
board of directors is happy losing 970 widgets per day?
Jesus Christ - stop screaming about what a paradise Bush has brought us!
We're down 970 widgets per day, and the American press is LOVING this
Unelected Moron. Not to mention the 435 factory workers who were killed
because the owner's idiot son says all those OSHA laws were just
"socialism run amok" and "shackles on production."
America - wake the hell up! The owner's idiot son is going to ruin
everything!
Hogan out.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Osprey" |
|
| Title: Re: The True klansmen? |
28 Nov 2003 05:56:14 PM |
|
|
"Hogan's Goat" <yeah@right.com> wrote in message
news:Xns9441A01CB241Cyeah.right.com@63.223.5.254...
Here's a cheerful little earful from Osprey:
"False Document" <bio_dudeNOSPAM@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:Xns943EA4A6EE46biodudeNOSPAMhotmail@130.133.1.4...
"Osprey" <noneedstoknow@mail.com> wrote in
news:sI6dnSF3RM4EXl6iRVn-uA@comcast.com:
before young kids die?
Do you realize that in Vietnam, Korea, WWII we had THOUSANDS die?
Do you realize that because we are more technological advance that
we are actually doing very well?
Do you realize the task that has to be done?
Do you realize what war is?
Here I thought the task was to combat terrorism. So why are we in
Iraq?
So what are you saying? Pull out the troops immediately?
Do you really know what you are talking about?
Do you realize that would be one of the worst mistakes we could
ever make? Finish the job that we started.
I said nothing of the kind. Why must you put words in my mouth. What
I said was that Bush deliberately sabotaged the military operation in
Iraq with his idiotic "bring them on" *****. Bush's "look at me
I'm macho even though I went AWOL when it was my turn to serve"
***** is getting a lot of kids killed that didn't need to die.
Moreover, his pet project is an unnecessary diversion from the real
problem: terrorists. You may have noticed that our little vacation in
Iraq has not resulted in less terrorism. It's resulted in more
terrorism. Of course Bush calls that "success." I don't.
If you are such a genius, why don't you try to outsmart Donald
Rumsfield and do his job.
A chimp could outsmart rumsfeld. This is the idiot who proclaimed
that "we know where they [WMD] are. In the area around Baghdad and
Tikrit, to the north and east a little." Oh, sorry, no.
I can guarantee you, you wouldn't last.
Bush is actually a Genius in some ways. He has built the perfect
cabinet.
Perfect fools. I mean, look how badly they got duped by bad
intelligence. That's really shocking. They should be humiliated.
You think that this is the first cabinet that had bad intelligence?
Not at all, it's just that 9/11 was the most colossal *****-up in the
history of the world, and Dim Son was behind the wheel.
So tell us about 9/11. Are you going to be another one to accuse Bush of
knowing about it and doing nothing?
That has been done before and each and everytime someone says that, all I
have to do is say prove it. And the argument is over.
Because no one can prove that. First you have to prove that Bush knew about
it. Second you have to prove that Bush knew the date, location and method
that terrorist were going to carry this attack out. Third you have to prove
that Bush could have prevented it. And finally, you have to come up with
how Bush was going to stop it.
Economy is doing great.
Uh, no.
Uh yes
http://www.foxnews.com/printer_friendly_story/0,3566,104015,00.html
Third-Quarter GDP Revised Full Point Upward
http://www.foxnews.com/printer_friendly_story/0,3566,99563,00.html
New Jobless Claims Lowest in Eight Months
Thursday, October 09, 2003
Weekly Jobless Numbers Fall Sharply
Thursday, November 20, 2003
http://www.foxnews.com/printer_friendly_story/0,3566,103614,00.html
A whole point? That's success?
When the economy is hemorrhaging a quart of blood per hour and you reduce
the quart to a half quart, you don't get to jump up and scream, "The
patient is cured!" It only means you're getting better at stopping the
bleeding.
If the economy is doing so great, why is Wall Street afraid to bet on it?
You haven't been paying attention to the stock markey very much have you.
They had confidence when Clinton was in charge, and they went "all in" on
America then.
Oh you mean consumer borrowing went up. Well yes, that is true. And guess
what else came along with that?
History's highest period of bankruptcy.
Oh lets not forget the dot.com's either.
If you crash the economy, you don't get credit for the
"miraculous comeback" half way thru. If Bush triples the Dow like
Clinton did, (which would be up to 33,000) I'll *consider* voting for the
*****.
Say your company buys 1000 widgets a day to convert to profitable ultra-
widgets. When the owner's idiot son takes over, he crashed ultra-widgets
production to 10 per day. Three years later, the owner's idiot son
raises production to 30 widgets a day. Do you scream what a genius the
monkey is for "tripling" production of widgets? Or do you wonder why the
board of directors is happy losing 970 widgets per day?
Jesus Christ - stop screaming about what a paradise Bush has brought us!
I never screamed that Bush brought us into paradise.
We're down 970 widgets per day, and the American press is LOVING this
Unelected Moron. Not to mention the 435 factory workers who were killed
because the owner's idiot son says all those OSHA laws were just
"socialism run amok" and "shackles on production."
America - wake the hell up! The owner's idiot son is going to ruin
everything!
I think America has woke up. In 2000 and again 2002. I don't think you
will see Bush lose this election.
What we are tired of is the stupidity that is played on both sides.
You want to fix something, fix that. Get these politicians, all of them, to
stop the partisanship.
Then you got my respect.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Osprey" |
|
| Title: Re: The True klansmen? |
28 Nov 2003 05:59:55 PM |
|
|
"Osprey" <noneedstoknow@mail.com> wrote in message
news:p_ydnWjIUfEEfVqiRVn-ig@comcast.com...
"Hogan's Goat" <yeah@right.com> wrote in message
news:Xns9441A01CB241Cyeah.right.com@63.223.5.254...
Here's a cheerful little earful from Osprey:
"False Document" <bio_dudeNOSPAM@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:Xns943EA4A6EE46biodudeNOSPAMhotmail@130.133.1.4...
"Osprey" <noneedstoknow@mail.com> wrote in
news:sI6dnSF3RM4EXl6iRVn-uA@comcast.com:
before young kids die?
Do you realize that in Vietnam, Korea, WWII we had THOUSANDS die?
Do you realize that because we are more technological advance that
we are actually doing very well?
Do you realize the task that has to be done?
Do you realize what war is?
Here I thought the task was to combat terrorism. So why are we in
Iraq?
So what are you saying? Pull out the troops immediately?
Do you really know what you are talking about?
Do you realize that would be one of the worst mistakes we could
ever make? Finish the job that we started.
I said nothing of the kind. Why must you put words in my mouth. What
I said was that Bush deliberately sabotaged the military operation in
Iraq with his idiotic "bring them on" *****. Bush's "look at me
I'm macho even though I went AWOL when it was my turn to serve"
***** is getting a lot of kids killed that didn't need to die.
Moreover, his pet project is an unnecessary diversion from the real
problem: terrorists. You may have noticed that our little vacation in
Iraq has not resulted in less terrorism. It's resulted in more
terrorism. Of course Bush calls that "success." I don't.
If you are such a genius, why don't you try to outsmart Donald
Rumsfield and do his job.
