One More GI Killed by Bush's Big Lie



 Religions > Atheism > One More GI Killed by Bush's Big Lie

LINK TO THIS PAGE  


rating :  0   |  0


  Page 1 of 3

1

 

2

 

3

 
Topic: Religions > Atheism
User: "Yang"
Date: 08 Aug 2003 09:48:38 PM
Object: One More GI Killed by Bush's Big Lie
"...The people can always be brought to the bidding of the
leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being
attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism, and
exposing the country to greater danger."
-- Herman Goering at the Nuremberg trials
"Another GI Killed By Bush's Big Lie"
http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/meast/08/08/sprj.irq.main/index.html
-----
Yang
a.a. #28
a.a. pastor #-273.15, the most frigid church of Celcius nee Kelvin
EAC Econometric Forecast and Socerey Division
Proudly plonked by Lani Girl and Crazyalec
The Bush 'balance' budget: -455 billion and worsening
The Bush 'economic' policy: -2.5 million jobs and counting
The Bush Iraq lie: -254 GIs, one friend's co-worker's son and mounting
Having Bush ***** up my country: Worthless
.

User: "Daniel Kolle"

Title: Re: One More GI Killed by Bush's Big Lie 10 Aug 2003 12:08:55 PM
(Yang) thought hard and said:

On Sat, 09 Aug 2003 16:23:36 -0500, Daniel Kolle <DKolle@hotmail.com>
wrote:

(Yang) thought hard and said:

<snip>

*****, are you annoying. Give it a fucking rest.



Go study your PSAT words, little boy.

Ooo! Little boy! Big insult!
This "little boy" is more mature than you are.
--
-Kolle; 15 A.A. #2035
Koji Kondo, Yo-Yo Ma, and Gustav Mahler are my Gods.
Madly Insane EAC Scientist.
.
User: "Yang"

Title: Re: One More GI Killed by Bush's Big Lie 10 Aug 2003 02:11:55 PM
On Sun, 10 Aug 2003 12:08:55 -0500, Daniel Kolle <DKolle@hotmail.com>
wrote:

eacmole@SPAMmail.com (Yang) thought hard and said:

On Sat, 09 Aug 2003 16:23:36 -0500, Daniel Kolle <DKolle@hotmail.com>
wrote:

eacmole@SPAMmail.com (Yang) thought hard and said:

<snip>

*****, are you annoying. Give it a fucking rest.



Go study your PSAT words, little boy.


Ooo! Little boy! Big insult!
This "little boy" is more mature than you are.

And less intelligent. So why don't you take you 'maturity' and your
remedial math class peahead of yours, go to your room, try to actually
make yourself a productive member of society, and stop pretending you
know what you're talking about.
-----
Yang
a.a. #28
a.a. pastor #-273.15, the most frigid church of Celcius nee Kelvin
EAC Econometric Forecast and Socerey Division
Proudly plonked by Lani Girl and Crazyalec
The Bush 'balance' budget: -455 billion and worsening
The Bush 'economic' policy: -2.5 million jobs and counting
The Bush Iraq lie: -254 GIs, one friend's co-worker's son and mounting
Having Bush ***** up my country: Worthless
.
User: "Daniel Kolle"

Title: Re: One More GI Killed by Bush's Big Lie 10 Aug 2003 05:38:44 PM
(Yang) thought hard and said:


And less intelligent.

I am not the partisan fuckwit.

So why don't you take you 'maturity' and your
remedial math class peahead of yours

Remedial math class peaheads have a hate of Bush and the Right Wing.
(as would those with a hate of the Left Wing)
That ain't me.

go to your room, try to actually
make yourself a productive member of society,

How can I be a productive member of society if I am locked up in my
room?

and stop pretending you
know what you're talking about.

Ah, but I do.
--
-Kolle; 15 A.A. #2035
Koji Kondo, Yo-Yo Ma, and Gustav Mahler are my Gods.
Madly Insane EAC Scientist.
.
User: "JTEM"

Title: Re: One More GI Killed by Bush's Big Lie 10 Aug 2003 10:54:47 PM
"Daniel Kolle" <DKolle@hotmail.com> wrote

I am not the partisan fuckwit.

Bill O'Reilly says the same thing, and convinces just as
many people (i.e. "None").
.

User: "Yang"

Title: Re: One More GI Killed by Bush's Big Lie 11 Aug 2003 05:43:08 AM
On Sun, 10 Aug 2003 17:38:44 -0500, Daniel Kolle <DKolle@hotmail.com>
wrote:

eacmole@SPAMmail.com (Yang) thought hard and said:


And less intelligent.


I am not the partisan fuckwit.

No, you just flil around.

So why don't you take you 'maturity' and your
remedial math class peahead of yours


Remedial math class peaheads have a hate of Bush and the Right Wing.
(as would those with a hate of the Left Wing)
That ain't me.

That's funny, I voted GOP before, and I plan to in the future. If you
think lying about a war is okay, please justify yourself.

go to your room, try to actually
make yourself a productive member of society,


How can I be a productive member of society if I am locked up in my
room?

At the very least, you would minimize your impediment to society.

and stop pretending you
know what you're talking about.


Ah, but I do.

And therein lies the problem, you pretend too well.
-----
Yang
a.a. #28
a.a. pastor #-273.15, the most frigid church of Celcius nee Kelvin
EAC Econometric Forecast and Socerey Division
Proudly plonked by Lani Girl and Crazyalec
The Bush 'balance' budget: -455 billion and worsening
The Bush 'economic' policy: -2.5 million jobs and counting
The Bush Iraq lie: -254 GIs, one friend's co-worker's son and mounting
Having Bush ***** up my country: Worthless
.




User: "quibbler"

Title: Re: One More GI Killed by Bush's Big Lie 08 Aug 2003 11:10:05 PM
In article <DJZYa.159189$hV.10431792@twister.austin.rr.com>,
dhaapala@houston.removethis.rr.com says...


