Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Facts of War: Yes, there were connections between Saddam Hussein and the 9/11 bad guys. (GREAT ONE)
The National Review ^ | November 18, 2005 | Mark Levin

Posted on 11/19/2005 12:55:30 PM PST by new yorker 77

What is this baloney that there were no connections between Iraq and Osama bin Laden? Even the 9/11 Commission Report, which I believe is lacking in many respects, includes some useful findings all but ignored today by the media and war critics. Consider the following excerpts:

Page 61:

Bin Ladin was also willing to explore possibilities for cooperation with Iraq, even though Iraq's dictator, Saddam Hussein, had never had an Islamist agenda — save for his opportunistic pose as a defender of the faithful against 'Crusaders' during the Gulf War of 1991. Moreover, Bin Ladin had in fact been sponsoring anti-Saddam Islamists in Iraqi Kurdistan, and sought to attract them into his Islamic army.

To protect his own ties with Iraq, [Sudan's Islamic leader] Turabi, reportedly brokered an agreement that Bin Ladin would stop supporting activities against Saddam. Bin Ladin apparently honored this pledge, at least for a time, although he continued to aid a group of Islamist extremist operating in part of Iraq (Kurdistan) outside of Baghdad's control. In the late 1990s, these extremist groups suffered major defeats by Kurdish forces. In 2001, with Bin Ladin's help they re-formed into an organization called Ansar al Islam. There are indications that by then the Iraqi regime tolerated and may even have helped Ansar al Islam against the common Kurdish enemy.

With the Sudanese regime acting as intermediary, Bin Ladin himself met with a senior Iraqi intelligence officer in Khartoum in late 1994 or early 1995. Bin Ladin is said to have asked for space to establish training camps, as well as assistance in procuring weapons, but there is no evidence that Iraq responded to his request. ... [T]he ensuing years saw additional efforts to establish common connections.

Page 66:

... In March 1998, after Bin Ladin's public fatwa against the United States, two al Qaeda members reportedly went to Iraq to meet with Iraqi intelligence. In July, an Iraqi delegation traveled to Afghanistan to meet first with the Taliban and then with Bin Ladin. Sources reported that one, or perhaps both, of these meetings was apparently arranged through Bin Ladin's Egyptian deputy, Zawahiri, who had ties of his own to the Iraqis. In 1998, Iraq was under intensifying U.S. pressure, which culminated in a series of large are attacks in December.

Similar meetings between Iraqi officials and Bin Ladin or his aides may have occured in 1999 during a period of some reported strains with the Taliban. According to the reporting, Iraqi officials offered Bin Ladin a safe haven in Iraq. Bin Ladin declined, apparently judging that his circumstances in Afghanistan remained more favorable than the Iraqi alternative. The reports describe friendly contacts and indicate some common themes in both sides' hatred of the United States. ...

The report goes on to say that no evidence was unearthed of a "collaborative operational relationship" or Iraqi cooperation in the 9/11 attacks. However, the existence of bin Ladin/al Qaeda and Saddam Hussein/Iraq connections, over a number of years, is indisputable.

Given this fact, and that both the president and Congress were informed by numerous intelligence officials and agencies that Saddam Hussein was pursuing weapons of mass destruction, it is simply a falsehood to claim that Iraq did not pose a national-security risk to the United States, or that there were no serious connections between Iraq and al Qaeda — connections which could develop further if Iraq had not been attacked.

Here's what Congress itself said in October 2002 in passing a joint resolution justifying and authorizing war against Iraq:

Whereas Iraq both poses a continuing threat to the national security of the United States and international peace and security in the Persian Gulf region and remains in material and unacceptable breach of its international obligations by, among other things, continuing to possess and develop a significant chemical and biological weapons capability, actively seeking a nuclear weapons capability, and supporting and harboring terrorist organizations;

Whereas the current Iraqi regime has demonstrated its capability and willingness to use weapons of mass destruction against other nations and its own people; Whereas members of al Qaida, an organization bearing responsibility for attacks on the United States, its citizens, and interests, including the attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, are known to be in Iraq;

Whereas Iraq continues to aid and harbor other international terrorist organizations, including organizations that threaten the lives and safety of United States citizens;

Whereas the attacks on the United States of September 11, 2001, underscored the gravity of the threat posed by the acquisition of weapons of mass destruction by international terrorist organizations;

Whereas Iraq's demonstrated capability and willingness to use weapons of mass destruction, the risk that the current Iraqi regime will either employ those weapons to launch a surprise attack against the United States or its Armed Forces or provide them to international terrorists who would do so, and the extreme magnitude of harm that would result to the United States and its citizens from such an attack, combine to justify action by the United States to defend itself; ...