A chimp could outsmart rumsfeld. This is the idiot who proclaimed
that "we know where they [WMD] are. In the area around Baghdad and
Tikrit, to the north and east a little." Oh, sorry, no.
I can guarantee you, you wouldn't last.
Bush is actually a Genius in some ways. He has built the perfect
cabinet.
Perfect fools. I mean, look how badly they got duped by bad
intelligence. That's really shocking. They should be humiliated.
You think that this is the first cabinet that had bad intelligence?
Not at all, it's just that 9/11 was the most colossal *****-up in the
history of the world, and Dim Son was behind the wheel.
So tell us about 9/11. Are you going to be another one to accuse Bush of
knowing about it and doing nothing?
That has been done before and each and everytime someone says that, all I
have to do is say prove it. And the argument is over.
Because no one can prove that. First you have to prove that Bush knew
about
it. Second you have to prove that Bush knew the date, location and method
that terrorist were going to carry this attack out. Third you have to
prove
that Bush could have prevented it. And finally, you have to come up with
how Bush was going to stop it.
Economy is doing great.
Uh, no.
Uh yes
http://www.foxnews.com/printer_friendly_story/0,3566,104015,00.html
Third-Quarter GDP Revised Full Point Upward
http://www.foxnews.com/printer_friendly_story/0,3566,99563,00.html
New Jobless Claims Lowest in Eight Months
Thursday, October 09, 2003
Weekly Jobless Numbers Fall Sharply
Thursday, November 20, 2003
http://www.foxnews.com/printer_friendly_story/0,3566,103614,00.html
A whole point? That's success?
A quick follow up.
That whole point was added to the 7.2 points. Highest increase in over 30
years.
Thank you
:o)
When the economy is hemorrhaging a quart of blood per hour and you
reduce
the quart to a half quart, you don't get to jump up and scream, "The
patient is cured!" It only means you're getting better at stopping the
bleeding.
If the economy is doing so great, why is Wall Street afraid to bet on
it?
You haven't been paying attention to the stock markey very much have you.
They had confidence when Clinton was in charge, and they went "all in"
on
America then.
Oh you mean consumer borrowing went up. Well yes, that is true. And
guess
what else came along with that?
History's highest period of bankruptcy.
Oh lets not forget the dot.com's either.
If you crash the economy, you don't get credit for the
"miraculous comeback" half way thru. If Bush triples the Dow like
Clinton did, (which would be up to 33,000) I'll *consider* voting for
the
*****.
Say your company buys 1000 widgets a day to convert to profitable ultra-
widgets. When the owner's idiot son takes over, he crashed
ultra-widgets
production to 10 per day. Three years later, the owner's idiot son
raises production to 30 widgets a day. Do you scream what a genius the
monkey is for "tripling" production of widgets? Or do you wonder why
the
board of directors is happy losing 970 widgets per day?
Jesus Christ - stop screaming about what a paradise Bush has brought us!
I never screamed that Bush brought us into paradise.
We're down 970 widgets per day, and the American press is LOVING this
Unelected Moron. Not to mention the 435 factory workers who were killed
because the owner's idiot son says all those OSHA laws were just
"socialism run amok" and "shackles on production."
America - wake the hell up! The owner's idiot son is going to ruin
everything!
I think America has woke up. In 2000 and again 2002. I don't think you
will see Bush lose this election.
What we are tired of is the stupidity that is played on both sides.
You want to fix something, fix that. Get these politicians, all of them,
to
stop the partisanship.
Then you got my respect.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Osprey" |
|
| Title: Re: The True klansmen? |
25 Nov 2003 06:36:09 PM |
|
|
"False Document" <bio_dudeNOSPAM@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:Xns943EA4A6EE46biodudeNOSPAMhotmail@130.133.1.4...
"Osprey" <noneedstoknow@mail.com> wrote in
news:sI6dnSF3RM4EXl6iRVn-uA@comcast.com:
before young kids die?
Do you realize that in Vietnam, Korea, WWII we had THOUSANDS die?
Do you realize that because we are more technological advance that we
are actually doing very well?
Do you realize the task that has to be done?
Do you realize what war is?
Here I thought the task was to combat terrorism. So why are we in Iraq?
"If Saddam Hussein fails to comply and we fail to act or we take some
ambiguous third route, which gives him yet more opportunities to develop his
program of weapons of mass destruction ... he will then conclude that he can
go right on doing more to build an arsenal of devastating destruction ...
Some way, someday, I guarentee you he'll use the arsenal." - Bill Clinton,
Feb. 18 1998
CNN Story dated Dec. 16, 1998
"The president said Iraq's refusal to cooperate with UN weapons inspectors
presented a threat to the entire world. 'Saddam must not be allowed to
threaten his neighbors or the world with nuclear arms, poison gas or
biological weapons.'"
"The best way to end that threat once and for all is with a new Iraqi
government - a government ready to live in peace with its neighbors, a
government that respects the rights of its people."
Sen. John F. Kerry, D - Mass., said on Feb. 23, 1998: "Saddam Hussein has
already used these weapons and has made it clear that he has the intent to
continue to try, by virtue of his duplicity and secrecy, to continue to do
so. That is a threat to the stability of the Middle East. It is a threat
with respect to the potential of terrorist activities on a global basis. It
is a threat even to regions near but not exactly in the Middle East."
Tom Daschel, Feb. 1998: "Look, we have exhausted virtually all our
diplomatic effort to get the Iraqis to comply with their own agreements and
with international law. Given that, what other option is there but to force
them to do so?' That's what they're saying. This is the key question. And
the answer is we don't have another option. We have go to force them to
comply, and we are doing so militarily."
http://www.foxnews.com/printer_friendly_story/0,3566,103176,00.html
Weekly Standard: Intel Report Links Saddam, Usama
Saturday, November 15, 2003
by Stephen F. Hayes
Usama bin Laden (search) and Saddam Hussein (search) had an operational
relationship from the early 1990s to 2003 that involved training in
explosives and weapons of mass destruction, logistical support for terrorist
attacks, Al Qaeda training camps and safe haven in Iraq, and Iraqi financial
support for Al Qaeda - perhaps even for Mohamed Atta - according to a top
secret U.S. government memorandum obtained by The Weekly Standard.
The memo, dated October 27, 2003, was sent from Undersecretary of Defense
for Policy Douglas J. Feith (search) to Senators Pat Roberts and Jay
Rockefeller, the chairman and vice chairman of the Senate Intelligence
Committee. It was written in response to a request from the committee as
part of its investigation into prewar intelligence claims made by the
administration. Intelligence reporting included in the 16-page memo comes
from a variety of domestic and foreign agencies, including the FBI, the
Defense Intelligence Agency, the Central Intelligence Agency, and the
National Security Agency. Much of the evidence is detailed, conclusive, and
corroborated by multiple sources. Some of it is new information obtained in
custodial interviews with high-level Al Qaeda terrorists and Iraqi
officials, and some of it is more than a decade old. The picture that
emerges is one of a history of collaboration between two of America's most
determined and dangerous enemies.
According to the memo, which lays out the intelligence in 50 numbered
points, Iraq-Al Qaeda contacts began in 1990 and continued through mid-March
2003, days before the Iraq War began. Most of the numbered passages contain
straight, fact-based intelligence reporting, which in some cases includes an
evaluation of the credibility of the source. This reporting is often
followed by commentary and analysis.