"Yang" <eacmole@SPAMmail.com> wrote in message
news:3f345f76.368281@news.cox.net...
| "...The people can always be brought to the bidding of the
| leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being
| attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism, and
| exposing the country to greater danger."
|
| -- Herman Goering at the Nuremberg trials
|
|
| "Another GI Killed By Bush's Big Lie"
| http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/meast/08/08/sprj.irq.main/index.html
|
|
| -----
|
| Yang
| a.a. #28
| a.a. pastor #-273.15, the most frigid church of Celcius nee Kelvin
| EAC Econometric Forecast and Socerey Division
| Proudly plonked by Lani Girl and Crazyalec
|
| The Bush 'balance' budget: -455 billion and worsening
| The Bush 'economic' policy: -2.5 million jobs and counting
| The Bush Iraq lie: -254 GIs, one friend's co-worker's son and mounting
|
| Having Bush ***** up my country: Worthless

Hey, Yang.
As an Atheist, I just have to ask you one question.
Every month in America there are more people killed in black
neighborhoods than there have been Americans in Iraq since March:

Maybe because the problem in black neighborhoods is not one that was
recently manufactured by Bush lies about Iraq, whereas, the situation in
Iraq clearly is. Bush could prevent the death of more americans by
bringing our soldiers home. There is no indication that Bush would have
the slightest clue how to deal with violence in a black neighborhood.
He'd probably propose a capital gains tax cut or something equally
ridiculous and unrelated to the actual problem.

Why aren't
you ***** about that?

How do you know he isn't ***** about that? Not everyone has an old,
broken down, one track mind like you, ya know.
--
_____________________________________________________
Quibbler (quibbler247atyahoo.com)
"It is fashionable to wax apocalyptic about the
threat to humanity posed by the AIDS virus, 'mad cow'
disease, and many others, but I think a case can be
made that faith is one of the world's great evils,
comparable to the smallpox virus but harder to
eradicate." -- Richard Dawkins
.
User: "David Haapala"

Title: Re: One More GI Killed by Bush's Big Lie 08 Aug 2003 11:17:33 PM
"quibbler" <quibbler247@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.199e220c44fb72be989fce@news.cis.dfn.de...
| In article <DJZYa.159189$hV.10431792@twister.austin.rr.com>,
|
says...
| >
| > "Yang" <eacmole@SPAMmail.com> wrote in message
| > news:3f345f76.368281@news.cox.net...
| > | "...The people can always be brought to the bidding of the
| > | leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being
| > | attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism, and
| > | exposing the country to greater danger."
| > |
| > | -- Herman Goering at the Nuremberg trials
| > |
| > |
| > | "Another GI Killed By Bush's Big Lie"
| > | http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/meast/08/08/sprj.irq.main/index.html
| > |
| > |
| > | -----
| > |
| > | Yang
| > | a.a. #28
| > | a.a. pastor #-273.15, the most frigid church of Celcius nee Kelvin
| > | EAC Econometric Forecast and Socerey Division
| > | Proudly plonked by Lani Girl and Crazyalec
| > |
| > | The Bush 'balance' budget: -455 billion and worsening
| > | The Bush 'economic' policy: -2.5 million jobs and counting
| > | The Bush Iraq lie: -254 GIs, one friend's co-worker's son and mounting
| > |
| > | Having Bush ***** up my country: Worthless
| >
| > Hey, Yang.
| > As an Atheist, I just have to ask you one question.
| > Every month in America there are more people killed in black
| > neighborhoods than there have been Americans in Iraq since March:
|
| Maybe because the problem in black neighborhoods is not one that was
| recently manufactured by Bush lies about Iraq, whereas, the situation in
| Iraq clearly is. Bush could prevent the death of more americans by
| bringing our soldiers home. There is no indication that Bush would have
| the slightest clue how to deal with violence in a black neighborhood.
| He'd probably propose a capital gains tax cut or something equally
| ridiculous and unrelated to the actual problem.
|
| > Why aren't
| > you ***** about that?
|
| How do you know he isn't ***** about that? Not everyone has an old,
| broken down, one track mind like you, ya know.
|
|
I am by no means a GWB fan, I am fanatically anti-fanatic.
Ol' GWB is too much of a christian than I like. Some profess Xianism,
while others truly believe and are psychotic; GWB is of the latter. Others
simply profess belief rather than be labeled evil.
With all things considered, putting aside your feelings for *****
xians like Bush, do you REALLY feel we are wrong in this war against these
Islamic assholes? Do you REALLY think the threat to our country lies with
our government rather than with the middle east, including Saudi Arabia?
I ask only for thoughtful consideration.
Sincerely,
David Haapala
.
User: "quibbler"

Title: Re: One More GI Killed by Bush's Big Lie 08 Aug 2003 11:44:02 PM
In article <xB_Ya.159207$hV.10413264@twister.austin.rr.com>,
dhaapala@houston.removethis.rr.com says...

With all things considered, putting aside your feelings for *****
xians like Bush, do you REALLY feel we are wrong in this war against these
Islamic assholes?

I certainly don't think it's wrong to try to get al quaeda and lots of
other known terrorists. But I think we should be trying to reign in lots
of muslim fanatics, including saudi ones. I also don't think we make the
situation better for ourselves by kissing Israel's ***** at every turn.
I'm not against muslim terrorists merely because they are theists. The
fact that they are violent extremists is far more important. There are
extremists just as bad in the world who aren't muslims at all.

Do you REALLY think the threat to our country lies with
our government rather than with the middle east, including Saudi Arabia?

Frankly, terrorism is not a large threat. It's actually rather minor.
The real threat from the saudis comes from their ability to manipulate
our economy and their continued machinations to keep up dependent on
their oil.
--
_____________________________________________________
Quibbler (quibbler247atyahoo.com)
"It is fashionable to wax apocalyptic about the
threat to humanity posed by the AIDS virus, 'mad cow'
disease, and many others, but I think a case can be
made that faith is one of the world's great evils,
comparable to the smallpox virus but harder to
eradicate." -- Richard Dawkins
.

User: "Yang"

Title: Re: One More GI Killed by Bush's Big Lie 09 Aug 2003 12:04:40 AM
On Sat, 09 Aug 2003 04:17:33 GMT, "David Haapala"
<dhaapala@houston.removethis.rr.com> wrote:

With all things considered, putting aside your feelings for *****
xians like Bush, do you REALLY feel we are wrong in this war against these
Islamic assholes?

If you can demonstrate that Iraq is connected to Al Qaeda, then I will
support the war 100%, but it does not.
"CIA debunked claims of link beteen Al Qaeda and Saddam"
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=127&ncid=742&e=14&u=/030616/7/4esz6.html
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/07/20030723-6.html#3

Do you REALLY think the threat to our country lies with
our government rather than with the middle east, including Saudi Arabia?
I ask only for thoughtful consideration.