Did Iraq pose a serious threat to our national security? Yes. Did Congress believe Iraq posed a serious threat? Yes. Did Iraq have or seek to obtain weapons of mass destruction? Yes. Those are the facts.

— Mark R. Levin is author of the best-selling Men In Black, president of Landmark Legal Foundation, and a radio talk-show host on WABC in New York.


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Foreign Affairs; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: alqaedaandiraq; bushlied; bushliedfacts; marklevin
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-76 next last

1 posted on 11/19/2005 12:55:32 PM PST by new yorker 77
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: new yorker 77

Kudos to the Great One


2 posted on 11/19/2005 12:58:20 PM PST by oneofmany (Tolerance is the virtue of a man with no convictions - G.K. Chesterton(The Apostle of Common Sense)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: oneofmany

BUMP!


3 posted on 11/19/2005 1:01:16 PM PST by Publius6961 (The IQ of California voters is about 420........... .............cumulatively)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: new yorker 77
When the Left deliberately ignores the facts and much of the public and press, foreign and domestic, buys the lies, they take hold. What can be done about the liars on the left and the ignorant and disloyal swayed by their lies?
4 posted on 11/19/2005 1:03:07 PM PST by luvbach1 (Near the belly of the beast in San Diego)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: new yorker 77
What is this baloney that there were no connections between Iraq and Osama bin Laden?

LOL. I can just hear him saying this.

5 posted on 11/19/2005 1:12:29 PM PST by Bahbah (Free Scooter; Tony Schaffer for the US Senate)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: new yorker 77

It sounds like the media, etc are trying to pull a Vietnam over our eyes. Make the war unpopular; etc.


6 posted on 11/19/2005 1:14:50 PM PST by freekitty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: new yorker 77

I know I'm in the minority of Freepers on this one...but we need o let the Iraq/ 9/11 thing go. Even if there were copntacts and some cooperation that doesn't justify the scale of our response in Iraq and y'all are simply preachingto the choir.

We need to focus the reality that we are there now, the consequences of leaving early, the humanitarian good that we have done, what a bad guy Saddam was and our plan to leave Iraq with a stable friendly democracy. That is the way to get the support we need to finish the job - and to not lose the house and senate in the process.


7 posted on 11/19/2005 1:17:15 PM PST by gondramB
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 68-69TonkinGulfYachtClub; Jeff Head; Laurita; CMS; The Sailor; txradioguy; Jet Jaguar; Defender2; ..

Great read!


8 posted on 11/19/2005 1:18:43 PM PST by Issaquahking
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: backhoe

bump to someone with a catalog of Iraq/Al Queda connections.


9 posted on 11/19/2005 1:20:34 PM PST by TigersEye ("Someone has to be right." said the joker. "Me, me, me..." said the thief, as the watchtower fell.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: St.Chuck

No ties, right?


10 posted on 11/19/2005 1:20:50 PM PST by Darksheare (I'm not suspicious & I hope it's nutritious but I think this sandwich is made of mime.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: luvbach1

I'd suggest that we continue along the lines that the House used Friday by treating them like a puppy that messed on the floor: grab 'em by the nap of the neck, rub their noses in their own **** and throw 'em out in the cold.

(Pelosi DOES remind me a lot of a yappy little ankle biter that hasn't been house trained yet........)


11 posted on 11/19/2005 1:21:43 PM PST by Unrepentant VN Vet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Unrepentant VN Vet

We need to fight for our young brave soldiers.

They will fight the enemy abroad.

We will fight the enemy within.

Plus, boycott the biased MSM.