The relationship began shortly before the first Gulf War. According to
reporting in the memo, bin Laden sent "emissaries to Jordan in 1990 to meet
with Iraqi government officials." At some unspecified point in 1991,
according to a CIA analysis, "Iraq sought Sudan's assistance to establish
links to Al Qaeda." The outreach went in both directions. According to 1993
CIA reporting cited in the memo, "bin Laden wanted to expand his
organization's capabilities through ties with Iraq."
The primary go-between throughout these early stages was Sudanese strongman
Hassan al-Turabi, a leader of the Al Qaeda-affiliated National Islamic Front
(search). Numerous sources have confirmed this. One defector reported that
"al-Turabi was instrumental in arranging the Iraqi-Al Qaeda relationship.
The defector said Iraq sought Al Qaeda influence through its connections
with Afghanistan, to facilitate the transshipment of proscribed weapons and
equipment to Iraq. In return, Iraq provided Al Qaeda with training and
instructors."
One such confirmation came in a postwar interview with one of Saddam
Hussein's henchmen. As the memo details:
4. According to a May 2003 debriefing of a senior Iraqi intelligence
officer, Iraqi intelligence established a highly secretive relationship with
Egyptian Islamic Jihad , and later with Al Qaeda. The first meeting in 1992
between the Iraqi Intelligence Service (IIS) and Al Qaeda was brokered by
al-Turabi. Former IIS deputy director Faruq Hijazi and senior Al Qaeda
leader [Ayman al] Zawahiri were at the meeting - the first of several
between 1992 and 1995 in Sudan. Additional meetings between Iraqi
intelligence and Al Qaeda were held in Pakistan. Members of Al Qaeda would
sometimes visit Baghdad where they would meet the Iraqi intelligence chief
in a safe house. The report claimed that Saddam insisted the relationship
with Al Qaeda be kept secret. After 9/11, the source said Saddam made a
personnel change in the IIS for fear the relationship would come under
scrutiny from foreign probes.
A decisive moment in the budding relationship came in 1993, when bin Laden
faced internal resistance to his cooperation with Saddam.
5. A CIA report from a contact with good access, some of whose reporting has
been corroborated, said that certain elements in the "Islamic Army" of bin
Laden were against the secular regime of Saddam. Overriding the internal
factional strife that was developing, bin Laden came to an "understanding"
with Saddam that the Islamic Army would no longer support anti-Saddam
activities. According to sensitive reporting released in U.S. court
documents during the African Embassy trial, in 1993 bin Laden reached an
"understanding" with Saddam under which he (bin Laden) forbade Al Qaeda
operations to be mounted against the Iraqi leader.
Another facilitator of the relationship during the mid-1990s was Mahmdouh
Mahmud Salim (a.k.a. Abu Hajer al-Iraqi). Abu Hajer, now in a New York
prison, was described in court proceedings related to the August 1998
bombings of U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania as bin Ladenıs "best
friend." According to CIA reporting dating back to the Clinton
administration, bin Laden trusted him to serve as a liaison with Saddam's
regime and tasked him with procurement of weapons of mass destruction for Al
Qaeda. FBI reporting in the memo reveals that Abu Hajer "visited Iraq in
early 1995" and "had a good relationship with Iraqi intelligence. Sometime
before mid-1995 he went on an Al Qaeda mission to discuss unspecified
cooperation with the Iraqi government."
Some of the reporting about the relationship throughout the mid-1990s comes
from a source who had intimate knowledge of bin Laden and his dealings. This
source, according to CIA analysis, offered "the most credible information"
on cooperation between bin Laden and Iraq.
This source's reports read almost like a diary. Specific dates of when bin
Laden flew to various cities are included, as well as names of individuals
he met. The source did not offer information on the substantive talks during
the meetings. . . . There are not a great many reports in general on the
relationship between bin Laden and Iraq because of the secrecy surrounding
it. But when this source with close access provided a "window" into bin
Laden's activities, bin Laden is seen as heavily involved with Iraq (and
Iran).
Reporting from the early 1990s remains somewhat sketchy, though multiple
sources place Hassan al-Turabi and Ayman al Zawahiri (search), bin Laden's
current No. 2, at the center of the relationship. The reporting gets much
more specific in the mid-1990s:
8. Reporting from a well placed source disclosed that bin Laden was
receiving training on bomb making from the IIS's [Iraqi Intelligence
Service] principal technical expert on making sophisticated explosives,
Brigadier Salim al-Ahmed. Brigadier Salim was observed at bin Laden's farm
in Khartoum in Sept.-Oct. 1995 and again in July 1996, in the company of the
Director of Iraqi Intelligence, Mani abd-al-Rashid al-Tikriti.
9 . . . Bin Laden visited Doha, Qatar (17-19 Jan. 1996), staying at the
residence of a member of the Qatari ruling family. He discussed the
successful movement of explosives into Saudi Arabia, and operations targeted
against U.S. and U.K. interests in Dammam, Dharan, and Khobar, using
clandestine Al Qaeda cells in Saudi Arabia. Upon his return, bin Laden met
with Hijazi and Turabi, among others.
And later more reporting, from the same "well placed" source:
10. The Director of Iraqi Intelligence, Mani abd-al-Rashid al-Tikriti, met
privately with bin Laden at his farm in Sudan in July 1996. Tikriti used an
Iraqi delegation traveling to Khartoum to discuss bilateral cooperation as
his "cover" for his own entry into Sudan to meet with bin Laden and Hassan
al-Turabi. The Iraqi intelligence chief and two other IIS officers met at
bin Ladenıs farm and discussed bin Ladenıs request for IIS technical
assistance in: a) making letter and parcel bombs; b) making bombs which
could be placed on aircraft and detonated by changes in barometric pressure;
and c) making false passport [sic]. Bin Laden specifically requested that
[Brigadier Salim al-Ahmed], Iraqi intelligence's premier explosives
maker<especially skilled in making car bombs<remain with him in Sudan. The
Iraqi intelligence chief instructed Salim to remain in Sudan with bin Laden
as long as required.
The analysis of those events follows:
The time of the visit from the IIS director was a few weeks after the Khobar
Towers bombing. The bombing came on the third anniversary of a U.S.
[Tomahawk missile] strike on IIS HQ (retaliation for the attempted
assassination of former President Bush in Kuwait) for which Iraqi officials
explicitly threatened retaliation.
In addition to the contacts clustered in the mid-1990s, intelligence reports
detail a flurry of activities in early 1998 and again in December 1998. A
"former senior Iraqi intelligence officer" reported that "the Iraqi
intelligence service station in Pakistan was Baghdad's point of contact with
Al Qaeda. He also said bin Laden visited Baghdad in Jan. 1998 and met with
Tariq Aziz."
11. According to sensitive reporting, Saddam personally sent Faruq Hijazi,
IIS deputy director and later Iraqi ambassador to Turkey, to meet with bin
Laden at least twice, first in Sudan and later in Afghanistan in 1999. . . .