What does the invasion of Iraq have anything to do with Saudi Arabia?
-----
Yang
a.a. #28
a.a. pastor #-273.15, the most frigid church of Celcius nee Kelvin
EAC Econometric Forecast and Socerey Division
Proudly plonked by Lani Girl and Crazyalec
The Bush 'balance' budget: -455 billion and worsening
The Bush 'economic' policy: -2.5 million jobs and counting
The Bush Iraq lie: -254 GIs, one friend's co-worker's son and mounting
Having Bush ***** up my country: Worthless
.
User: "David Haapala"

Title: Re: One More GI Killed by Bush's Big Lie 09 Aug 2003 12:17:14 AM
"Yang" <eacmole@SPAMmail.com> wrote in message
news:3f347f70.8554031@news.cox.net...
| On Sat, 09 Aug 2003 04:17:33 GMT, "David Haapala"
| <dhaapala@houston.removethis.rr.com> wrote:
|
|
|
| > With all things considered, putting aside your feelings for *****
| >xians like Bush, do you REALLY feel we are wrong in this war against
these
| >Islamic assholes?
|
| If you can demonstrate that Iraq is connected to Al Qaeda, then I will
| support the war 100%, but it does not.
|
| "CIA debunked claims of link beteen Al Qaeda and Saddam"
|
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=127&ncid=742&e=14&u=/030616/7/4esz6.html
| http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/07/20030723-6.html#3
|
|
| >Do you REALLY think the threat to our country lies with
| >our government rather than with the middle east, including Saudi Arabia?
| > I ask only for thoughtful consideration.
|
| What does the invasion of Iraq have anything to do with Saudi Arabia?
|
With the bases established in Qatar, and the obvious democratic moves
the "Sultan" of Qatar has made, the main base of western military power is
moving OUT of Saudi Arabia and into Qatar.
With the invasion of Iraq, and the western determinism to have Iraq
become a country where the people of Iraq benefit from it's oil wealth, (
along with the U.S.) and the recent moves of Iran to show interest in
becoming more of a democracy than a Theocracy, AND the recent terroristic
efforts of religious nuts of islam WITHIN the Saudi government, (Which they
thought "It will never happen to us!")
Gee, I just can't think of how the Iraqi invasion fucked over the
Saudi's...
.
User: "Yang"

Title: Re: One More GI Killed by Bush's Big Lie 09 Aug 2003 12:23:31 AM
On Sat, 09 Aug 2003 05:17:14 GMT, "David Haapala"
<dhaapala@houston.removethis.rr.com> wrote:

"Yang" <eacmole@SPAMmail.com> wrote in message
news:3f347f70.8554031@news.cox.net...
| On Sat, 09 Aug 2003 04:17:33 GMT, "David Haapala"
| <dhaapala@houston.removethis.rr.com> wrote:
|
|
|
| > With all things considered, putting aside your feelings for *****
| >xians like Bush, do you REALLY feel we are wrong in this war against
these
| >Islamic assholes?
|
| If you can demonstrate that Iraq is connected to Al Qaeda, then I will
| support the war 100%, but it does not.
|
| "CIA debunked claims of link beteen Al Qaeda and Saddam"
|
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=127&ncid=742&e=14&u=/030616/7/4esz6.html
| http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/07/20030723-6.html#3
|
|
| >Do you REALLY think the threat to our country lies with
| >our government rather than with the middle east, including Saudi Arabia?
| > I ask only for thoughtful consideration.
|
| What does the invasion of Iraq have anything to do with Saudi Arabia?
|

With the bases established in Qatar, and the obvious democratic moves
the "Sultan" of Qatar has made, the main base of western military power is
moving OUT of Saudi Arabia and into Qatar.

And you need invade Iraq just to move your base?

With the invasion of Iraq, and the western determinism to have Iraq
become a country where the people of Iraq benefit from it's oil wealth, (
along with the U.S.) and the recent moves of Iran to show interest in
becoming more of a democracy than a Theocracy, AND the recent terroristic
efforts of religious nuts of islam WITHIN the Saudi government, (Which they
thought "It will never happen to us!")

Right, you mean the petroleum money that is nowheere to be found, the
rise of Shiite fundamentalism in Iraq, and the continuing terrorist
activities in Indonesia and Saudi Arabia. Boy, that was really
effective.

Gee, I just can't think of how the Iraqi invasion fucked over the
Saudi's...

-----
Yang
a.a. #28
a.a. pastor #-273.15, the most frigid church of Celcius nee Kelvin
EAC Econometric Forecast and Socerey Division
Proudly plonked by Lani Girl and Crazyalec
The Bush 'balance' budget: -455 billion and worsening
The Bush 'economic' policy: -2.5 million jobs and counting
The Bush Iraq lie: -254 GIs, one friend's co-worker's son and mounting
Having Bush ***** up my country: Worthless
.


User: "Baghdad Bob"

Title: Re: One More GI Killed by Bush's Big Lie 09 Aug 2003 03:58:39 PM

If you can demonstrate that Iraq is connected to Al Qaeda, then I will
support the war 100%, but it does not.

If you possessed an iota of honesty, you'd be gobbling down crow right now.
http://abcnews.go.com/sections/nightline/DailyNews/alqaeda_iraq020927.html
http://www.newyorker.com/printable/?fact/030210fa_fact
http://www.warriorsfortruth.com/al-queda-iraq-connection.html
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2003/04/27/walq27.xml
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Printable.asp?ID=5571
.
User: "JTEM"

Title: Re: One More GI Killed by Bush's Big Lie 12 Aug 2003 01:10:58 AM
"Baghdad Bob" <not@home.com> wrote

"Patriotboy" <tim@somecallme.net> wrote

Rumsfeld met with Saddam a couple of years earlier.
Does that mean Saddam has ties to the Republican
Party?

It means that he had links to the US government. Duh!

The Republican party has links to Saddam Hussein,
Al Qaida and big government.
--
A recommendation (or a shameless plug for
a friend):
http://www.brucegarrett.com/brucelog.htm
Other friends & interests to follow.
.

User: "JTEM"

Title: Re: One More GI Killed by Bush's Big Lie 09 Aug 2003 09:35:47 PM
"Fred Stone" <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote

http://abcnews.go.com/sections/nightline/DailyNews/alqaeda_iraq020927.html
"The U.S. believes Iraq has had contact with al Qaeda," I said, "Do you
know that to be a fact?"

