Guest Sir Sam Posted December 5, 2007 Posted December 5, 2007 On Wed, 05 Dec 2007 01:30:20 GMT, "Mavisbeacon" <Mavisbeacon@nospam.forme> mumbled: > >"Sir Sam" <nite@cru.sade> wrote in message >news:ifobl3du82egk9gku9109f4qto6n19l56p@4ax.com... >> On Tue, 04 Dec 2007 20:50:55 GMT, "Mavisbeacon" >> <Mavisbeacon@nospam.forme> mumbled: >> >> Dublin, Ireland >> >> 89.100.47.254 = [ 089-100-047254.ntlworld.ie ] >> inetnum: 89.100.0.0 - 89.101.127.255 >[snip] >[snip] >> descr: NTL Ireland > >NTL Ireland does not exist anymore! Oh? Quote
Guest Sir Sam Posted December 5, 2007 Posted December 5, 2007 On Wed, 05 Dec 2007 01:30:20 GMT, "Mavisbeacon" <Mavisbeacon@nospam.forme> mumbled: > >"Sir Sam" <nite@cru.sade> wrote in message >news:siobl358uv70vuvpmn7t5ps4a02s0skt5n@4ax.com... >> On Tue, 04 Dec 2007 20:59:24 GMT, "Mavisbeacon" >> <Mavisbeacon@nospam.forme> mumbled: >> >>>Anyway at best a single meeting a decade ago whiuch IS NOt evidence of >>>planning world terror >> >> LIAR! >> >> http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewNation.asp?Page=%5CNation%5Carchive%5C200410%5CNAT20041011a.html >> When CNSNews.com published an article Monday, Oct. 4, entitled, >[snip - news spin article] > >Read the actual report by the CIA. Read what they found AFTER the invasion - fool. Quote
Guest Sir Sam Posted December 5, 2007 Posted December 5, 2007 On Wed, 05 Dec 2007 01:30:20 GMT, "Mavisbeacon" <Mavisbeacon@nospam.forme> mumbled: > >"abracadabra" <abra@hotmail.com> wrote in message >news:4755ebb8$0$8677$4c368faf@roadrunner.com... >> >> "Ivanhoe Martin" <cliff@rasta.man> wrote in message >> news:qjp9l31qucv9tl2fi75ahbrttm4017u8ns@4ax.com... >>> On Mon, 3 Dec 2007 16:34:01 -0500, "abracadabra" <abra@hotmail.com> >>> mumbled: >>> >>>> Al Qaeda didn't like Saddam >>> >>> Oh? >> >> Yeah, Saddam and Osama had no use for eachother. > >Why would a religious zealot bent on introducing Islamic Law into Arabia >like a whisky drinking dictator who wanted to rule a country himslef rather >than allow Islamists run the place? > The enemy of my enemy...etc... Quote
Guest Sir Sam Posted December 5, 2007 Posted December 5, 2007 On Wed, 05 Dec 2007 01:42:05 GMT, "Mavisbeacon" <Mavisbeacon@nospam.forme> mumbled: > >"Sir Sam" <nite@cru.sade> wrote in message >news:vombl3t4edn70vn8t0rdtogpsppm4b7dva@4ax.com... >> On Tue, 04 Dec 2007 18:02:10 GMT, "Mavisbeacon" >> <Mavisbeacon@nospam.forme> mumbled: >> >> >> rubbish.... >> >[snip claims without any supporting evidence] > >Here is the OFFICIAL report That is the official whitewash. Quote
Guest Sir Sam Posted December 5, 2007 Posted December 5, 2007 On Wed, 05 Dec 2007 01:42:05 GMT, "Mavisbeacon" <Mavisbeacon@nospam.forme> mumbled: > >"Sir Sam" <nite@cru.sade> wrote in message >news:ugtbl3pdg04j6nlssgriovr0hfmodsgra1@4ax.com... >> On Tue, 4 Dec 2007 19:07:03 -0500, "abracadabra" <abra@hotmail.com> >> mumbled: >> >>> >>>"Sir Sam" <nite@cru.sade> wrote in message >>>news:8bval3hpr9qr296ibobtt8ih7duhnr2af5@4ax.com... >>>> On Tue, 04 Dec 2007 10:52:36 GMT, "Mavisbeacon" >>>> <Mavisbeacon@nospam.forme> mumbled: >>>> >>>>>al quad were NOT in any way prevalent in Iraq under >>>>>Saddam >>>> >>>> LIAR! >>>> >>>> http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/003/033jgqyi.asp >>>> >>> >>> >>>Weakly Standard is >> >> NO FACTUAL REBUTTAL! > >Here is factual rebuttal: > >In 2003 Jan 26 on page 11 of a Report entitled "CIA: Iraqi support for >Terrorism" (which you can find referred to - ref 160- on page 64 of the >following reference) "Saddam Hussain and Uasama Bin Liden are far from >being natural partners" > > > I use an official report to the US congress Politician spin, hardly the final say. Quote