14. According to a sensitive reporting [from] a "regular and reliable
source," [Ayman al] Zawahiri, a senior Al Qaeda operative, visited Baghdad
and met with the Iraqi Vice President on 3 February 1998. The goal of the
visit was to arrange for coordination between Iraq and bin Laden and
establish camps in an-Nasiriyah and Iraqi Kurdistan under the leadership of
Abdul Aziz.
That visit came as the Iraqis intensified their defiance of the U.N.
inspection regime, known as UNSCOM, created by the cease-fire agreement
following the Gulf War. UNSCOM (search) demanded access to Saddam's
presidential palaces that he refused to provide. As the tensions mounted,
President Bill Clinton went to the Pentagon on February 18, 1998, and
prepared the nation for war. He warned of "an unholy axis of terrorists,
drug traffickers, and organized international criminals" and said "there is
no more clear example of this threat than Saddam Hussein."
The day after this speech, according to documents unearthed in April 2003 in
the Iraqi Intelligence headquarters by journalists Mitch Potter and Inigo
Gilmore, Saddam's intelligence service wrote a memo detailing coming
meetings with a bin Laden representative traveling to Baghdad. Each
reference to bin Laden had been covered by liquid paper that, when revealed,
exposed a plan to increase cooperation between Iraq and Al Qaeda. According
to that memo, the IIS agreed to pay for "all the travel and hotel costs
inside Iraq to gain the knowledge of the message from bin Laden and to
convey to his envoy an oral message from us to bin Laden." The document set
as the goal for the meeting a discussion of "the future of our relationship
with him, bin Laden, and to achieve a direct meeting with him." The Al Qaeda
representative, the document went on to suggest, might provide "a way to
maintain contacts with bin Laden."
Four days later, on February 23, 1998, bin Laden issued his now-famous fatwa
on the plight of Iraq, published in the Arabic-language daily, al Quds
al-Arabi: "For over seven years the United States has been occupying the
lands of Islam in the holiest of places, the Arabian Peninsula, plundering
its riches, dictating to its rulers, humiliating its people, terrorizing its
neighbors, and turning its bases in the Peninsula into a spearhead through
which to fight the neighboring Muslim peoples." Bin Laden urged his
followers to act: "The ruling to kill all Americans and their
allies<civilians and military<is an individual duty for every Muslim who can
do it in any country in which it is possible to do it."
Although war was temporarily averted by a last-minute deal brokered by U.N.
Secretary General Kofi Annan, tensions soon rose again. The standoff with
Iraq came to a head in December 1998, when President Clinton launched
Operation Desert Fox (search), a 70-hour bombing campaign that began on
December 16 and ended three days later, on December 19, 1998.
According to press reports at the time, Faruq Hijazi, deputy director of
Iraqi Intelligence, met with bin Laden in Afghanistan on December 21, 1998,
to offer bin Laden safe haven in Iraq. CIA reporting in the memo to the
Senate Intelligence Committee seems to confirm this meeting and relates two
others.
15. A foreign government service reported that an Iraqi delegation,
including at least two Iraqi intelligence officers formerly assigned to the
Iraqi Embassy in Pakistan, met in late 1998 with bin Laden in Afghanistan.
16. According to CIA reporting, bin Laden and Zawahiri met with two Iraqi
intelligence officers in Afghanistan in Dec. 1998.
17. . . . Iraq sent an intelligence officer to Afghanistan to seek closer
ties to bin Laden and the Taliban in late 1998. The source reported that the
Iraqi regime was trying to broaden its cooperation with Al Qaeda. Iraq was
looking to recruit Muslim "elements" to sabotage U.S. and U.K. interests.
After a senior Iraqi intelligence officer met with Taliban leader [Mullah]
Omar, arrangements were made for a series of meetings between the Iraqi
intelligence officer and bin Laden in Pakistan. The source noted Faruq
Hijazi was in Afghanistan in late 1998.
18. . . . Faruq Hijazi went to Afghanistan in 1999 along with several other
Iraqi officials to meet with bin Laden. The source claimed that Hijazi would
have met bin Laden only at Saddamıs explicit direction.
An analysis that follows No. 18 provides additional context and an
explanation of these reports:
Reporting entries #4, #11, #15, #16, #17, and #18, from different sources,
corroborate each other and provide confirmation of meetings between Al Qaeda
operatives and Iraqi intelligence in Afghanistan and Pakistan. None of the
reports have information on operational details or the purpose of such
meetings. The covert nature of the relationship would indicate strict
compartmentation [sic] of operations.
Information about connections between Al Qaeda and Iraq was so widespread by
early 1999 that it made its way into the mainstream press. A January 11,
1999, Newsweek story ran under this headline: "Saddam + Bin Laden?" The
story cited an "Arab intelligence source" with knowledge of contacts between
Iraq and Al Qaeda. "According to this source, Saddam expected last month's
American and British bombing campaign to go on much longer than it did. The
dictator believed that as the attacks continued, indignation would grow in
the Muslim world, making his terrorism offensive both harder to trace and
more effective. With acts of terror contributing to chaos in the region,
Turkey, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, and Kuwait might feel less inclined to support
Washington. Saddam's long-term strategy, according to several sources, is to
bully or cajole Muslim countries into breaking the embargo against Iraq,
without waiting for the United Nations to lift if formally."
Intelligence reports about the nature of the relationship between Iraq and
Al Qaeda from mid-1999 through 2003 are conflicting. One senior Iraqi
intelligence officer in U.S. custody, Khalil Ibrahim Abdallah, "said that
the last contact between the IIS and Al Qaeda was in July 1999. Bin Laden
wanted to meet with Saddam, he said. The guidance sent back from Saddamıs
office reportedly ordered Iraqi intelligence to refrain from any further
contact with bin Laden and Al Qaeda. The source opined that Saddam wanted to
distance himself from Al Qaeda."
The bulk of reporting on the relationship contradicts this claim. One report
states that "in late 1999" Al Qaeda set up a training camp in northern Iraq
that "was operational as of 1999." Other reports suggest that the Iraqi
regime contemplated several offers of safe haven to bin Laden throughout
1999.
23. . . . Iraqi officials were carefully considering offering safe haven to
bin Laden and his closest collaborators in Nov. 1999. The source indicated
the idea was put forward by the presumed head of Iraqi intelligence in
Islamabad (Khalid Janaby) who in turn was in frequent contact and had good
relations with bin Laden.
Some of the most intriguing intelligence concerns an Iraqi named Ahmed
Hikmat Shakir:
24. According to sensitive reporting, a Malaysia-based Iraqi national
(Shakir) facilitated the arrival of one of the Sept 11 hijackers for an
operational meeting in Kuala Lumpur (Jan 2000). Sensitive reporting
indicates Shakirıs travel and contacts link him to a worldwide network of
terrorists, including Al Qaeda. Shakir worked at the Kuala Lumpur airport<a
job he claimed to have obtained through an Iraqi embassy employee.
One of the men at that Al Qaeda operational meeting in the Kuala Lumpur
Hotel was Tawfiz al Atash, a top bin Laden lieutenant later identified as
the mastermind of the October 12, 2000, attack on the USS Cole.
25. Investigation into the bombing of the USS Cole in October 2000 by Al
Qaeda revealed no specific Iraqi connections but according to the CIA,
"fragmentary evidence points to possible Iraqi involvement."