For a moment there I thought you might've had a real cite, instead
of one that was already posted by another of your sock puppets,
and refuted.
Here's how your dishonesty works.
We say "The bush administration constructed a case of lies for it's
war for oil. In addition to the forged documents on Nigeria and
made-up uses for the some tubes, there was also the Al Qaida ties
they invented."
What do you do? You post an example of the very thing that we're
talking about.
We said that the administration fabricated these "links," and
you just provided us with an example of them doing just that.
In truth though, the "Al Qaida" group with ties to Saddam were
actively seeking to over throw Saddam. Secondly, not one human
being ever claimed a link between them & Saddam prior to
Bush's decision to go to war for oil.
If the link is real, show me the link in 1997. Go ahead.
Is 1997 too tough for you? Show me a citation detailing this
imagined link, oh, let's say from 1999.
Thanks in advance, you dishonest piece of *****.
.
User: "Baghdad Bob"

Title: Re: One More GI Killed by Bush's Big Lie 10 Aug 2003 05:01:42 AM
"JTEM" <jaytem@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:M0KdnYVaiK9rM6iiU-KYvA@comcast.com...


"Fred Stone" <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote



http://abcnews.go.com/sections/nightline/DailyNews/alqaeda_iraq020927.html


"The U.S. believes Iraq has had contact with al Qaeda," I said, "Do you
know that to be a fact?"


For a moment there I thought you might've had a real cite, instead
of one that was already posted by another of your sock puppets,
and refuted.

Here's how your dishonesty works.

***** you. Impugn the testimony of numerous sources that dirctly show answer
the question. But do you have any evidence to the contrary? Hell no! You
just sit there and call everyone else liars without a single source to back
up your *****. You just claim to have this mystical, irrefutable,
knowledge. Well you don't have *****. You're a whiny little punk, arguing
from pure, unadulterated ignorance.
.
User: "Baghdad Bob"

Title: Re: One More GI Killed by Bush's Big Lie 10 Aug 2003 10:29:35 AM
"JTEM" <jaytem@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:TvmdnXej9rIUw6uiU-KYgw@comcast.com...


"Baghdad Bob" <not@home.com> wrote

***** you.


Do I look like your mother? Is that it? Is that why you
insist on all this sex talk, you horny little abortion
gone wrong?

Your obesession with what you imagine to be my sex life or genital
proportions marks you for the juvenile ***** you are.

Now let's see a citation that establishes a link between
Saddam's government & Al Qaida that dates before
2000.

From one of the very articles you say you read. But of course you didn't,
you lied about that too.
http://abcnews.go.com/sections/nightline/DailyNews/alqaeda_iraq020927.html
"In '92, elements of al Qaeda came to Baghdad and met with Saddam Hussein
and among them was Dr. Al-Zawahiri."
.
User: "JTEM"

Title: Re: One More GI Killed by Bush's Big Lie 12 Aug 2003 12:50:42 AM
"Baghdad Bob" <not@home.com> wrote

Your obesession with what you imagine to be my
sex life or genital proportions marks you for the
juvenile ***** you are.

Examined closely, one might uncover a contradiction
of sorts within your remarks... if one is sharp.
Not that I'm accusing you of being sharp, bobby. Oh no,
perish the thought.

From one of the very articles you say you read. But
of course you didn't, you lied about that too.

Herb...errr...bobby, you need to have your head examined.

"In '92, elements of al Qaeda came to Baghdad and met
with Saddam Hussein and among them was Dr. Al-Zawahiri."

Great. Your claim wasn't that someone from Al Qaida had
visited Iraq, bobby. Your claim wasn't that Saddam had
met anyone with connections to Al Qaida, bobby. Your claim
was that a specific group was linked to Al Qaida and that
Saddam was supporting them.
Show us evidence for this, bobby, and show us evidence for
this that pre-dates the decision to go to war for oil.
Saddam met somebody with Al Qaida links in 1992? Wow.
I mean, *Wow*. That same year the United States had a
President with links to Al Qaida. George H.W. Bush is the
close friend of Osama Bin Laden's father. What's more,
George H.W. Bush is the man that Bin Laden's man went to,
when he wanted the CIA to help his son build an international
organization. George H.W. Bush was only too happy to
comply.
.



User: "Fred Stone"

Title: Re: One More GI Killed by Bush's Big Lie 10 Aug 2003 04:52:19 AM
JTEM wrote:

I'm sorry, "Fred," I really am, but your concrete evidence
only materialized *After* Bush decided on his war for oil.

And now JTEM thinks we could have caught these guys before we invaded
the place where they were hiding out.
--
Fred Stone
Conquering the Galaxy since 2003
.
User: "JTEM"

Title: Re: One More GI Killed by Bush's Big Lie 10 Aug 2003 05:06:48 AM
"Fred Stone" <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote

JTEM wrote:

I'm sorry, "Fred," I really am, but your concrete evidence
only materialized *After* Bush decided on his war for oil.

And now JTEM thinks we could have caught these guys before
we invaded the place where they were hiding out.

That's quite imaginative, "Fred." Which words, exactly, are you
creatively interpreting to mean that?
Al Qaida has been on the U.S. government's ***** list for quite
some time. Clinton ordered a cruise missile strike on one of
their camps, after intelligence indicated that Bin Laden would
be present. Yed, oddly, if Saddam Hussein was supporting any
Al Qaida links groups at that time, not one person in the
universe appears to have noticed.
This remained unchanged until Bush & company decided on
their war ofr oil. Sudden, like out of the blue, there's this
connection thing going on. Okay? It's like, um, Al Qaida &
stuff. Yeah. Bin Laden and Saddam are butt buddies.
You're a sick & twisted *****, "Fred." You really are.
.
User: "Fred Stone"

Title: Re: One More GI Killed by Bush's Big Lie 10 Aug 2003 05:10:58 AM
JTEM wrote:

"Fred Stone" <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote


JTEM wrote:

I'm sorry, "Fred," I really am, but your concrete evidence
only materialized *After* Bush decided on his war for oil.



And now JTEM thinks we could have caught these guys before
we invaded the place where they were hiding out.



That's quite imaginative, "Fred." Which words, exactly, are you
creatively interpreting to mean that?

Al Qaida has been on the U.S. government's ***** list for quite
some time. Clinton ordered a cruise missile strike on one of
their camps, after intelligence indicated that Bin Laden would
be present. Yed, oddly, if Saddam Hussein was supporting any
Al Qaida links groups at that time, not one person in the
universe appears to have noticed.

Now JTEM thinks we could interview prisoners with cruise missiles.
--
Fred Stone
Conquering the Galaxy since 2003
.
User: "JTEM"

Title: Re: One More GI Killed by Bush's Big Lie 10 Aug 2003 10:02:16 AM
"Fred Stone" <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote

Now JTEM thinks we could interview prisoners with
cruise missiles.

My how the trolling flies...
.