Guest Mavisbeacon Posted December 5, 2007 Posted December 5, 2007 "Sir Sam" <nite@cru.sade> wrote in message news:ucobl3909g16c9q678mnoqs9rdh0jrtkj8@4ax.com... > On Tue, 04 Dec 2007 20:50:55 GMT, "Mavisbeacon" > <Mavisbeacon@nospam.forme> mumbled: > >> >>WE know about the Feith Memo being a mockup. but > > BULLSHIT!!! > > http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewNation.asp?Page=%5CNation%5Carchive%5C200410%5CNAT20041011a.html > > When CNSNews.com published an article Monday, Oct. 4, entitled, > "Exclusive: Saddam Possessed WMD, Had Extensive Terror Ties," we > decided against publishing all 42 pages of the Iraqi intelligence > documents in our possession and on which the article was based. > [snip] I gave you a source from the OFFICIAL classified report to congress. http://intelligence.senate.gov/phaseiiaccuracy.pdf They examined MILLIONS of pages! It s stranget that your 42 pages are not there because they only report ONE meeting with Al Khyda operatives and they say NO EVIDENCE OF LINKS between al Quaeda and Iraq. Thats MILLIONS of pages examined by the CIA not by a media spindoctor: http://www.slate.com/id/2092180 What is disputed is that the meetings went anywhere. It would not be surprising to find out that the two sides had a de facto cease-fire, as has been alleged. But we're still waiting to see real cooperation in the form of transfers of weapons and other materiel, know-how, or funds; the provision of safe haven on a significant scale; or the use of Iraqi diplomatic facilities by al-Qaida terrorists. The Feith memo mentions a few instances of possible Iraqi assistance to al-Qaida on bomb-building and weapons supply to affiliated groups, but nothing like the kind of evidence that, in Hayes' words, "is detailed, conclusive, and corroborated by multiple sources." [end excerpt] Quote
Guest Mavisbeacon Posted December 5, 2007 Posted December 5, 2007 "Sir Sam" <nite@cru.sade> wrote in message news:al8cl3drm5g33kt7cn1b53o0eqi3o96va6@4ax.com... > On Wed, 05 Dec 2007 01:30:20 GMT, "Mavisbeacon" > <Mavisbeacon@nospam.forme> mumbled: > >> >>"Sir Sam" <nite@cru.sade> wrote in message >>news:siobl358uv70vuvpmn7t5ps4a02s0skt5n@4ax.com... >>> On Tue, 04 Dec 2007 20:59:24 GMT, "Mavisbeacon" >>> <Mavisbeacon@nospam.forme> mumbled: >>> >>>>Anyway at best a single meeting a decade ago whiuch IS NOt evidence of >>>>planning world terror >>> >>> LIAR! >>> [snip - news spin] >>[snip - news spin article] >> >>Read the actual report by the CIA. unsnipped official doc - http://intelligence.senate.gov/phaseiiaccuracy.pdf > > Read what they found AFTER the invasion - fool. What an idiotic comment! The CIA report IS based on everything they know AFTER the invasion! And it also includes everything they knew BEFORE the invasion. Including the stuff that was not stovepiped to the top by the OSP! Quote