26. During a custodial interview, Ibn al-Shaykh al-Libi [a senior Al Qaeda
operative] said he was told by an Al Qaeda associate that he was tasked to
travel to Iraq (1998) to establish a relationship with Iraqi intelligence to
obtain poisons and gases training. After the USS Cole bombing in 2000, two
Al Qaeda operatives were sent to Iraq for CBW-related [Chemical and
Biological Weapons] training beginning in Dec 2000. Iraqi intelligence was
"encouraged" after the embassy and USS Cole bombings to provide this
training.
The analysis of this report follows.
CIA maintains that Ibn al-Shaykh's timeline is consistent with other
sensitive reporting indicating that bin Laden asked Iraq in 1998 for
advanced weapons, including CBW and "poisons."
Additional reporting also calls into question the claim that relations
between Iraq and Al Qaeda cooled after mid-1999:
27. According to sensitive CIA reporting, . . . the Saudi National Guard
went on a kingdom-wide state of alert in late Dec 2000 after learning Saddam
agreed to assist Al Qaeda in attacking U.S./U.K. interests in Saudi Arabia.
And then there is the alleged contact between lead 9/11 hijacker Mohamed
Atta and an Iraqi intelligence officer in Prague. The reporting on those
links suggests not one meeting, but as many as four. Whatıs more, the memo
reveals potential financing of Atta's activities by Iraqi intelligence.
The Czech counterintelligence service reported that the Sept. 11 hijacker
[Mohamed] Atta met with the former Iraqi intelligence chief in Prague,
[Ahmed Khalil Ibrahim Samir] al Ani, on several occasions. During one of
these meetings, al Ani ordered the IIS finance officer to issue Atta funds
from IIS financial holdings in the Prague office.
And the commentary:
CIA can confirm two Atta visits to Prague<in Dec. 1994 and in June 2000;
data surrounding the other two, on 26 Oct 1999 and 9 April 2001, is
complicated and sometimes contradictory and CIA and FBI cannot confirm Atta
met with the IIS. Czech Interior Minister Stanislav Gross continues to stand
by his information.
It's not just Gross who stands by the information. Five high-ranking members
of the Czech government have publicly confirmed meetings between Atta and al
Ani. The meeting that has gotten the most press attention ,April 9, 2001, is
also the most widely disputed. Even some of the most hawkish Bush
administration officials are privately skeptical that Atta met al Ani on
that occasion. They believe that reports of the alleged meeting, said to
have taken place in public, outside the headquarters of the U.S.-financed
Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, suggest a level of sloppiness that doesnıt
fit the pattern of previous high-level Iraq-Al Qaeda contacts.
Whether or not that specific meeting occurred, the report by Czech
counterintelligence that al Ani ordered the Iraqi Intelligence Service
officer to provide IIS funds to Atta might help explain the lead hijacker's
determination to reach Prague, despite significant obstacles, in the spring
of 2000. (Note that the report stops short of confirming that the funds were
transferred. It claims only that the IIS officer requested the transfer.)
Recall that Atta flew to Prague from Germany on May 30, 2000, but was denied
entry because he did not have a valid visa. Rather than simply return to
Germany and fly directly to the United States, his ultimate destination,
Atta took pains to get to Prague. After he was refused entry the first time,
he traveled back to Germany, obtained the proper paperwork, and caught a bus
back to Prague. He left for the United States the day after arriving in
Prague for the second time.
Several reports indicate that the relationship between Saddam and bin Laden
continued, even after the September 11 attacks:
31. An Oct. 2002 . . . report said Al Qaeda and Iraq reached a secret
agreement whereby Iraq would provide safe haven to Al Qaeda members and
provide them with money and weapons. The agreement reportedly prompted a
large number of Al Qaeda members to head to Iraq. The report also said that
Al Qaeda members involved in a fraudulent passport network for Al Qaeda had
been directed to procure 90 Iraqi and Syrian passports for Al Qaeda
personnel.
The analysis that accompanies that report indicates that the report fits the
pattern of Iraq-Al Qaeda collaboration:
References to procurement of false passports from Iraq and offers of safe
haven previously have surfaced in CIA source reporting considered reliable.
Intelligence reports to date have maintained that Iraqi support for Al Qaeda
usually involved providing training, obtaining passports, and offers of
refuge. This report adds to that list by including weapons and money. This
assistance would make sense in the aftermath of 9-11.
Colin Powell, in his February 5, 2003, presentation to the U.N. Security
Council, revealed the activities of Abu Musab al Zarqawi. Reporting in the
memo expands on Powell's case and might help explain some of the resistance
the U.S. military is currently facing in Iraq.
37. Sensitive reporting indicates senior terrorist planner and close Al
Qaeda associate al Zarqawi has had an operational alliance with Iraqi
officials. As of Oct. 2002, al Zarqawi maintained contacts with the IIS to
procure weapons and explosives, including surface-to-air missiles from an
IIS officer in Baghdad. According to sensitive reporting, al Zarqawi was
setting up sleeper cells in Baghdad to be activated in case of a U.S.
occupatio
of the city, suggesting his operational cooperation with the
Iraqis may have deepened in recent months. Such cooperation could include
IIS provision of a secure operating bases [sic] and steady access to arms
and explosives in preparation for a possible U.S. invasion. Al Zarqawiıs
procurements from the Iraqis also could support Al Qaeda operations against
the U.S. or its allies elsewhere.
38. According to sensitive reporting, a contact with good access who does
not have an established reporting record: An Iraqi intelligence service
officer said that as of mid-March the IIS was providing weapons to Al Qaeda
members located in northern Iraq, including rocket propelled grenade
(RPG)-18 launchers. According to IIS information, northern Iraq-based Al
Qaeda members believed that the U.S. intended to strike Al Qaeda targets
during an anticipated assault against Ansar al-Islam positions.
The memo further reported pre-war intelligence which "claimed that an Iraqi
intelligence official, praising Ansar al-Islam, provided it with $100,000
and agreed to continue to give assistance."
Critics of the Bush administration have complained that Iraq-Al Qaeda
connections are a fantasy, trumped up by the warmongers at the White House
to fit their preconceived notions about international terror; that links
between Saddam Hussein and Usama bin Laden have been routinely "exaggerated"
for political purposes; that hawks "cherry-picked" bits of intelligence and
tendentiously presented these to the American public.
Carl Levin, a senior member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, made those
points as recently as November 9, in an appearance on Fox News Sunday.
Republicans on the committee, he complained, refuse to look at the
administrationıs "exaggeration of intelligence."
Said Levin: "The question is whether or not they exaggerated intelligence in
order to carry out their purpose, which was to make the case for going to
war. Did we know, for instance, with certainty that there was any
relationship between the Iraqis and the terrorists that were in Afghanistan,
bin Laden? The administration said that there's a connection between those
terrorist groups in Afghanistan and Iraq. Was there a basis for that?"
There was, as shown in the memo to the committee on which Levin serves. And
much of the reporting comes from Clinton-era intelligence. Not that you
would know this from Al Goreıs recent public statements. Indeed, the former
vice president claims to be privy to new "evidence" that the administration
lied. In an August speech at New York University, Gore claimed: "The
evidence now shows clearly that Saddam did not want to work with Usama bin
Laden at all, much less give him weapons of mass destruction." Really?