User: "Baghdad Bob"

Title: Re: One More GI Killed by Bush's Big Lie 09 Aug 2003 07:33:53 PM
"JTEM" <jaytem@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:vt6cnYrpLP7E66iiXTWJjQ@comcast.com...


"Baghdad Bob" <not@home.com> dishonestly wrote:

If you can demonstrate that Iraq is connected to Al Qaeda, then I will
support the war 100%, but it does not.


If you possessed an iota of honesty,


He does. You don't. I'll demonstrate:

He absolutely does not, and your lack of truthfullness has been
demonstrated. Just where are these mysterious court rulings?


http://abcnews.go.com/sections/nightline/DailyNews/alqaeda_iraq020927.html


The "Al Qaida connection," or so this story claims, is a group called
Ansar al-Islam. They're an Iranian-backed anti-Saddam group with no
connection to Saddam Hussein.

Then again, we wouldn't expect an Iranian-backed revolutionary group
that was actively trying to topple Saddam to be allied with Saddam.

Ansar al-Islam is not Iranian-backed. They have operated in Saddam's Iraq
for decades, and with his support. Al-Zaqawri recieved medical help in
Baghdad and financial suuport from Saddam. Saddam ran a police state, and
knew of and controlled the lives of every corner of that country. If there
were a hint of an assassination from that quarter, he would have gassed them
in no time.

http://www.newyorker.com/printable/?fact/030210fa_fact


This one establishes beyond any doubt that the administration
actively & openly made false connections between Iraq and Al Qaida.

But don't bother to try to disprove any of what is says. Just deny, deny,
deny.

http://www.warriorsfortruth.com/al-queda-iraq-connection.html


Same here. It further establishes that the administration did -- in no
uncertain terms -- makes false claims regarding imagined links
between Iraq and Al Qaida.

When faced with specific facts, names, dates and evidence of the truth you
just go into denial mode and pretend that you've somehow refuted it. All
you've refuted is your own delusion of being an honest judge of the truth.

How do we know those links are imagined, pure propaganda from
an administration bent on war for oil?

How do we know that 9/11 really happened? Were you there? Did you see the
planes crash into the buildings with your own eyes? It could have been
Hollywood-style special effects.

Because the "Al Qaida" operatives in Iraq are anti-Saddam,
pro-Iranian militants who have been actively fighting to overthrow
the government of Saddam Hussein for years.

Wrong again. The evidence is there that they recieved his aid, financially,
medically, chem weapons expertise and operational training grounds.

We know for a fact that Saddam wasn't helping these people. We
no for a fact that Saddam was giving them money & weapons so
they could better combat his own authority. We know that the
administration lied to us when it pretended that these Iranian
terrorists was Iraqi-backed Al Qaida operatives.

Wrong again asswipe:
Woolsey, who served as President Clinton's first C.I.A. director, said that
it is now illogical to doubt the notion that Saddam collaborates with
Islamist terrorism, and that he would provide chemical or biological weapons
to Al Qaeda. "At Salman Pak"-a training camp near Baghdad-"we know there
were Islamist terrorists training to hijack airplanes in groups of four or
five with short knives," Woolsey told me. "I mean, hello? If we had seen
after December 7, 1941, a fake American battleship in a lake in northern
Italy, and a group of Asian pilots training there, would we have said,
'Well, you can't prove that they were Japanese'?


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2003/04/27/walq27.xml


This one claims the the "Proof" that the Bush administration had
been desperately searching for was found by a newspaper
reporter. Why a newspaper reporter was given access to the
headquarters of Iraqi intelligence, and why the military and U.S.
intelligence had missed it, is a mystery I care not to explore.

It's interesting to note that the "Proof" is five years old, with
nothing more recent to go by than the "Al Qaida" linked Ansar al-Islam,
who were trying to over throw Saddam.

Oh, so the fact that the Telegraph was the first on the scene means that
those documents are somehow invalid. Or the fact that the documents
describe the status quo 5 years previously means that their cooperation
occurred in 1998 and only in 1998?

http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Printable.asp?ID=5571


Once again: Ansar al-Islam is an anti-Saddam militant group that
had been actively fighting to over throw Saddam's government
for many years. They are an Iranian group -- Iranian backed and
funded -- who were allowed to take refuge in Iran whenever Iraqi
or the later U.S. forces threatened to destroy them.

All you've done is deny the facts. You don't have a shred of evidence to
support your contention that Ansar was anti-Saddam. You maintain that lie
in the face of irrefutable evidence that you are wrong with nothing other
than unsubstantiated lies.
.
User: "JTEM"

Title: Re: One More GI Killed by Bush's Big Lie 09 Aug 2003 09:21:03 PM
"Baghdad Bob" <not@home.com> wrote

Ansar al-Islam is not Iranian-backed.

"Human Rights Watch has not investigated the alleged links
between the Iraqi government and Ansar al-Islam, and is
not aware of any convincing evidence supporting this
contention. On the other hand, the location of the group's
bases very close to the Iranian border, taken together with
credible reports of the return of some Ansar al-Islam fighters
to Iraqi Kurdistan through Iran, suggest that these fighters
have received at least limited support from some Iranian
sources."
http://www.hrw.org/backgrounder/mena/ansarbk020503.htm
"The cache of documents at the Ansar al-Islam compound,
including computer discs and foreign passports belonging to
Arab fighters from around the Middle East, could bolster
the Bush administration's claims that the two groups are
connected, although there was no indication any of the
evidence tied Ansar to Saddam Hussein as Washington
has maintained."
"There were indications, however, that the group has been
getting help from inside neighboring Iran."
http://vikingphoenix.com/public/rongstad/military/terrorism/raid_ansar_al-qa
ida.htm

http://www.newyorker.com/printable/?fact/030210fa_fact


This one establishes beyond any doubt that the administration
actively & openly made false connections between Iraq and Al Qaida.

But don't bother to try to disprove any of what is says. Just deny, deny,
deny.

You're not very bright, but allow me to try and explain it to you.
This story is old. This is an example of what we are complaining about --
the fact that the U.S. government invented such stories in order to justify
a war for oil. We're talking about these so-called "Reports." This is what
we mean when we say that the government has been lying to us.
I didn't just "Deny," far from it. I pointed out the inescapable fact
that the "Al Qaida" terrorist the administrations *Claims* are linked
to Saddam Hussein were in fact battling to over throw Saddam
Hussein.
Prior to Bush's decision to go to war for oil, not one human being
on the planet suggested that these anti-Saddam forces were
por-Saddam.

When faced with specific facts, names, dates and evidence
of the truth you just go into denial mode and pretend that
you've somehow refuted it.