Guest Mavisbeacon Posted December 5, 2007 Posted December 5, 2007 "Sir Sam" <nite@cru.sade> wrote in message news:cm8cl3d0v4br5dc3rt7ccdook7jk924amf@4ax.com... > On Wed, 05 Dec 2007 01:30:20 GMT, "Mavisbeacon" > <Mavisbeacon@nospam.forme> mumbled: > >> >>"abracadabra" <abra@hotmail.com> wrote in message >>news:4755ebb8$0$8677$4c368faf@roadrunner.com... >>> >>> "Ivanhoe Martin" <cliff@rasta.man> wrote in message >>> news:qjp9l31qucv9tl2fi75ahbrttm4017u8ns@4ax.com... >>>> On Mon, 3 Dec 2007 16:34:01 -0500, "abracadabra" <abra@hotmail.com> >>>> mumbled: >>>> >>>>> Al Qaeda didn't like Saddam >>>> >>>> Oh? >>> >>> Yeah, Saddam and Osama had no use for eachother. >> >>Why would a religious zealot bent on introducing Islamic Law into Arabia >>like a whisky drinking dictator who wanted to rule a country himslef >>rather >>than allow Islamists run the place? >> > The enemy of my enemy...etc... That logic might apply to Georges Bush Jr and Snr. and Regan. Maybe even to Clinton. But not to Saddam. He didnt work with ~Islamists. In fact unlike the US he probably thought that if you incubate and finance Islamists in another country they will one day turn on you! Quote
Guest Mavisbeacon Posted December 5, 2007 Posted December 5, 2007 "Sir Sam" <nite@cru.sade> wrote in message news:do8cl39mfgt7din0t49gh2dgmavggcson7@4ax.com... > On Wed, 05 Dec 2007 01:42:05 GMT, "Mavisbeacon" > <Mavisbeacon@nospam.forme> mumbled: > >> >>"Sir Sam" <nite@cru.sade> wrote in message >>news:vombl3t4edn70vn8t0rdtogpsppm4b7dva@4ax.com... >>> On Tue, 04 Dec 2007 18:02:10 GMT, "Mavisbeacon" >>> <Mavisbeacon@nospam.forme> mumbled: >>> >>> >>> rubbish.... >>> >>[snip claims without any supporting evidence] >> >>Here is the OFFICIAL report [unsnipped] http://intelligence.senate.gov/phaseiiaccuracy.pdf > > That is the official whitewash. That is you rebuttal is it? Several of the largest intelligence services in the world examine tens of million of pages of documents. the look at photos and videos and talk to people on the ground (on all sides) and present their opinion on all this evidence. and YOU for your part have WHAT evidence? Nothing ! Only you OPINION and the cut and paste UNSUPPORTED OPINION of biased media sources! How is it a whitewash? It gives the whole story, warts and all. In fact even the stovepiped UNSUPPORTED CLAIMS directly before the invasion about WMD in Iraq and links to Al Qaeda are included. ANY known evidence is raised supplied and analysed. Dissenting opinion (without evidence to support it) is recorded. A number of Senators from all sides of the house were involved. you can see the amendments they put and what they agreed to. And the supported opinion (not and unsupported stove-pipe OSP ) of the CIA FBI Homeland Sec. DIA etc. are all included. It even included theories that are unsupported but can't be proved wrong. Please care to show how it is a whitewash? Next you will be saying the Moon Landings were a hoax and the pictures are all fake! LOL! Quote
Guest Einstein Posted December 5, 2007 Posted December 5, 2007 wow so many LIES in that OP! 10k is what an average American thinks? Hell no. 70k is Media reports? Try 500k 1 Million actual? FALSE, you lose, your a liar. Quote
Guest Mavisbeacon Posted December 5, 2007 Posted December 5, 2007 "Sir Sam" <nite@cru.sade> wrote in message news:bp8cl31jcc7spchuk6104nnf98dfd6gvek@4ax.com... > On Wed, 05 Dec 2007 01:42:05 GMT, "Mavisbeacon" > <Mavisbeacon@nospam.forme> mumbled: [snip] >>>> >>>> >>>>Weakly Standard is >>> >>> NO FACTUAL REBUTTAL! >> >>Here is factual rebuttal: >> >>In 2003 Jan 26 on page 11 of a Report entitled "CIA: Iraqi support for >>Terrorism" (which you can find referred to - ref 160- on page 64 of the >>following reference) "Saddam Hussain and Uasama Bin Liden are far from >>being natural partners" >> >> >> I use an official report to the US congress > > Politician spin, hardly the final say. http://intelligence.senate.gov/phaseiiaccuracy.pdf It ISN'T politicians! It is the CIA FBI Homeland security NSA DIA ALL reporting to congress! It is called OVERSIGHT, something the current administration seemed to ignore and are still trying to ignore! Now since you claim it please care to show how it is as you claim "politician spin"? Betya you cant! all you will have is your OPINION versus the FACT of Intelligence agencies SUPPORTED BY EVIDENCE! Quote