One of the most interesting things to note about the 16-page memo is that it
covers only a fraction of the evidence that will eventually be available to
document the relationship between Iraq and Al Qaeda. For one thing, both
Saddam and bin Laden were desperate to keep their cooperation secret.
(Remember, Iraqi intelligence used liquid paper on an internal intelligence
document to conceal bin Laden's name.) For another, few people in the U.S.
government are expressly looking for such links. There is no Iraq-Al Qaeda
equivalent of the CIA's 1,400-person Iraq Survey Group currently searching
Iraq for weapons of mass destruction.
Instead, CIA and FBI officials are methodically reviewing Iraqi intelligence
files that survived the three-week war last spring. These documents would
cover several miles if laid end-to-end. And they are in Arabic. They include
not only connections between bin Laden and Saddam, but also revolting
details of the regime's long history of brutality. It will be a slow
process.
So Feith's memo to the Senate Intelligence Committee is best viewed as sort
of a "Cliffıs Notes" version of the relationship. It contains the
highlights, but it is far from exhaustive.
One example. The memo contains only one paragraph on Ahmed Hikmat Shakir,
the Iraqi facilitator who escorted two September 11 hijackers through
customs in Kuala Lumpur. U.S. intelligence agencies have extensive reporting
on his activities before and after the September 11 hijacking. That they
would include only this brief overview suggests the 16-page memo, extensive
as it is, just skims the surface of the reporting on Iraq-Al Qaeda
connections.
Other intelligence reports indicate that Shakir whisked not one but two
September 11 hijackers - Khalid al Midhar and Nawaq al Hamzi - through the
passport and customs process upon their arrival in Kuala Lumpur on January
5, 2000. Shakir then traveled with the hijackers to the Kuala Lumpur Hotel
where they met with Ramzi bin al Shibh, one of the masterminds of the
September 11 plot. The meeting lasted three days. Shakir returned to work on
January 9 and January 10, and never again.
Shakir got his airport job through a contact at the Iraqi Embassy. (Iraq
routinely used its embassies as staging grounds for its intelligence
operations; in some cases, more than half of the alleged "diplomats" were
intelligence operatives.) The Iraqi embassy, not his employer, controlled
Shakirıs schedule. He was detained in Qatar on September 17, 2001.
Authorities found in his possession contact information for terrorists
involved in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, the 1998 embassy bombings,
the 2000 `ck on the USS Cole, and the September 11 hijackings. The CIA had
previous reporting that Shakir had received a phone call from the safe house
where the 1993 World Trade Center attacks had been plotted.
The Qataris released Shakir shortly after his arrest. On October 21, 2001,
he flew to Amman, Jordan, where he was to change planes to a flight to
Baghdad. He didnıt make that flight. Shakir was detained in Jordan for three
months, where the CIA interrogated him. His interrogators concluded that
Shakir had received extensive training in counter-interrogation techniques.
Not long after he was detained, according to an official familiar with the
intelligence, the Iraqi regime began to "pressure" Jordanian intelligence to
release him. At the same time, Amnesty International complained that Shakir
was being held without charge. The Jordanians released him on January 28,
2002, at which point he is believed to have fled back to Iraq.
Was Shakir an Iraqi agent? Does he provide a connection between Saddam
Hussein and September 11? We donıt know. We may someday find out.
But there can no longer be any serious argument about whether Saddam
Hussein's Iraq worked with Usama bin Laden and Al Qaeda to plot against
Americans.
Clinton-Era Reports Cited Saddam-bin Laden Ties
http://www.newsmax.com/showinsidecover.shtml?a=2003/7/16/123325
In the nearly two years since President Bush named Iraq as part of the
"Axis of Evil," the American press has been working overtime denying
that there was ever any link between Saddam Hussein and 9/11 mastermind
Osama bin Laden.
But that's not what the same news outlets were saying before the 9/11
attacks, back when Bill Clinton was president and needed justification
to attack Iraq.
Just weeks after Clinton bombed the daylights out of suspected hideaways
for Iraq's weapons of mass destruction, he used his January 1999 State
of the Union Address to warn America about both bin Laden and Saddam,
mentioning the two terror kingpins almost in the same breath.
"We will defend our security wherever we are threatened - as we did this
summer when we struck at Osama bin Laden's network of terror," Clinton
told Congress and the nation. "The bombing our embassies in Kenya and
Tanzania reminds us again of the risks faced every day by those who
represent America to the world."
Moments later Clinton segued into the threat posed by Saddam:
"For nearly a decade, Iraq has defied its obligations to destroy its
weapons of terror and the missiles to deliver them. America will
continue to contain Saddam, and we will work for the day when Iraq has a
government worthy of its people."
But rather than launch an all out assault on what reporters now call the
"dubious" assertion that Saddam and bin Laden had made common cause, the
press took Clinton's ball and ran with it.
In fact, as researched and documented this week by
FrontPageMagazine.com, in 1999 the national news media was replete with
reports linking the Butcher of Baghdad and the man who masterminded the
killing of 3,000 Americans almost two years ago.
Here are a few highlights gathered by FrontPage from the press'
Saddam-bin Laden file - stories that have since conveniently
disappeared down the media's memory hole:
Associated Press Worldstream
Feb. 14, 1999
Taliban leader says whereabouts of bin Laden unknown
... Analysts say bin Laden's options for asylum are limited.
Iraq was considered a possible destination because bin Laden had
received an invitation from Iraqi President Saddam Hussein last month.
And Somalia was a third possible destination because of its anarchy and
violent anti-U.S. history ....
San Jose Mercury News
SUNDAY MORNING FINAL EDITION
Feb. 14, 1999
U.S. WORRIED ABOUT IRAQI, BIN LADEN TIES TERRORIST COULD GAIN EVEN
DEADLIER WEAPONS
U.S. intelligence officials are worried that a burgeoning alliance
between terrorist leader Osama bin Laden and Iraqi President Saddam
Hussein could make the fugitive Saudi's loose-knit organization much
more dangerous ...
In addition, the officials said, Palestinian terrorist Abu Nidal is now
in Iraq, as is a renowned Palestinian bomb designer, and both could make
their expertise available to bin Laden.
"It's clear the Iraqis would like to have bin Laden in Iraq," said
Vincent Cannistraro, a former head of counterterrorism operations at the
Central Intelligence Agency ...
Saddam has even offered asylum to bin Laden, who has expressed support
for
Iraq.
... [in] late December, when bin Laden met a senior Iraqi intelligence
official near Qandahar, Afghanistan, there has been increasing evidence
that bin Laden and Iraq may have begun cooperating in planning attacks
against American and British targets around the world.
Bin Laden, who strikes in the name of Islam, and Saddam, one of the most
secular rulers in the Arab world, have little in common except their
hatred of the United States ...
More worrisome, the American officials said, are indications that there
may be contacts between bin Laden's organization and Iraq's Special
Security Organization (SSO), run by Saddam's son Qusay. Both the SSO and
the Mukhabarat were involved in a failed 1993 plot to assassinate former
President George Bush ...
"The idea that the same people who are hiding Saddam's biological
weapons may be meeting with Osama bin Laden is not a happy one," said
one American official....