Apparently you didn't read your own citations. You're not
describing anything you posted at all. Sorry.

How do we know that 9/11 really happened?

Can you say "Strawman"? I thought you could.

Because the "Al Qaida" operatives in Iraq are anti-Saddam,
pro-Iranian militants who have been actively fighting to overthrow
the government of Saddam Hussein for years.

Wrong again.

I've already demonstrated that you're lying.
You're welcome.

The evidence is there that they recieved his aid, financially,
medically, chem weapons expertise and operational training
grounds.

There is no evidence at all, apart from a single prisoner who
was subjected to torture -- and even that "evidence" didn't
exist until *After* the decision to go to war for oil had been
made.

It's interesting to note that the "Proof" is five years old, with
nothing more recent to go by than the "Al Qaida" linked Ansar al-Islam,
who were trying to over throw Saddam.

Oh, so the fact that the Telegraph was the first on the scene means that
those documents are somehow invalid.

Actually, the fact that this "Evidence" was refuted is what makes it
invalid.
There was no cooperation.

Once again: Ansar al-Islam is an anti-Saddam militant group that
had been actively fighting to over throw Saddam's government
for many years. They are an Iranian group -- Iranian backed and
funded -- who were allowed to take refuge in Iran whenever Iraqi
or the later U.S. forces threatened to destroy them.

All you've done is deny the facts.

Hardly. I'm repeating the facts as stated by the Kurds who have
been combating Ansar al-Islam. They've never been shy about
it, Ansar al-Islam is supported by Iran.
They know better than you.
.
User: "Baghdad Bob"

Title: Re: One More GI Killed by Bush's Big Lie 10 Aug 2003 05:28:11 AM
"JTEM" <jaytem@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:xy2dnVR__p0eNqiiXTWJhw@comcast.com...


"Baghdad Bob" <not@home.com> wrote

Ansar al-Islam is not Iranian-backed.


"Human Rights Watch has not investigated the alleged links
between the Iraqi government and Ansar al-Islam, and is
not aware of any convincing evidence supporting this
contention. On the other hand, the location of the group's
bases very close to the Iranian border, taken together with
credible reports of the return of some Ansar al-Islam fighters
to Iraqi Kurdistan through Iran, suggest that these fighters
have received at least limited support from some Iranian
sources."

http://www.hrw.org/backgrounder/mena/ansarbk020503.htm

They fucking admit their own lack of research in the disclaimer of this
piece. They have zero evidence, and say as much. Not only that, but this
op-ed was written in 2002! Instead, they just tell us that it seems logical
to them from the "location of the group's bases" that they must be aligned
with Iran. Complete speculative *****, that doesn't even claim to be
based on evidence. And since the time that this *opinion* was expressed,
mountains of evidence have surfaced showing that such links did exist.


"The cache of documents at the Ansar al-Islam compound,
including computer discs and foreign passports belonging to
Arab fighters from around the Middle East, could bolster
the Bush administration's claims that the two groups are
connected, although there was no indication any of the
evidence tied Ansar to Saddam Hussein as Washington
has maintained."

"There were indications, however, that the group has been
getting help from inside neighboring Iran."


http://vikingphoenix.com/public/rongstad/military/terrorism/raid_ansar_al-qa

ida.htm

Broken link. But once again your citation shows *NO FACT*. Another opinion
piece from some nobody with a computer. Real pursuasive.

http://www.newyorker.com/printable/?fact/030210fa_fact


This one establishes beyond any doubt that the administration
actively & openly made false connections between Iraq and Al Qaida.


But don't bother to try to disprove any of what is says. Just deny,

deny,

deny.


You're not very bright, but allow me to try and explain it to you.

You're too stupid to know.

This story is old. This is an example of what we are complaining about --
the fact that the U.S. government invented such stories in order to

justify

a war for oil. We're talking about these so-called "Reports." This is what
we mean when we say that the government has been lying to us.

You claim that they're invented, but hvae no evidence to back you up. You
just repeat ***** opinions from Human Rights Watch as *proof*.

I didn't just "Deny," far from it. I pointed out the inescapable fact
that the "Al Qaida" terrorist the administrations *Claims* are linked
to Saddam Hussein were in fact battling to over throw Saddam
Hussein.

Inescapable? What a fucking hoot. Opinions are like assholes. And that's
all you've shown, are a few assholes.

Prior to Bush's decision to go to war for oil, not one human being
on the planet suggested that these anti-Saddam forces were
por-Saddam.

Not on your planet. Here on earth, every intelligent person on the planet
knew that Saddam was a supporter of international terrorist. What has
become more clear since the war are his direct ties to Al Qaeda.

When faced with specific facts, names, dates and evidence
of the truth you just go into denial mode and pretend that
you've somehow refuted it.


Apparently you didn't read your own citations. You're not
describing anything you posted at all. Sorry.

Don't bother to refute, just deny, deny, deny.

How do we know that 9/11 really happened?


Can you say "Strawman"? I thought you could.

It illustrates your *evidence to the contrary* quite nicely.

Because the "Al Qaida" operatives in Iraq are anti-Saddam,
pro-Iranian militants who have been actively fighting to overthrow
the government of Saddam Hussein for years.


Wrong again.


I've already demonstrated that you're lying.

You've demonstrated your own stupidity and nothing more.

The evidence is there that they recieved his aid, financially,
medically, chem weapons expertise and operational training
grounds.


There is no evidence at all, apart from a single prisoner who
was subjected to torture -- and even that "evidence" didn't
exist until *After* the decision to go to war for oil had been
made.

There were multiple prisoners, and the interview was conducted by a
journalist. There was no evidence that any torture whatsoever was applied.
You are lying.

It's interesting to note that the "Proof" is five years old, with
nothing more recent to go by than the "Al Qaida" linked Ansar

al-Islam,

who were trying to over throw Saddam.


Oh, so the fact that the Telegraph was the first on the scene means that
those documents are somehow invalid.


Actually, the fact that this "Evidence" was refuted is what makes it
invalid.

Refuted by whom, how? Learn to say no to hallucinogenic drugs.

Once again: Ansar al-Islam is an anti-Saddam militant group that
had been actively fighting to over throw Saddam's government
for many years. They are an Iranian group -- Iranian backed and
funded -- who were allowed to take refuge in Iran whenever Iraqi
or the later U.S. forces threatened to destroy them.


All you've done is deny the facts.


Hardly. I'm repeating the facts as stated by the Kurds who have
been combating Ansar al-Islam. They've never been shy about
it, Ansar al-Islam is supported by Iran.