12 posted on 11/19/2005 1:25:04 PM PST by new yorker 77 (FAKE POLLS DO NOT TRANSLATE INTO REAL VOTERS!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Unrepentant VN Vet

"I'd suggest that we continue along the lines that the House used Friday by treating them like a puppy that messed on the floor: grab 'em by the nap of the neck, rub their noses in their own **** and throw 'em out in the cold."

The Republicans got lucky with that stunt - the democrats fell for it hook, line and sinker. But you can't always count on stupidity in response- they might have been smarter and said "of we can't withdraw -we are in quagmire" and they wouldn't have looked like petulent crybabbies.


13 posted on 11/19/2005 1:25:58 PM PST by gondramB
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: gondramB
You make a good point but it shouldn't be forgotten that 9/11 and Al Queda were hardly the centerpiece for the administrations case for war. Nor were WMDs. It is simply leftist/MSM myth that the President made those things the most important.

It is not good to simply forget the past and ignore the intentional deceptions being made about it. The aim of these deceptions is to cause division not find a solution.

14 posted on 11/19/2005 1:27:31 PM PST by TigersEye ("Someone has to be right." said the joker. "Me, me, me..." said the thief, as the watchtower fell.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Unrepentant VN Vet

Welcome Home Brother


15 posted on 11/19/2005 1:27:51 PM PST by 68-69TonkinGulfYachtClub (Be wary of FReepers who preach and howl : Get over it Tonk. Move On! mmmm Move On as in Fat Boy?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: gondramB

I disagree with you.

Your solution of "just let Iraq/9/11thingy go" still leaves all those the CommiCrats brainwashed believing all the lies about the President and VP inventing the story so as to go to war for oil.

The CommiCrats repeatd the lies till 1/2 the nation believed them so maybe if we keep throwing the truth at them we can convert them and show the CommiCrats up for what they are and save the country from being taken over completely by the Communists.


16 posted on 11/19/2005 1:29:07 PM PST by AmeriBrit (DEMOCRATS LIE AND OUR TROOPS DIE!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

later read


17 posted on 11/19/2005 1:30:39 PM PST by Mo1 (Message to Democrats .... We do not surrender and run from a fight !!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: gondramB

They seem to me to have been having public tantrums ever since 2000.

And as far as stupid...........well, why does the whole bunch act like they're still running against W? Somebody over at the DNC think they can turn back the clock if they keep banging their heads against the wall?


18 posted on 11/19/2005 1:31:17 PM PST by Unrepentant VN Vet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: new yorker 77

A wonderful society that Islam fosters, eh.


19 posted on 11/19/2005 1:32:33 PM PST by Fruitbat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: new yorker 77

Thanks for the reference material!


20 posted on 11/19/2005 1:33:00 PM PST by silverleaf (Fasten your seat belts- it's going to be a BUMPY ride.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: gondramB
Read Stephen Hayes book "The Connection" to see the full picture between Saddam and Al Queda. I assure you, you will be astounded!
21 posted on 11/19/2005 1:33:20 PM PST by Blind Eye Jones
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: freekitty
It sounds like the media, etc are trying to pull a Vietnam over our eyes. Make the war unpopular; etc.

Vietnam was a democrat led war.

This one is not.

22 posted on 11/19/2005 1:33:54 PM PST by concerned about politics ("Get thee behind me, Liberal.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: 68-69TonkinGulfYachtClub

Same to you, brother.

You ever spend any time at "beautiful" NAS Kingsville or Fallon before you went on the canoe ride?


23 posted on 11/19/2005 1:36:56 PM PST by Unrepentant VN Vet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: gondramB

If we had decided in 2003 to let it go, Al Qaeda would be mor epowerful, and Saddam would be sitting on WMD's or WMD capability. The combination is scary.


24 posted on 11/19/2005 1:43:43 PM PST by Zack Nguyen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: concerned about politics

Vietnam was a democrat led war.

This one is not.




More like a Democrat DIRECTED (sometimes at a squad level) war, as I recall.

Only problems were the same ones they've got now: insufficient balls OR intelligence to conduct a spitball fight and no committment to anything in the world but their next election campaign.


25 posted on 11/19/2005 1:44:01 PM PST by Unrepentant VN Vet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: new yorker 77

We need to fight for our young brave soldiers.

