Iraq Al Qaeda link apparently is there

by Yerusalyim 61 Replies latest social current

• 

  lastcall

  I'm kinda confused. You say the burden of proof belongs to the accuser. Aren't people who are accusing the US of being wrong to go into Iraq the accusers?

  No-- I'm talking about our indictment of Iraq as being involved w/ 9-11 before we went over and bombed them. The accusation was made or intimated that they were directly linked, that was one of the reasons for going to war .. Bush put 9/11 and Iraq all in one basket. The U.S. had a burden of proof there, and in my opinion that was not met. I was continuing an earlier anology about a court trial. We, in a sense took them to court with reguard to 9/11 .

  If they can prove a direct link between Iraq and Al Qaeda, although it will be very important, unfortunately, I think it will prove to be very anti-climatic only because of all the doubt that has been shed on the whole operation.

  Agreed, they've shot their wad there.

  LC
• 

  SixofNine

  Did you get an opportunity to view the links I posted? If so, can you help me understand why you say that Atta didn't meet with an Iraqi diplomat?

  Because the links you posted are doing just what you are doing, passing on wrong information. There isn't any evidence that this meeting happened (certainly not a "film") and yet you keep repeating that there is actually a "film" of it.

  It may just be a matter of learning to use the internet while not letting others use the internet to use you. For instance, it is one thing to venture onto a extremely biased website, and pull well credited information that the extremely biased person is using to make their point, and wholly another thing to venture onto a biased website and then simply repeat the opinion of the horribly biased web-master, even if he's picked and pulled from a few breaking (and unsubstansiated) news stories to make his case. Using vs being used.
• 

  DakotaRed

  Now I'm faced with a real dilemna. We all know how the white conservative Americans lie about everything, but it's they who claim that Mohammed Atta wasn't ever in Prague to meet the Iraqis.

  Seems it's the Czechs who have been claiming he was there.

  Is Washington covering up again? Was he really there on CIA business and Washington now has to cover it all up?

  http://www.computerbytesman.com/911/praguefaq.htm
• 

  SixofNine

  We all know how the white conservative Americans lie about everything,

  Now don't go projecting your lack of interest in facts onto all of us white conservative Americans.

  Good website, btw. I have it bookmarked.
• 

  imallgrowedup

  SixofNine-

  It may just be a matter of learning to use the internet while not letting others use the internet to use you. For instance, it is one thing to venture onto a extremely biased website, and pull well credited information that the extremely biased person is using to make their point, and wholly another thing to venture onto a biased website and then simply repeat the opinion of the horribly biased web-master, even if he's picked and pulled from a few breaking (and unsubstansiated) news stories to make his case. Using vs being used.

  I have no idea what you are trying to say here. For what it is worth, I originally heard about this on tv, and then again, on the radio. No one is using me - especially not anyone on the internet. I made a point of choosing two links from non-US sources - one from Prague and one from India, so as to not appear as though I chose a US bias. I get the feeling you didn't even read them or you would have known that. If I am wrong about that, I humbly apologize.

  growedup
• 

  shamus

  Pfffffft! Alquaeda Links??? Whatever...

  The U.S.A. can say whatever they want now, I don't believe one dam thing that comes out of that administrations filthy mouth. Jeez, not like they're liars, eh? Poor ol' George... really trying to justify nothing. I guess other people get prosecuted as war criminals and that's cool with Georgie, as long as the same rules do not apply to him.

  He is the biggest dumbass liar in the world.
• 

  DakotaRed

  Now don't go projecting your lack of interest in facts onto all of us white conservative Americans

  My lack of interest in facts, yet you bookmark the site I sent you too proving that someone is obviously lying about this?
• 

  Yerusalyim

  Last Call,

  I'm talking about our indictment of Iraq as being involved w/ 9-11 before we went over and bombed them. The accusation was made or intimated that they were directly linked, that was one of the reasons for going to war .. Bush put 9/11 and Iraq all in one basket.

  When, where, and how did Bush put 9/11 and Iraq in one basket. The Administration has went to pains NOT to use Iraq and 9/11 in one breath. The Administration has not EVER,. to the very best of my knowledge, said that Iraq was responsible for 9/11.

  How soon we forget, and how quick we are to accuse...this war is on TERRORISM...not just those responsible for 9/11 but ALL terrorists. The links Bush claimed that existed between Iraq and terrorists seem to be there in the form of finances and training...which is a good enough excuse to take down saddam.

  I AM A WHITE CONSERVATIVE AND I DO NOT LIE. Generalized bullsh*t statements saying white conservatives lie adds nothing to this debate.

  There are those who doubt this legitimately, and those who would doubt Bush if he claimed to be a white man...those whose hatred of Bush, and conservatives is irrational...to those I say...go play with yourself.
• 

  patio34

  This is from the Dept of Defense about the alleged AQ-Iraq link:

  United States Department of Defense News Releases On the web: http://www.defenselink.mil/cgi-bin/dlprint.cgi?http://www.defenselink.mil/releases/2003/nr20031115-0642.html Media contact: +1 (703) 697-5131 Public contact: http://www.dod.mil/faq/comment.html or +1 (703) 428-0711

  
  
  

  	No. 851-03
  IMMEDIATE RELEASE	November 15, 2003

  ---

  DoD Statement on News Reports of al-Qaida and Iraq Connections

  News reports that the Defense Department recently confirmed new information with respect to contacts between al-Qaida and Iraq in a letter to the Senate Intelligence Committee are inaccurate.

  A letter was sent to the Senate Intelligence Committee on October 27, 2003 from Douglas J. Feith, Under Secretary of Defense for Policy, in response to follow-up questions from his July 10 testimony. One of the questions posed by the committee asked the Department to provide the reports from the Intelligence Community to which he referred in his testimony before the Committee. These reports dealt with the relationship between Iraq and al-Qaida.

  The letter to the committee included a classified annex containing a list and description of the requested reports, so that the Committee could obtain the reports from the relevant members of the Intelligence Community.

  The items listed in the classified annex were either raw reports or products of the CIA, the NSA, or, in one case, the DIA. The provision of the classified annex to the Intelligence Committee was cleared by other agencies and done with the permission of the Intelligence Community. The selection of the documents was made by DOD to respond to the Committee?s question. The classified annex was not an analysis of the substantive issue of the relationship between Iraq and al Qaida, and it drew no conclusions.

  Individuals who leak or purport to leak classified information are doing serious harm to national security; such activity is deplorable and may be illegal.

  -END-

  ---

  ---

  http://www.defenselink.mil/releases/2003/nr20031115-0642.html
• 

  Phantom Stranger

  Funny how every other major news organization didn't touch this story. Actually, no, I guess it's not. Broadcast journalism in general has declined in quality over the last decade, but FNN remains unparalelled.

  Where have you gone, Walter Cro-onkite, a nation turns its lonely eyes to you... woo hoo hoo..