Beacon Journal wire services
Oct. 31, 1999
BIN LADEN SPOTTED AFTER OFFER TO LEAVE
DATELINE: JALALABAD, AFGHANISTAN:
... The Taliban has since made it known through official channels that
the likely destination is Iraq.
A Clinton administration official said bin Laden's request "falls far
short" of the UN resolution that the Taliban deliver him for trial. ...
The Kansas City Star
March 2, 1999
International terrorism, a conflict without boundaries
By Rich Hood
... He [bin Laden] has a private fortune ranging from $250 million to
$500 million and is said to be cultivating a new alliance with Iraq's
Saddam Hussein, who has biological and chemical weapons bin Laden would
not hesitate to use. An alliance between bin Laden and Saddam Hussein
could be deadly. Both men are united in their hatred for the United
States and any country friendly to the United States. ...
United Press International
Nov. 3, 1999, Wednesday, BC cycle.
WASHINGTON - The U.S. government has tried to prevent accused terror
suspect Osama bin Laden from fleeing Afghanistan to either Iraq or
Chechnya, Michael Sheehan, head of counter-terrorism at the State
Department, told a Senate Foreign Relations subcommittee. ...
U.S. Newswire
Dec. 23, 1999
Terrorism Expert Reveals Why Osama bin Laden has Declared War On
America; Available for Comment in Light of Predicted Attacks.
... Aauthor Yossef] Bodansky also reveals the relationship between bin
Laden and Saddam Hussein and how the U.S. bombing of Iraq is
"strengthening the hands of militant Islamists eager to translate their
rage into violence and terrorism."
National Public Radio
MORNING EDITION (10:00 a.m.ET)
Feb. 18, 1999
THOUGH AFGHANISTAN HAS PROVIDED OSAMA BIN LADEN WITH SANCTUARY, IT IS
UNCLEAR WHERE HE IS NOW. ANCHORS: BOB EDWARDS REPORTERS: MIKE SHUSTER
... There have also been reports in recent months that bin Laden might
have been considering moving his operations to Iraq. Intelligence
agencies in several nations are looking into that. According to Vincent
Cannistraro, a former chief of CIA counterterrorism operations, a senior
Iraqi intelligence official, Farouk Hijazi(ph), sought out bin Laden in
December and invited him to come to Iraq.
Mr. VINCENT CANNISTRARO (Former Chief of CIA Counterterrorism
Operations): Farouk Hijazi, who was the Iraqi ambassador in Turkey ...
known through sources in Afghanistan, members of Osama's entourage let
it be known that the meeting had taken place.
SHUSTER: Iraq's contacts with bin Laden go back some years, to at least
1994, when, according to one U.S. government source, Hijazi met him when
bin Laden lived in Sudan. According to Cannistraro, Iraq invited bin
Laden to live in Baghdad to be nearer to potential targets of terrorist
attack in Saudi Arabia and Kuwait. There is a wide gap between bin
Laden's fundamentalism and Saddam Hussein's secular dictatorship. But
some experts believe bin Laden might be tempted to live in Iraq because
of his reported desire to obtain chemical or biological weapons. CIA
director George Tenet referred to that in recent testimony. ...
Foreign news services also carried news of the now-supressed Saddam-bin
Laden connection:
Agence France-Presse
Feb. 17, 1999
Saddam plans to use bin Laden against Kuwait, Saudi: opposition
Iraq's President Saddam Hussein plans to use alleged terrorist Osama bin
Laden's network to carry out his threats against Kuwait and Saudi
Arabia, an Iraqi opposition figure charged on Wednesday.
"If the ... Jaber, a member of the Supreme Council for Islamic
Revolution in Iraq (SCIRI), said Iraq had "offered to shelter bin Laden
under the precondition that he carry out strikes on targets in
neighbouring countries."
Deutsche Presse-Agentur
Feb. 17, 1999, Wednesday, BC Cycle
Opposition group says bin Laden in Iraq
DATELINE: Kuwait City
An Iraqi opposition group claimed in a published report Wednesday that
Islamic militant Osama bin Laden is in Iraq from where he plans to
launch a campaign of terrorism against Baghdad's Gulf neighbours.
The claim was made by Bayan Jabor, spokesman for the Teheran-based
Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq (SCIRI).
Bin Laden "recently settled in Iraq at the invitation of Saddam Hussein
in exchange for directing strikes against targets in neighbouring
countries," Jabor told the Kuwaiti newspaper al-Rai al- Aam ... Taleban
leaders in Afghanistan, where he had been living, said they lost track
of him. Media reports have speculated he sought refuge in Chechnya,
Somalia, Iraq, or with a non-Taliban group in Afghanistan.
Jabor, who was interviewed in Damascus, Syria, said Iraq began extending
invitations to bin Laden six months ago, shortly after the United States
bombed his suspected terrorist training camps in Afghanistan after
linking him with the August 7 bombings of U.S. embassies in Nairobi,
Kenya and in Dar-es-Salam, Tanzania.
The United States indicted Bin Laden for the embassy bombings and has
offered a five million dollar reward for information leading to his
capture. Bin Laden's disappearance has coincided with stepped up threats
by Iraq against neighbours Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Turkey for allowing
the United States and Britain to use their air bases to carry out air
patrols over two "no-fly" zones over northern and southern Iraq.
http://www.newsmax.com/showinsidecover.shtml?a=2003/7/16/123325
http://www.foxnews.com/printer_friendly_story/0,3566,99149,00.html
Kay: Clues Exist on Anthrax, Missiles Still in Iraq
Sunday, October 05, 2003
WASHINGTON - Weapons hunters in Iraq are following leads that point to the
presence of anthrax (search) research and Scud missiles (search) still
hidden in the country, the chief U.S. weapons searcher said Sunday.
David Kay (search) told Congress last week that his survey team has not
found weapons of mass destruction. But he argued against drawing
conclusions, saying he can provide a full picture on Iraq's weapons programs
in six months to nine months.
President Bush has said the U.S.-led war on Iraq was justified despite the
failure to find weapons so far.
Kay reported that searchers discovered "reference strains" of biological
organisms in the home of a scientist. Such material cannot be used to
produce biological warfare agents.
The survey team did find a vial of live botulinum (search) bacteria that had
been stored in an Iraqi scientist's refrigerator since 1993. The bacteria
can be used to make botulinum toxin, which can be used as a biological
weapon.
Kay said that scientist was asked to hide another much larger cache of
strains but "after a couple of days he turned them back because he said they
were too dangerous. He has small children in the house."
Kay said the cache "contains anthrax and that's one reason we're actively
interested in getting it." Kay, speaking on "Fox News Sunday," did not say
whether the anthrax was live or a reference strain.
Searches have been unsuccessful for the kind of long-range Scud missiles the
Iraqis fired at Saudi Arabia and Israel in 1991.
But Kay said there are indications there may still be Scuds even though Iraq
declared it got rid of the missiles in the early 1990s.
"We have Iraqis now telling us that they continued until 2001, early 2002,
to be capable of mixing and preparing Scud missile fuel. Scud missile fuel
is only useful in Scud missiles," he said. "Why would you continue to
produce Scud missile fuel if you didn't have Scuds? We're looking for the
Scuds."
Critics say Kay's findings do not appear to so far validate most of the Bush
administration's prewar assertions of widespread and advanced Iraqi weapons
programs.