Where have you cited a single statement from a single Kurd? All I've seen
is a single article of speculative BS, written in 2002 by a source admittnig
their lack of information. Oh and there is that borken link which also
claims to be nothing more than the author's opinion.
.
User: "JTEM"

Title: Re: One More GI Killed by Bush's Big Lie 10 Aug 2003 10:01:32 AM
"Baghdad Bob" <not@home.com> wrote

"JTEM" <jaytem@yahoo.com> wrote

"Human Rights Watch has not investigated the alleged links
between the Iraqi government and Ansar al-Islam, and is
not aware of any convincing evidence supporting this
contention. On the other hand, the location of the group's
bases very close to the Iranian border, taken together with
credible reports of the return of some Ansar al-Islam fighters
to Iraqi Kurdistan through Iran, suggest that these fighters
have received at least limited support from some Iranian
sources."

http://www.hrw.org/backgrounder/mena/ansarbk020503.htm

They fucking admit their own lack of research in the disclaimer
of this piece.

They fucking state that they have no reason to "research" the matter,
as there isn't any convincing evidence.

They have zero evidence, and say as much.

Zero evidence for any link between the Islamic militants and
Saddam's government. That is exactly what they say.

Not only that, but this op-ed was written in 2002!

The piece was written in 2002, after the world got a look at
the contrived evidence from the administration.

"There were indications, however, that the group has been
getting help from inside neighboring Iran."



http://vikingphoenix.com/public/rongstad/military/terrorism/raid_ansar_al-qa

ida.htm

Broken link.

Figure out how to cut & paste. It's not difficult.

But once again your citation shows *NO FACT*.

There was the "Fact" that no connection could be made between
the Islamic militants and Saddam's government.

You're too stupid to know.

Clever.

You claim that they're invented, but hvae no evidence to
back you up.

I don't have to have any evidence, you moron! You're the
one pretending that Saddam had links to Al Qaida, not me.
You're the one pretending to have "evidence."

I didn't just "Deny," far from it. I pointed out the inescapable fact
that the "Al Qaida" terrorist the administrations *Claims* are linked
to Saddam Hussein were in fact battling to over throw Saddam
Hussein.

Inescapable?

That's right.

Prior to Bush's decision to go to war for oil, not one human being
on the planet suggested that these anti-Saddam forces were
por-Saddam.

Not on your planet.

Cites. Let's see them. Give us that dates before 2000. Put up or shut up.
What have you been waiting for, tinkerbell?
.
User: "Baghdad Bob"

Title: Re: One More GI Killed by Bush's Big Lie 10 Aug 2003 10:39:33 AM
"JTEM" <jaytem@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:o9OdnXcuEpZdwKuiXTWJiQ@comcast.com...


"Baghdad Bob" <not@home.com> wrote

"JTEM" <jaytem@yahoo.com> wrote


"Human Rights Watch has not investigated the alleged links
between the Iraqi government and Ansar al-Islam, and is
not aware of any convincing evidence supporting this
contention. On the other hand, the location of the group's
bases very close to the Iranian border, taken together with
credible reports of the return of some Ansar al-Islam fighters
to Iraqi Kurdistan through Iran, suggest that these fighters
have received at least limited support from some Iranian
sources."

http://www.hrw.org/backgrounder/mena/ansarbk020503.htm


They fucking admit their own lack of research in the disclaimer
of this piece.


They fucking state that they have no reason to "research" the matter,
as there isn't any convincing evidence.

They have no evidence because they didn't bother to look, you flaming turd!

They have zero evidence, and say as much.


Zero evidence for any link between the Islamic militants and
Saddam's government. That is exactly what they say.

They have zero evidence one way or the other, because they chose not to look
for it.

Not only that, but this op-ed was written in 2002!


The piece was written in 2002, after the world got a look at
the contrived evidence from the administration.

What contrived evidence? How many more lies do you need to have discredited
before you slink back into your little rat hole?

"There were indications, however, that the group has been
getting help from inside neighboring Iran."




http://vikingphoenix.com/public/rongstad/military/terrorism/raid_ansar_al-qa

ida.htm


Broken link.


Figure out how to cut & paste. It's not difficult.

I did, *****-for-brains. The lin is broken.

But once again your citation shows *NO FACT*.


There was the "Fact" that no connection could be made between
the Islamic militants and Saddam's government.

Where did you see this supposed "fact"? All it says is that particular
cache of documents did not contain the proof. Big fucking deal. Other
evidence proves, from Baghdad proves it. Both Al-Zirqawri's medical help in
Baghdad and the terrorist training bases in Iraq prove it. As does the very
existence of a large AlQaeda group operating inside the very borders of
Iraq!

You're too stupid to know.


Clever.

You claim that they're invented, but hvae no evidence to
back you up.


I don't have to have any evidence, you moron! You're the
one pretending that Saddam had links to Al Qaida, not me.
You're the one pretending to have "evidence."

I'm not pretending anything. I've shown you evidence. You've shown your
stupidity.

I didn't just "Deny," far from it. I pointed out the inescapable fact
that the "Al Qaida" terrorist the administrations *Claims* are linked
to Saddam Hussein were in fact battling to over throw Saddam
Hussein.


Inescapable?


That's right.

In a pig's eye (or your eye, they're one in the same).

Prior to Bush's decision to go to war for oil, not one human being
on the planet suggested that these anti-Saddam forces were
por-Saddam.


Not on your planet.


Cites. Let's see them. Give us that dates before 2000. Put up or shut up.

What have you been waiting for, tinkerbell?

I've given it to you, litlle fag. Here is an exerpt from one of the
articles you lied about having read:
http://abcnews.go.com/sections/nightline/DailyNews/alqaeda_iraq020927.html
"In '92, elements of al Qaeda came to Baghdad and met with Saddam Hussein
and among them was Dr. Al-Zawahiri."
.
User: "JTEM"

Title: Re: One More GI Killed by Bush's Big Lie 12 Aug 2003 12:52:50 AM
"Baghdad Bob" <not@home.com> wrote

They have no evidence because they didn't bother to
look, you flaming turd!

So what you're telling us, bobby, is that if the government
would investigate you they'd find all the evidence they
need to convict & execute you.
Fine. In that case I fully support an investigation into your
alleged links to international terrorism.
Well, I guess that's it. There's nothing more for me to say
here other than...
"Bye."
.






User: "raven1"

Title: Re: One More GI Killed by Bush's Big Lie 09 Aug 2003 09:26:53 PM
On Sat, 09 Aug 2003 21:49:38 -0400, Fred Stone
<fstone69@earthling.com> wrote:

JTEM wrote:

"Fred Stone" <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote
[---snip---]

Cites?




http://abcnews.go.com/sections/nightline/DailyNews/alqaeda_iraq020927.html

"The U.S. believes Iraq has had contact with al Qaeda," I said, "Do you
know that to be a fact?"

"Yes. In '92, elements of al Qaeda came to Baghdad and met with Saddam
Hussein and among them was Dr. Al-Zawahiri."

Ayman Al-Zawahiri, you may recall, has been identified as a top
lieutenant of bin Laden's, and is widely thought to be a mastermind of
the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks.

"There is a relationship between the governments of al Qaeda and the
Iraqi government," he continued. "It began after the events of Kuwait
approximately. That is when the relationship developed and many
delegations came to Baghdad. There are elements of al Qaeda training on
suicide operations, assassinations, explosions, and the making of
chemical substances, and they are supervised by a number of officers,
experts from the Iraqi intelligence, the Explosives Division, the
Assassinations Division, different specialties."

You left out the beginning of the article, Fred:
"S U L I Y A M A N I A, Iraq, Sept. 27 — In a prison in the part of
Northern Iraq controlled by Kurds, I sat down with three men who claim
to have first-hand knowledge of links between Osama bin Laden's
organization and Iraq.
The three men are in the custody of the Iraqi Kurdish government,
which is opposed to Saddam Hussein's regime. All three assured me they
were speaking of their own free will. They said they were not under
threat of torture and they were aware they did not have to talk to me.
But prison interviews are always suspect because there's no way to
know if they're exaggerating or simply lying in order to curry favor
from their captors, and the information is difficult to confirm."
Hardly the most credible of sources.
.
User: "Baghdad Bob"

Title: Re: One More GI Killed by Bush's Big Lie 10 Aug 2003 04:56:21 AM
"raven1" <psychedelephant@flashmail.com> wrote in message
news:i9bbjvkn0clhi80lsnfcvevejp2g8j8nfp@4ax.com...

On Sat, 09 Aug 2003 21:49:38 -0400, Fred Stone
<fstone69@earthling.com> wrote:

JTEM wrote:

"Fred Stone" <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote
[---snip---]

Cites?





http://abcnews.go.com/sections/nightline/DailyNews/alqaeda_iraq020927.html


"The U.S. believes Iraq has had contact with al Qaeda," I said, "Do you
know that to be a fact?"

"Yes. In '92, elements of al Qaeda came to Baghdad and met with Saddam
Hussein and among them was Dr. Al-Zawahiri."

Ayman Al-Zawahiri, you may recall, has been identified as a top
lieutenant of bin Laden's, and is widely thought to be a mastermind of
the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks.

"There is a relationship between the governments of al Qaeda and the
Iraqi government," he continued. "It began after the events of Kuwait
approximately. That is when the relationship developed and many
delegations came to Baghdad. There are elements of al Qaeda training on
suicide operations, assassinations, explosions, and the making of
chemical substances, and they are supervised by a number of officers,
experts from the Iraqi intelligence, the Explosives Division, the
Assassinations Division, different specialties."


You left out the beginning of the article, Fred:

"S U L I Y A M A N I A, Iraq, Sept. 27 - In a prison in the part of
Northern Iraq controlled by Kurds, I sat down with three men who claim
to have first-hand knowledge of links between Osama bin Laden's
organization and Iraq.

The three men are in the custody of the Iraqi Kurdish government,
which is opposed to Saddam Hussein's regime. All three assured me they
were speaking of their own free will. They said they were not under
threat of torture and they were aware they did not have to talk to me.
But prison interviews are always suspect because there's no way to
know if they're exaggerating or simply lying in order to curry favor
from their captors, and the information is difficult to confirm."

Hardly the most credible of sources.

You impugn their testimony based on what? Where is your evidence to the
contrary?
.
User: "Patriotboy"

Title: Re: One More GI Killed by Bush's Big Lie 10 Aug 2003 01:08:41 PM
On 10 Aug 2003, "Baghdad Bob" <not@home.com> posted this:

The three men are in the custody of the Iraqi Kurdish
government, which is opposed to Saddam Hussein's regime. All
three assured me they were speaking of their own free will.
They said they were not under threat of torture and they were
aware they did not have to talk to me. But prison interviews
are always suspect because there's no way to know if they're
exaggerating or simply lying in order to curry favor from their
captors, and the information is difficult to confirm."

Hardly the most credible of sources.


You impugn their testimony based on what? Where is your
evidence to the contrary?

I think it was suspect because they were being held by the Kurds.
BTW, why is it that the fact that Ansar al-Islam was based in
Northern Iran is used as proof that they were suppoted by Saddam wen
the anti-Saddam Kurds operated freely in the same territory?
--
'The administration hastened from the beginning to
persuade us that defending America against terror
cannot be done without seriously abridging the protections
of the Constitution for American citizens, up to and
including an asserted right to place them in a form
of limbo totally beyond the authority of our courts.
And that view is both wrong and fundamentally un-American.'
--Al Gore
.








  Page 1 of 3

1

 

2

 

3

 


Related Articles
One More GI Killed by Bush's Big Lie
One More GI Killed By Bush's Big Lie, While Chickenhawks Such as Bill Bonde Deflects Responsibility and Gleefully Dance On Their Graves.
One More GI Killed by Bush's Big Lie
Re: God KILLED his SON for one rotten APPLE !
Re: God KILLED his SON for one rotten APPLE !
Re: God KILLED his SON for one rotten APPLE !
Re: God KILLED his SON for one rotten APPLE !
Re: God KILLED his SON for one rotten APPLE !
Re: God KILLED his SON for one rotten APPLE !
Re: God KILLED his SON for one rotten APPLE !
Re: God KILLED his SON for one rotten APPLE !
Re: God KILLED his SON for one rotten APPLE !
Re: God KILLED his SON for one rotten APPLE !
Reasons NOT to be Catholic...Use of the word Bullsh*t...was God KILLED his SON for one rotten APPLE !
Re: 313 killed in Iraq in one day! The "surge" has backfired inBush's face!
 

NEWER

pg.3585     pg.2749     pg.2106     pg.1612     pg.1232     pg.940     pg.716     pg.544     pg.412     pg.311     pg.234     pg.175     pg.130     pg.96     pg.70     pg.50     pg.35     pg.24     pg.16     pg.10     pg.6     pg.3     pg.1

OLDER