They will fight the enemy abroad.

We will fight the enemy within.

Plus, boycott the biased MSM.



First, Bravo Zulu on the article. (Geesh, I'm actually writing this to LEVIN?)

Second, per your instructions above............well, about the only use I've had for the MSM since 1968 is either a NEGATIVE barometer or packing material for my wife's crockery.


26 posted on 11/19/2005 1:54:48 PM PST by Unrepentant VN Vet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: freekitty

This has been their goal from the beginning!

They started during the thunder run into Baghdad - calling it a quagmire!


27 posted on 11/19/2005 1:57:19 PM PST by CyberAnt ( I believe Congressman Curt Weldon re Able Danger)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: All
 
CONNECTED

28 posted on 11/19/2005 1:58:11 PM PST by timpad (The Wizard Tim, Keeper of the Holy Hand Grenade, Finder of Obscurata)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Unrepentant VN Vet

An NEGAT on the MSM.


29 posted on 11/19/2005 2:11:39 PM PST by new yorker 77 (FAKE POLLS DO NOT TRANSLATE INTO REAL VOTERS!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: TigersEye

Thank you- I will add this to my links.


30 posted on 11/19/2005 3:05:07 PM PST by backhoe (The Silence of the Tom's ( Tired Old Media... ))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: freekitty
"It sounds like the media, etc are trying to pull a Vietnam over our eyes. Make the war unpopular; etc."

What do you mean "trying"? They did!

31 posted on 11/19/2005 3:09:17 PM PST by Sen Jack S. Fogbound
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Unrepentant VN Vet

"You ever spend any time at "beautiful" NAS Kingsville or Fallon before you went on the canoe ride?"

No I have not.


32 posted on 11/19/2005 3:11:32 PM PST by 68-69TonkinGulfYachtClub (Have you said Thank You to a service man or woman today?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: TigersEye
>>>>You make a good point but it shouldn't be forgotten that 9/11 and Al Queda were hardly the centerpiece for the administrations case for war. Nor were WMDs. It is simply leftist/MSM myth that the President made those things the most important.

You're right. The President didn't make 9-11 or Al Qaeda centerpieces for invading Iraq. But its no myth, WMD were the major reason behind PresBush ultimately ordering the invasion of Iraq, or as you say "the centerpiece" for war.

You need to go back and read the speeches Bush, Cheney and others gave prior to Operation Iraqi Freedom being undertaken. Example. More then half of Bush`s speech to the UN on September.12,2002 was aimed at Saddam Hussein and his WMD programs. A few snippets.

"In cells and camps, terrorists are plotting further destruction, and building new bases for their war against civilization. And our greatest fear is that terrorists will find a shortcut to their mad ambitions when an outlaw regime supplies them with the technologies to kill on a massive scale.
In one place -- in one regime -- we find all these dangers, in their most lethal and aggressive forms, exactly the kind of aggressive threat the United Nations was born to confront.
"... Saddam Hussein's regime is a grave and gathering danger.
"... Saddam Hussein has defied all these efforts and continues to develop weapons of mass destruction."

Here's another example.

"Our mission is clear in Iraq. Should we have to go in, our mission is very clear: disarmament."
--- PresBush, March.6,2003

I don't think the President could have been more clear. There were other reasons for invading Iraq. Saddam thumbing his nose at endless UN resolutions. Oppression of the Iraqi people. Keeping a free flow of oil from Iraq. Removing a haven for terrorists. But the WMD issue was the premier issue for Bush invading Iraq. As it turned out, WMD were found, just not in the quantities that were anticipated. Human Events recently gave this account of WMD found in Iraq.

• Found: 1.77 metric tons of enriched uranium

• Found: 1,500 gallons of chemical weapons

• Found: Roadside bomb loaded with sarin gas

• Found: 1,000 radioactive materials--ideal for radioactive dirty bombs

• Found: 17 chemical warheads--some containing cyclosarin, a nerve agent five times more powerful than sarin

33 posted on 11/19/2005 4:09:42 PM PST by Reagan Man (Secure our borders;punish employers who hire illegals;stop all welfare to illegals)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: freekitty

That's exactly what they're doing. It worked once.