Bush and Secretary of State Colin Powell have contended that the vial of
botulinum bacteria Kay's team found is one strong piece of evidence of
Saddam's weapons intent.
Kay has offered no evidence the bacteria had been used in a weapons program
during the last decade.
So what are you saying? Pull out the troops immediately?
Do you really know what you are talking about?
Do you realize that would be one of the worst mistakes we could ever
make? Finish the job that we started.
I said nothing of the kind.
Do you see question marks at the end of each question?
Why must you put words in my mouth.
Again I ask you, do you see question marks at the end of each question?
That means I am ASKING you.
What I
said was that Bush deliberately sabotaged the military operation in Iraq
with his idiotic "bring them on" *****.
No, he didn't sabotage anything at all.
Bush's "look at me I'm macho
even though I went AWOL
Military Record
Bill Clinton registers for the draft on September 08, 1964, accepting all
contractual conditions of registering for the draft. Given Selective Service
Number 3 26 46 228.
Bill Clinton classified 2-S on November 17, 1964.
Bill Clinton reclassified 1-A on March 20, 1968.
Bill Clinton ordered to report for induction on July 28, 1969.
Bill Clinton dishonors order to report and is not inducted into the
military.
Bill Clinton reclassified 1-D after enlisting in the United States Army
Reserves on August 07,1969 under authority of Col.E.Holmes.
Clinton signs enlistment papers and takes oath of enlistment.
Bill Clinton fails to report to his duty station at the University of
Arkansas ROTC, September 1969.
Bill Clinton reclassified 1-A on October 30, 1969, as enlistment with Army
Reserves is revoked by Colonel E. Holmes and Clinton now AWOL and subject to
arrest under Public Law 90-40 (2)(a) "registrant who has failed to
report....remain liable for induction".
Bill Clinton's birth date lottery number is 311, drawn December 1,1969, but
anyone who has already been ordered to report for induction is INELIGIBLE!
Bill Clinton runs for Congress (1974), while a fugitive from justice under
Public Law 90-40.
Bill Clinton runs for Arkansas Attorney General (1976), while a fugitive
from justice.
Bill Clinton receives pardon on January 21, 1977, from President Jimmy
Carter.
Bill Clinton is the (FIRST PARDONED FEDERAL FELON) ever to serve as
President.
All these facts come from Freedom of Information requests, public laws, and
various books that have been published, and have not been refuted by
Clinton.
After the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, which killed six and injured
1,000; President Clinton promised that those responsible would b e hunted
down and punished.
After the 1995 bombing in Saudi Arabia, which killed five U.S. military
personnel; Clinton promised that those responsible would be hunted down and
punished.
After the 1996 Khobar Towers bombing in Saudi Arabia, which killed 19 and
injured 200 U.S. military personnel; Clinton promised that those responsible
would be hunted down and punished.
After the 1998 bombing of U.S. embassies in Africa, which killed 224 and
injured 5,000; Clinton promised that those responsible would be hunted down
and punished.
After the 2000 bombing of the USS Cole, which killed 17 and injured 39 U.S.
sailors; Clinton promised that those responsible would be hunted down and
punished.
Maybe if Clinton had kept those promises, an estimated 3,000 people in New
York and Washington, D.C. that are now dead would be alive today.
when it was my turn to serve" ***** is getting
a lot of kids killed that didn't need to die. Moreover, his pet project
is an unnecessary diversion from the real problem: terrorists. You may
have noticed that our little vacation in Iraq has not resulted in less
terrorism. It's resulted in more terrorism. Of course Bush calls that
"success." I don't.
If you are such a genius, why don't you try to outsmart Donald
Rumsfield and do his job.
A chimp could outsmart rumsfeld.
Not a chance. You have absolutely no clue do you on Rumsfield background.
Hint: You don't stand a chance
This is the idiot who proclaimed that
"we know where they [WMD] are. In the area around Baghdad and Tikrit, to
the north and east a little." Oh, sorry, no.
And it is most likely at one time that was true. And very likely that with
in all the time that we spent with the U.N., Saddam was moving them, burying
them, and killing anyone that knew.
This is a very possible scenario
I can guarantee you, you wouldn't last.
Bush is actually a Genius in some ways. He has built the perfect
cabinet.
Perfect fools. I mean, look how badly they got duped by bad intelligence.
That's really shocking. They should be humiliated.
Economy is doing great.
Uh, no.
Passed a defensive budget that will take care of our troops and vets
Which actually cuts benefits for veterans. Gee that's nice.
Passed a Medicare reform
Which is a pork-laden handout to the pharmaceutical industry (hey, don't
get me wrong - I work in the pharmaceutical industry - it's still pork
and it doesn't help seniors).
Fighting a war
Which one? The war on terror or the war on iraq? You think they are the
same? Please tell me you aren't that naive.
History will show you that never has a active wartime president lost a
election.
Until now.
And right now as it stands, I don't see anyone who can actually beat
Bush.
In the latest Zogby poll, "any democrat" beat Bush.
And if anyone wants to just remove the troops and not finish the job,
no way will Americans stand for that.
It really stuns me how often you wing-nuts have nothing but diametrically
oppposed extemes as choices. Either we elect Bush and follow him blindly
or we pull out all our troops from Iraq and let it sink into worse chaos
than we've already inflicted. Can you conceive of anything in between?
--
"Anybody who wants to harm American troops will be found and brought to
justice. There are some that feel like if they attack us that we may
decide to leave prematurely. They don't understand what they are talking
about if that is the case. Let me finish. There are some who feel like
the conditions are such that they can attack us there. My answer is,
bring 'em on."
- George WMD Bush, July 2, 2003
And they did. Impeach Bush NOW!!! Before more young kids die.
.
|
|
|
| User: "False Document" |
|
| Title: Re: The True klansmen? |
02 Dec 2003 01:29:09 PM |
|
|
"Osprey" <noneedstoknow@mail.com> wrote in
news:Wc6dnSzCgcLvaF6iRVn-jw@comcast.com:
"False Document" <bio_dudeNOSPAM@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:Xns943EA4A6EE46biodudeNOSPAMhotmail@130.133.1.4...
"Osprey" <noneedstoknow@mail.com> wrote in
news:sI6dnSF3RM4EXl6iRVn-uA@comcast.com:
before young kids die?
Do you realize that in Vietnam, Korea, WWII we had THOUSANDS die?
Do you realize that because we are more technological advance that
we are actually doing very well?
Do you realize the task that has to be done?
Do you realize what war is?
Here I thought the task was to combat terrorism. So why are we in
Iraq?
"If Saddam Hussein fails to comply and we fail to act or we take some
ambiguous third route, which gives him yet more opportunities to
develop his program of weapons of mass destruction ... he will then
conclude that he can go right on doing more to build an arsenal of
devastating destruction ... Some way, someday, I guarentee you he'll
use the arsenal." - Bill Clinton, Feb. 18 1998
It's amazing how far ahead of the curve Clinton was. Thank god he acted
on this and in so doing completely disarmed and emmasculated Hussein.
Bush owes a huge debt of thanks for that. Otherwise, Hussein might have
actually had some weapons to fire back at our troops when Bush decided to
take over Iraq.
--
"Anybody who wants to harm American troops will be found and brought to
justic | | | | | |