Guest Mavisbeacon Posted December 5, 2007 Posted December 5, 2007 "Sir Sam" <nite@cru.sade> wrote in message news:rk8cl31k538gj2qmiea8f4op7g4b9fpslf@4ax.com... > On Wed, 05 Dec 2007 01:30:20 GMT, "Mavisbeacon" > <Mavisbeacon@nospam.forme> mumbled: > >> >>"Sir Sam" <nite@cru.sade> wrote in message >>news:ifobl3du82egk9gku9109f4qto6n19l56p@4ax.com... >>> On Tue, 04 Dec 2007 20:50:55 GMT, "Mavisbeacon" >>> <Mavisbeacon@nospam.forme> mumbled: >>> >>> Dublin, Ireland >>> >>> 89.100.47.254 = [ 089-100-047254.ntlworld.ie ] >>> inetnum: 89.100.0.0 - 89.101.127.255 >>[snip] >>[snip] >>> descr: NTL Ireland >> >>NTL Ireland does not exist anymore! > > Oh? You didn't check did you? LOL! Ill bet you are feverishly looking now to try to prove me wrong. It is a subsidiary issue anyway. The old servers still physically exist. But my main point is what is the relevance of posting the source of a post? When you are LOSING the debate do you always try to evade the issue and attack the person making the argument? "Don't like the message so shoot the messenger" eh? US security sources (I showed you ONE but there are loads and loads of them - unlike unproven claims of loads of WMD and Al Qaeda training camps) now say NO WMD in Iraq and no links to Al Qaeda. But you still seem to think there ARE WMD and there were links to Al Khyda and training camps in Iraq and WMD ready to launch DIRECTLY BEFORE invasion or even now. So where is your evidence to support YOUR CLAIM that WMD and Al Khyda training camps were in Iraq prior to invasion? Not media spin but ACTUAL EVIDENCE. The "Salman Pak was training Al Qaeda terrorists" claim is a JOKE! Quote
Guest Mavisbeacon Posted December 5, 2007 Posted December 5, 2007 "Sir Sam" <nite@cru.sade> wrote in message news:bp8cl31jcc7spchuk6104nnf98dfd6gvek@4ax.com... > On Wed, 05 Dec 2007 01:42:05 GMT, "Mavisbeacon" > <Mavisbeacon@nospam.forme> mumbled: > >> >>"Sir Sam" <nite@cru.sade> wrote in message >>news:ugtbl3pdg04j6nlssgriovr0hfmodsgra1@4ax.com... >>> On Tue, 4 Dec 2007 19:07:03 -0500, "abracadabra" <abra@hotmail.com> >>> mumbled: >>> >>>> >>>>"Sir Sam" <nite@cru.sade> wrote in message >>>>news:8bval3hpr9qr296ibobtt8ih7duhnr2af5@4ax.com... >>>>> On Tue, 04 Dec 2007 10:52:36 GMT, "Mavisbeacon" >>>>> <Mavisbeacon@nospam.forme> mumbled: >>>>> >>>>>>al quad were NOT in any way prevalent in Iraq under >>>>>>Saddam >>>>> >>>>> LIAR! >>>>> >>>>> http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/003/033jgqyi.asp >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>Weakly Standard is >>> >>> NO FACTUAL REBUTTAL! >> >>Here is factual rebuttal: >> >>In 2003 Jan 26 on page 11 of a Report entitled "CIA: Iraqi support for >>Terrorism" (which you can find referred to - ref 160- on page 64 of the >>following reference) "Saddam Hussain and Uasama Bin Liden are far from >>being natural partners" >> >> >> I use an official report to the US congress > > Politician spin, hardly the final say. YOU are the one who supplied OPINION and media spin! How is an official report which details all the evidence from the CIA FBI DIA NSA etc. a "spin"? It is an all party committee coming from all sides of the political spectrum and getting information of official sources and not opinion sources. Quote
Guest jim bronson Posted December 5, 2007 Posted December 5, 2007 On Wed, 05 Dec 2007 09:17:49 GMT, "Mavisbeacon" <Mavisbeacon@nospam.forme> mumbled: >I gave you a source from the OFFICIAL classified report to congress. Whop a dee fuck. Think "Congress" ever solved JFK's assassination? Quote
Guest jim bronson Posted December 5, 2007 Posted December 5, 2007 On Wed, 05 Dec 2007 09:40:03 GMT, "Mavisbeacon" <Mavisbeacon@nospam.forme> mumbled: >The CIA report IS based on everything they know AFTER the invasion! Ah...so hindsight allows revision, great.... Quote
Guest jim bronson Posted December 5, 2007 Posted December 5, 2007 On Wed, 05 Dec 2007 09:40:03 GMT, "Mavisbeacon" <Mavisbeacon@nospam.forme> mumbled: >ANY known evidence is raised supplied and >analysed. Like say: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/2712903.stm A court in the German city of Mannheim has convicted two businessmen of supplying weapons-making equipment to Iraq in violation of UN sanctions. Engineer Bernd Schompeter was sentenced to five years and three months for dealing in drills that can be used for boring tubes for long-range cannons, capable of launching nuclear, chemical or biological warheads. A second defendant, Willi Heinz Ribbeck, was given a two-year suspended sentence for failing to alert his superiors to the sale of the drills to Mr Schompeter by his Burgsmueller machine company. Both defendants, who are in their 50s, have confessed to the main charge of supplying the equipment. Quote
Guest jim bronson Posted December 5, 2007 Posted December 5, 2007 On Wed, 05 Dec 2007 09:40:03 GMT, "Mavisbeacon" <Mavisbeacon@nospam.forme> mumbled: >> The enemy of my enemy...etc... > >That logic might apply to Georges Bush Jr and Snr. and Regan. Maybe even to >Clinton. But not to Saddam Oh do tell.... He had no axe to grind with the US???? http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewNation.asp?Page=%5CNation%5Carchive%5C200410%5CNAT20041011a.html CNSNews.com) - When CNSNews.com published an article Monday, Oct. 4, entitled, "Exclusive: Saddam Possessed WMD, Had Extensive Terror Ties," we decided against publishing all 42 pages of the Iraqi intelligence documents in our possession and on which the article was based. We published only the first page, fearing that if more were made widely available on the Internet, they might end up being altered or otherwise manipulated. We offered credentialed news organizations and counter-terrorism experts the opportunity to view and receive copies of the documents so that they might check for themselves on the authenticity of the documents and judge their importance in the debate over whether Saddam Hussein possessed weapons of mass destruction and/or had ties to international terrorist organizations. Several news organizations did just that. But in light of other assertions on Wednesday, widely reported by the mainstream media, that Saddam did not pose any significant threat prior to the U.S. invasion of Iraq, we felt it was time to publish as many of the Iraqi intelligence documents as possible. What follows are copies of 30 of the 42 pages that are in our possession. Pages 29 through 40 were excluded because they replicate, though in a different person's handwriting, earlier documents. Upon clicking on the individual pages of Arabic documents, readers will have an opportunity to click on the unedited English translation of those documents. We hope this serves to further illuminate a very important element of the ongoing debate. Page 1: Jan. 18, 1993 memo from Saddam Hussein, through his secretary, to the Iraqi Intelligence Service, urging that missions be undertaken to "hunt down Americans," especially in Somalia. Pages 2-12: Jan. 25, 1993 memo from the Iraqi Intelligence Service to Saddam Hussein, outlining the existing or developing relationships between Iraq and terrorist organizations. Page 2 Page 3 Page 4 Page 5 Page 6 Page 7 Page 8 Page 9 Page 10 Page 11 Page 12 Page 13: Feb. 8, 1993 response from Saddam Hussein to the Jan. 25, 1993 memo. Pages 14, 15: March 11, 1993 memo from the Iraqi Intelligence Service detailing plans for a meeting with "one of the leaders from the Egyptian Al-Jehad" terrorist organization. Page 14 Page 15 Page 16: March 16, 1993 response from Saddam's secretary to the March 11, 1993 memo. Pages 17, 18: March 18, 1993 memo from the Iraqi Intelligence Service detailing plans to "move against the Egyptian regime" of Hosni Mubarak. Page 17 Page 18 Pages 19-20: Iraqi Intelligence Service internal memos regarding the information of individuals who participated at "the martyr act camp" belonging to the Iraqi intelligence directorate. Page 19 Page 20 Pages 21-26: They comprise a list of terrorists trained at a camp belonging to the Iraqi Intelligence Directorate. Page 21 Page 22 Page 23 Page 24 Page 25 Page 26 Pages 27, 28: Notes from the Iraqi Intelligence Service outlining strategies. Included is the assessment that terrorist "efforts should be concentrated on Egypt." The notes also advise against targeting the U.S. military, but recommend targeting "Americans as general" as well as "US agents inside the (Egyptian) regime." Page 27 Page 28 Page 29-40: Duplicative of pages 2-12, except in a different person's handwriting. Page 41: Table indicating Sept. 6, 2000 acquisition of malignant pustule (anthrax) as well as sterilization/decontamination equipment. Page 42: Table indicating Aug. 21, 2000 acquisition of mustard gas as well as protective equipment. http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Read.aspx?GUID={EACB624F-680F-4296-9D12-49C458BF38C1} When a military man Quote
Guest jim bronson Posted December 5, 2007 Posted December 5, 2007 On Wed, 05 Dec 2007 09:44:17 GMT, "Mavisbeacon" <Mavisbeacon@nospam.forme> mumbled: >It ISN'T politicians! It is the CIA FBI Homeland security NSA DIA ALL >reporting to congress! Who are Congress? Who hires, fires, and appoints to Govt. agencies? Quote
Guest jim bronson Posted December 5, 2007 Posted December 5, 2007 On Wed, 05 Dec 2007 10:03:14 GMT, "Mavisbeacon" <Mavisbeacon@nospam.forme> mumbled: >what is the relevance of posting the source of a post? What does some offshore Mick have to do with any expertiseon US affairs of state? Quote
Guest jim bronson Posted December 5, 2007 Posted December 5, 2007 On Wed, 05 Dec 2007 10:03:14 GMT, "Mavisbeacon" <Mavisbeacon@nospam.forme> mumbled: >The "Salman Pak was training Al Qaeda terrorists" claim is a >JOKE! So that fuselage must be a "joke" too, eh? Quote
Guest jim bronson Posted December 5, 2007 Posted December 5, 2007 On Wed, 05 Dec 2007 09:44:17 GMT, "Mavisbeacon" <Mavisbeacon@nospam.forme> mumbled: >http://intelligence.senate.gov/phaseiiaccuracy.pdf >It ISN'T politicians! It is the CIA FBI Homeland security NSA DIA ALL >reporting to congress! Did you bother to note how much was BLACKED out???? My gawd, you're a fool of the forst order! Quote
Guest Don Homuth Posted December 5, 2007 Posted December 5, 2007 On Wed, 05 Dec 2007 04:07:10 GMT, Sir Sam <nite@cru.sade> wrote: >On Wed, 05 Dec 2007 01:30:20 GMT, "Mavisbeacon" ><Mavisbeacon@nospam.forme> mumbled: > >>Read the actual report by the CIA. > >Read what they found AFTER the invasion - fool. No WMDs. No Terrist training camps. No nuclear weapons program. No facilities to make or store CWs or BWs. No indication of an operational connection between ObL and Iraq at any level. Nothing. Quote
Guest jim bronson Posted December 5, 2007 Posted December 5, 2007 On Wed, 05 Dec 2007 09:28:51 -0800, Don Homuth <dhomuthoneatcomcast.net@> mumbled: >On Wed, 05 Dec 2007 04:07:10 GMT, Sir Sam <nite@cru.sade> wrote: > >>On Wed, 05 Dec 2007 01:30:20 GMT, "Mavisbeacon" >><Mavisbeacon@nospam.forme> mumbled: >> > >>>Read the actual report by the CIA. >> >>Read what they found AFTER the invasion - fool. >No WMDs. LIAR! http://butlerblog.com/2005/08/30/how-many-nuclear-weapons-can-you-make-from-500-tons-of-yellow-cake/ The Tuwaitha site was heavily bombed during the Quote
Guest Mavisbeacon Posted December 5, 2007 Posted December 5, 2007 "jim bronson" <then@came.nbc> wrote in message news:fuidl3hlmucbjgbj8ddhtegjrut0laq56o@4ax.com... > On Wed, 05 Dec 2007 09:17:49 GMT, "Mavisbeacon" > <Mavisbeacon@nospam.forme> mumbled: > >>I gave you a source from the OFFICIAL classified report to congress. > > Whop a dee fuck. > > Think "Congress" ever solved JFK's assassination? You are changing the context. Lee Harvey Oswald was not in the fourth largest Army in the World. Oswald did not have thousands of UN inspectors spend over a decade going all over his house BEFORE the assassination of JFK or after it! You MIGHT have a case in the case of 9/11 and whether Osama was involved in it. But you certainly DON'T have a case in the case of Iraq having WMD or links to Al Qaeda training camps. It seems like when you don't like the message you try to shoot the messenger. WHAT do you find id WRONG about the report from the CIA , FBI, NSA etc.? What BETTER sources do you have which show counter evidence and which show Al Qaeda training camps or WMD in Iraq? I'll bet you don't have ANY! And don't forget this comes with a backdrop of the US Administration claiming loads and loads of WMD ready to launch at the West in minutes! They even stated they KNEW WHERE the WMD were! Quote
Guest Mavisbeacon Posted December 5, 2007 Posted December 5, 2007 "jim bronson" <then@came.nbc> wrote in message news:ocjdl3h0t9gsjogt9c3r2nrkad2ap4as36@4ax.com... > On Wed, 05 Dec 2007 10:03:14 GMT, "Mavisbeacon" > <Mavisbeacon@nospam.forme> mumbled: > >>The "Salman Pak was training Al Qaeda terrorists" claim is a >>JOKE! > > So that fuselage must be a "joke" too, eh? I don't deny there was a facility at Salman Pak. If you want to train terrorists you train them to hijack planes and NOT how to get into grounded planes! for that you only need the INSIDE of a plane. You use planes on the ground to train COUNTER TERRORISTS! The Salman Pak claims had been soundly debunked. I only gave you the CIA FBI NSA and other securoty sources view on it. Indeed since the invasion a fby now famous bloger was called "Salman PAX" which was a joke on the debunked so called "Al Qaeda training camp". Al Qaeda were not welcome by Saddam in Iraq let alone trained by his people! Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.