34 posted on 11/19/2005 5:43:21 PM PST by Eagles6 (Dig deeper, more ammo.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: TigersEye
Here's a few cuts from PresBush`s last three speeches leading up to the start of the war in Iraq. WMD were the major reason for going to war with Saddam. Period.

"The dictator of Iraq and his weapons of mass destruction are a threat to the security of free nations. He is a danger to his neighbors. He's a sponsor of terrorism. He's an obstacle to progress in the Middle East. For decades he has been the cruel, cruel oppressor of the Iraq people."

--- PresBush 3-16-2003, Azores Portugal

"My fellow citizens, events in Iraq have now reached the final days of decision. For more than a decade, the United States and other nations have pursued patient and honorable efforts to disarm the Iraqi regime without war. That regime pledged to reveal and destroy all its weapons of mass destruction as a condition for ending the Persian Gulf War in 1991."

"The danger is clear: using chemical, biological or, one day, nuclear weapons, obtained with the help of Iraq, the terrorists could fulfill their stated ambitions and kill thousands or hundreds of thousands of innocent people in our country, or any other."

--- PresBush 3-17-2003, Address to the Nation

"My fellow citizens, at this hour, American and coalition forces are in the early stages of military operations to disarm Iraq, to free its people and to defend the world from grave danger."

--- PresBush 3-19-2003, Address to the Nation

35 posted on 11/19/2005 5:48:02 PM PST by Reagan Man (Secure our borders;punish employers who hire illegals;stop all welfare to illegals)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Darksheare
No ties, right?

Exactly. Mr. Levin's essay proves nothing. In fact, I am embarrassed for him. He takes the ambiguous language of the 9/11 Commission Report and creates a definitive conclusion that ignores the definitive and all important conclusion of the Report.

Read the excerpts carefully. You will find these kind of caveats are littered throughout: "reportedly, apparently, There are indications, may even, is said to have, may have occurred ,indicate." That is why the Report concludes that "We have no credible evidence that Iraq and al Qaeda cooperated on attacks against the United States." and that there was no evidence that a "collaborative operational relationship" existed between Al Quaida and Iraq.

Yet Mr. Levin claims that all these weasel words support his contention that there were "serious connections between Iraq and al Qaeda."

Did Iraq pose a serious threat to our national security? Yes. Did Congress believe Iraq posed a serious threat? Yes. Did Iraq have or seek to obtain weapons of mass destruction? Yes. Those are the facts.

Those are not the facts. We know that Iraq did not pose a serious imminent threat to our national security because Iraq did not have WMD's. It had no delivery system to attack the U.S. with WMD's even if it did have them. According to the Duelfer Report, all of Iraq's unconventional weapons programs were abandoned or had decayed after Desert Storm and sanctions were applied to Iraq. Congress was misinformed, as we now know, " We were wrong about almost everything" Mr. Duelfer told the Senate committee, echoing David Kay's findings. Mr. Levin ignores facts.

36 posted on 11/19/2005 6:46:05 PM PST by St.Chuck
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: St.Chuck

Riiiight.

Just like your statements in the other thread.

Thanks for confirming what you are.


37 posted on 11/19/2005 6:47:31 PM PST by Darksheare (I'm not suspicious & I hope it's nutritious but I think this sandwich is made of mime.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Reagan Man

"• Found: 1.77 metric tons of enriched uranium

• Found: 1,500 gallons of chemical weapons

• Found: Roadside bomb loaded with sarin gas

• Found: 1,000 radioactive materials--ideal for radioactive dirty bombs

• Found: 17 chemical warheads--some containing cyclosarin, a nerve agent five times more powerful than sarin"


Never found: the ability of most liberal Democrats to put the US ahead of petty, partisan, political gain.


38 posted on 11/19/2005 6:48:07 PM PST by SpinyNorman (The ACLU empowers terrorists and criminals, weakens America, and degrades our society.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: St.Chuck

You mean the Dems, like you, ignore facts.
Like Salman Pak terrorist training camp in Iraq, and how it was there BEFORE we went into Iraq?


