On the contrary, the al qaeda subsidiary Ansar al-Islam operated openly in Northern Iraq. 6 Legislative Days Left Until The AWB Expires
Posted on 07/22/2004 10:20:50 PM PDT by FairOpinion
I don't understand why the Republicans allow the deliberate disinformation spread by the Dems, that there was no connection between Iraq and terrorism, stand.
I will be going through the various reports - Senate intel, 911, and butler - as well as hayes sources, to glean a summation.
It looks like some of Hayes speculative possibilities didnt/dont pan out BUT the main point - that there are dozens of Links and connections - DID SHOW UP in other reports.
In particular Zawahiri visit to baghdad in 1992, and Iraqi intelligence meetings in 1998 with Bin Laden.
So ... the truth is out there.
Keep me pinged and/or dont hesitate to comment on the liberating Iraq blog:
http://freedomstruth.blogspot.com
I have a blog article on "the connection" btw.
ping for ref.
Saddam was probably very allergic to a "close" relationship with Al Qaeda. This doesn't mean he didn't work with them, and intend to work them in the future.
Saddam was a control freak. Probably one reason why Al Qaeda chose Afghanistan rather than Iraq for their base of operations. In Iraq, Saddam would've taken active part in designating targets and organizing their operations.
But there is no doubt that Saddam wouldn't have minded and probably was in the process of setting up an interface between his covert operations and Al Qaeda's. Naturally, to assist them in strikes against mutual enemies. A relationship, which would have eventually led to Al Qaeda having an oil producing nation's wealth and sovereign borders in which to hide weapons training and programs.
On the contrary, the al qaeda subsidiary Ansar al-Islam operated openly in Northern Iraq. 6 Legislative Days Left Until The AWB Expires
http://freedomstruth.blogspot.com
Your blog is EXCELLENT!!!
I wish editorials in newspapers would at least be a pale imitation of you superb essay. You really summed it up:
"The real diagnosis is to blame the terrorists for the conditions of terrorism. The real solution is not to feed the monster, but to find and kill the terrorists. "
another for the list.
ASAFP, por favor.
It's quite simple actually, When your opponent has reached rock bottom and showing no signs of ending the digging, don't interrupt him.
All these lies are easily debunked, do you really think the Bush team doesn't plan to use all these lies in Ads in the final 105 days?
John Kerry has provided a treasure trove of flip flops since he announced his candidacy for POTUS. John Kerry says he supports our Troops, yet he has never been to Iraq or Afghanistan, nor has he visited a single wounded soldier since 9/11. He says he believes life begins at conception while in the Bible Belt, yet in todays interview with Peter Jennings, he said just the opposite, he said life begins when the baby is viable.
The Bush team doesn't need to do much but let John Kerry answer questions in front of different crowds, Kerry is his own worse enemy.
Thanks, Jet.
In the section "Link to Terrorists", the Senate Intel report covers Iraq links to terrorists in general and especially Al Qaeda -- 66 pages worth -- showing that Iraq trained them in chemical, biological, NUCLEAR, and bomb making from "1990 to present".
In addition, the report also covers Iraq having 100s of terrorist training camps for home grown Iraqi terrorist from "1996 to present" specifically dedicated to training to hit US and US interests.
As far as I'm concerned, no additional activity by Saddam -- than what this report validates -- is required in to make a valid case that Saddam was a clear and undeniable threat to the US!
For your excellent work....
bump
Thanks!!!
"Iraq war: We did the Right Thing"
A future article I'll be writing.
"
http://freedomstruth.blogspot.com
Your blog is EXCELLENT!!! "
My sincere thanks for your praise. That'll keep me 'blogging'. Please spread the word on it.
I hope your right.
in 1992, Clinton had so many openings and Bush 41 did nothing.
Bush 43 has run tight focussed campaigns that dont emphasize the negative. that worked for him in 94 98 2000... I dont know if he will go after Kerry hammer and tong... and I am not sure that is the right strategy.
The dilemma is we need a 'positive' electorate to vote the incumbent, but we also need to tell people how bad kerry is of the mushy middle will go for him over the 'warmonger' Bush.
we need to remind people how relieved they felt when they realized Bush was there instead of Gore on 9/11.
we need to refute the lies about the iraq war (we did the right thing), and build the positive case on the economy.
We have had a pant-load of anti-Bush lies dumped in the public discourse.
We need to be aggressive in stopping that and turning it around.
bump
^
Bookmarked, and already sent along to the leftist I've been sparring with via e-mail. :o)
These pesky facts do so interfere with their argumentation.........
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.