39 posted on 11/19/2005 6:49:28 PM PST by Darksheare (I'm not suspicious & I hope it's nutritious but I think this sandwich is made of mime.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: gondramB
I know I'm in the minority of Freepers on this one...but we need o let the Iraq/ 9/11 thing go. Even if there were copntacts and some cooperation that doesn't justify the scale of our response in Iraq and y'all are simply preachingto the choir.

I agree. The more stridently and desperately conservatives defend the pretext for the war the more foolish we look.

We need to focus the reality that we are there now, the consequences of leaving early, the humanitarian good that we have done, what a bad guy Saddam was and our plan to leave Iraq with a stable friendly democracy. That is the way to get the support we need to finish the job - and to not lose the house and senate in the process.

Well said. The facts as they are now need to be dealt with, not the facts as they weren't then.

40 posted on 11/19/2005 6:52:14 PM PST by St.Chuck
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: St.Chuck

*cough cough*
http://www.foia.cia.gov/duelfer/Iraqs_WMD_Vol3.pdf

Link does work you liar.


41 posted on 11/19/2005 6:53:03 PM PST by Darksheare (I'm not suspicious & I hope it's nutritious but I think this sandwich is made of mime.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: St.Chuck

"I agree. The more stridently and desperately conservatives defend the pretext for the war the more foolish we look."

YOU are not a conservative, but a Dem operative as shown by your posts praising Joe Wilson, and your claims that Murtha never said "Immediate Withdraw" from Iraq.


42 posted on 11/19/2005 6:54:04 PM PST by Darksheare (I'm not suspicious & I hope it's nutritious but I think this sandwich is made of mime.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Darksheare

If Salman Pak was a terrorist camp it would be a house hold name. The defector that made the claims about its being used as a terrorist camp claimed that they had excercises where they landed on speeding trains in helicopters in order to hijack them. His credibility was deemed fanciful.


43 posted on 11/19/2005 6:55:36 PM PST by St.Chuck
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: St.Chuck; DocRock

"If Salman Pak was a terrorist camp it would be a house hold name."

Hey Doc, got those pics of Salman Pak terrorist training camp handy?

The LAME stream media sat on the story.
You see, the media doesn't want us to win, just like the DEMS don't want us to win.
Do you think they'd report on the fact that uranium was found in Irq?
Not in any appreciable manner.


44 posted on 11/19/2005 6:58:36 PM PST by Darksheare (I'm not suspicious & I hope it's nutritious but I think this sandwich is made of mime.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Darksheare

Frankly, I think my posts are over your head. If ad hominems and character assassination is all you can respond with I suggest you refrain from reading my posts.


45 posted on 11/19/2005 7:01:30 PM PST by St.Chuck
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: new yorker 77

Yeah but, but.. those are facts.


46 posted on 11/19/2005 7:02:27 PM PST by SeaBiscuit (God Bless all who defend America and Friends, the rest can go to hell.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: new yorker 77

After we were attacked by the cowards of 9/11, President Bush told the world:

IF YOU AID/ABET OUR ENEMIES,

YOU ARE THE ENEMY.

It was a fair warning. People seem to have forgotten his warning.


47 posted on 11/19/2005 7:04:21 PM PST by bannie (The government which robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend upon the support of Paul.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: St.Chuck

"Frankly, I think my posts are over your head."

All liberals think that.
And they're always wrong.

"If ad hominems and character assassination is all you can respond with I suggest you refrain from reading my posts."

If lying, your claim that the Duelfer report link didn't work, and spouting DNC talking points is all you have, you should refrain from being here as FR is not a liberal debating forum.
You are most definitely a Dem.


48 posted on 11/19/2005 7:11:15 PM PST by Darksheare (I'm not suspicious & I hope it's nutritious but I think this sandwich is made of mime.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: Darksheare
Didn't you hear? They found photographic proof that Salman Pak was never used to train al Qaida terrorists.

49 posted on 11/19/2005 7:38:07 PM PST by WhistlingPastTheGraveyard (David Corn's moment of near-clarity: http://www.laweekly.com/ink/02/50/news-corn.php)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: WhistlingPastTheGraveyard

LOL!!


50 posted on 11/19/2005 7:44:01 PM PST by Darksheare (I'm not suspicious & I hope it's nutritious but I think this sandwich is made of mime.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-76 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson