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

Skip to comments.

Qusay Hussein coordinated Iraq special operations with bin Laden's terrorist activities
YOSSEF BODANSKY - National Press Club

Posted on 07/24/2003 8:52:12 AM PDT by tallhappy

Now that Saddam's sons are dead, there is talk the "resistance" againts US troops should decrease.

This makes sense in that these two brothers most likely oversaw the cash to pay those attacking US troops. And it has killed their liason with al Qaeda, Qusay.

Back in 1999 Yossef Bodansky had this to say:

The other state that is rising up -- and I've elaborated a lot in the book about that -- is Iraq. Bin Laden has been dealing with Iraq intelligence since the early 1990s, where they cooperated in Sudan and in Somalia. This has been a love-hate relationship because of the Iraqi secular policies and Saddam Hussein's disdain for Islamism and even persecution of Iraqi Islamists, including veterans of Afghanistan. But in recent years, Hassan al-Turabi, the spiritual leader of Sudan and bin Laden's patron, if you want, spiritual patron, mediated a deal between Iraq and bin Laden that has since been cemented and became practical.

The important thing of the recent development that should be a cause of tremendous worry is that Saddam Hussein empowered his son, Qusay to deal with the day-to-day relationship with bin Laden and coordinate the Iraqi special operations with bin Laden's terrorist activities. Last week, Qusay Hussein has been elevated into the declared successor and had taken a tremendous amount of new powers, particularly in issues of national security, intelligence operations and the like. And that will of course elevate also the standing of bin Laden and the cooperation that they have been working on. And we should be very worried about that development.

Source is Federal News Service, AUGUST 6, 1999, FRIDAY, HEADLINE: PRESS CONFERENCE NATIONAL PRESS CLUB MORNING NEWSMAKER WITH YOSSEF BODANSKY, AUTHOR SUBJECT: INTERNATIONAL TERRORISM NATIONAL PRESS CLUB WASHINGTON, D.C.

How soon all the "guerilla attacks", as they are more and more being referred to as, continue will be reflected in how much Qusay and his also dead brother oversaw the coordination and payment for the attacks and whether or not they have anyone who was a top aide to them who can or will take over.

Dems have been loving the "guerilla attacks". Flashbacks of their perceived past glory -- Vietnam -- dance in their heads.

They ignore or downplay any relation or coordination of the Hussein regime with al Qaeda or terrorist groups. They will most likely be disapointed by the decrease in attacks on our troops in the same way the CA legislators were overheard discussing how a crisis in the state would benefit them politically.

Yet it was under the Clinton administration that the info about Iraq and al Qaeda came forth near the end of 1998, early 1999.

It came in wake of the visit of Farouk Hijazi, Iraq's Ambassador to Turkey at the time, to bin Laden in Afghanistan.


TOPICS: Foreign Affairs; Front Page News; News/Current Events; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: alaqeda; alqaedaandiraq; binladen; hussein; iraq; qusay; war
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-53 next last
References in liberal media to Iraq/Saddam links to al Qaeda/bin Laden

Guardian, 2/6/1999 , Julian Borger, Saddam link to Bin Laden

Guardian, 2/6/99, Julian Borger and Ian Black, The Western nightmare: Saddam and Bin Laden versus the world

Newsweek, January 11, 1999, SECTION: INTERNATIONAL; Pg. 34, Saddam + Bin Laden?, CHRISTOPHER DICKEY, GREGORY L. VISTICA AND RUSSELL WATSON With JOSEPH CONTRERAS

1 posted on 07/24/2003 8:52:12 AM PDT by tallhappy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: tallhappy
"Dems have been loving the "guerilla attacks". Flashbacks of their perceived past glory -- Vietnam -- dance in their heads. "

So sick and sad that a statement like this rings, in part, with the truth....

2 posted on 07/24/2003 8:57:53 AM PDT by eureka! (Rats and Presstitutes lie--they have to in order to survive.....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tallhappy
Send the links to CNN and all the other alphabet networks; they don't seem to believe there was any linkage.
3 posted on 07/24/2003 8:59:05 AM PDT by Peach
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: traditionalist
Not exactly a cheerful, happy society just bursting with love for us.
4 posted on 07/24/2003 9:02:28 AM PDT by liberallarry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: liberallarry
Not exactly a cheerful, happy society just bursting with love for us.

I agree.

Or weren't you talking about the Dems?

5 posted on 07/24/2003 9:10:47 AM PDT by niteowl77 (When self-congratulatory schadenfreude becomes aiding and abetting the enemy, it's time to shut up.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: liberallarry
I guess that you missed the remarks by Christopher Hitchens that the reports of Iraqi opposition to US forces was a figment of the imagination of the liberal press. He just returned from Mosul yesterday morning and said that the troop moral couldn't be better and that everywhere he went he saw people on street corners waving American flags at the troops.
6 posted on 07/24/2003 9:13:40 AM PDT by Eva
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: tallhappy
YOSSEF BODANSKY - National Press Club

Well, I guess we can't blame the "National Press Club"...when they bury their
heads in the sand about INTERNATIONAL affairs.

Worthless pukes...
7 posted on 07/24/2003 9:18:12 AM PDT by VOA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: liberallarry
Not exactly a cheerful, happy society just bursting with love for us.

Love is relative.
Most of them hated Uday and Quasy a lot more than Coalition troops.

Hence the riotous gunfire in Baghdad as soon as they were getting news via
their satellite TV about Uday/Quasy having been ventilated.

Stay tuned for the next 60 days...the power/water problems should be taken care
of by then and the new Iraqi militia should be joining the Coalition patrols.

It's a dicey situation...but not yet as Vietnam.
As much as about 95% of the press (the Democratic/Leftist journalists)
are each angling for a Pulitzer Prize for being the first to document the
Middle East Vietnam.
8 posted on 07/24/2003 9:22:30 AM PDT by VOA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: tallhappy

9 posted on 07/24/2003 10:10:13 AM PDT by Tamzee (Peace is the prerogative of the victorious, not the vanquished.... Churchill)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tallhappy
Just a heads-up: Yossef Bodansky has also written a book stating quite unequivocally that al-Qaeda has been in bed with the KLA and their various incarnations in Albania. Despite the fact that we continue to protect these jokers.
10 posted on 07/24/2003 10:11:36 AM PDT by inquest (We are NOT the world)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tallhappy
No there is no connection between these Middle Eastern gentlemen. /sarcasm
11 posted on 07/24/2003 10:14:54 AM PDT by bmwcyle (Here's to Hillary's book sinking like the Clinton 2000 economy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tallhappy
FYI...while the Prague meeting has been refuted by some officials, people seem to forget that Farouk Hijazi, an Iraqi intelligence officer met with bin Laden in Kandahar in Dec 1998.

Also forgotten is that in 1998, two of bin Laden’s senior military commanders, Muhammad Abu-Islam and Abdullah Qassim, visited Baghdad for discussions with Qusay Hussein. This and info on other meetings can be found here.

Also in 1998, an Arab intelligence officer, who knows Saddam personally, predicted in Newsweek: "Very soon you will be witnessing large-scale terrorist activity run by the Iraqis." The Arab official said these terror operations would be run under "false flags" --spook-speak for front groups--including bin Laden's organization.

Then there were the predictions by an Iraqi with ties to Iraqi intelligence, Naeem Abd Mulhalhal, in Qusay's own newspaper several weeks before the attacks that stated bin Laden would “demolish the Pentagon after he destroys the White House and ”bin Laden would strike America “on the arm that is already hurting.” (referencing a second IRAQI sponsored attack on the World Trade Center). Another reference to New York was “[bin Laden] will curse the memory of Frank Sinatra everytime he hears his songs.” (e.g., “New York, New York”) which identified New York, New York as a target. Mulhalhal also stated, “The wings of a dove and the bullet are all but one and the same in the heart of a believer." which references an airplane attack.

The Arabic language daily newspaper Al-Quds Al-Arabic also cited the cooperation between Iraq, bin Laden and Al December 1998 editorial, which predicted that “President Saddam Hussein, whose country was subjected to a four day air strike, will look for support in taking revenge on the United States and Britain by cooperating with Saudi oppositionist Osama Bin-Laden, whom the United States considers to be the most wanted person in the world.” This info is in the link provided in the para above. How could these people have had foreknowledge without Iraq being involved?

There are just too many things that point to Iraqi involvement, even without the refuted evidence.

12 posted on 07/24/2003 10:25:40 AM PDT by ravingnutter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: VOA; Eva; edskid; traditionalist
Sorry guys. My post was directed at traditionalist who, on an earlier thread, seemed to think that because Iraqis weren't participants in 911 they weren't part of a larger frustrated, angry, violent Arab/Muslim culture which directed a large part of its resentment toward us.

Many of them cheered on 912.

It's a dicey situation...

We knew that going in ... but I believe we had, and have, no choice. We must force a radical change in Arab/Muslim culture or face the prospect of endless 911s.

13 posted on 07/24/2003 10:33:02 AM PDT by liberallarry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Eva
I did miss that. What's the URL? He's one of those guys whose opinions I trust.
14 posted on 07/24/2003 10:35:26 AM PDT by liberallarry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: liberallarry
Hitchens: Morale is very high, both among troops and average citizens .
15 posted on 07/24/2003 10:44:38 AM PDT by Eva
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: liberallarry
My post was directed at traditionalist who, on an earlier thread, seemed to think that because Iraqis weren't participants in 911 they weren't part of a larger frustrated, angry, violent Arab/Muslim culture which directed a large part of its resentment toward us.

Arab culture is not monolithic. Iraqis are different from Sauids, are different from Jordanians, are different from Egyptians, are different from Palestinians.

From everything I have seen and read, Iraqis are considerably less resentful of the West than are other Arabs, such as Saudis, Egyptians, and Palestinians.

Your post was the first report I've seen of Iraqis cheering on 9-12. Do you have anything with which to back that up?

16 posted on 07/24/2003 11:00:18 AM PDT by traditionalist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: traditionalist
Arab culture is not monolithic. Iraqis are different from Sauids, are different from Jordanians, are different from Egyptians, are different from Palestinians.

Obviously true. There are also significant differences within the groups you mention. They wouldn't be human if that weren't so.

From everything I have seen and read, Iraqis are considerably less resentful of the West than are other Arabs, such as Saudis, Egyptians, and Palestinians.

That's also probably true...although not of Ba'athists and their supporters - the very people who so brutally ran the country until recently. I wonder if that had anything to do with our choice of targets?

Your post was the first report I've seen of Iraqis cheering on 9-12. Do you have anything with which to back that up?

Many people throughout the Arab world (and elsewhere, including the United States) cheered. I'll see if I can find a specific reference to Iraq.

17 posted on 07/24/2003 11:31:06 AM PDT by liberallarry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: inquest
Just a heads-up: Yossef Bodansky has also written a book stating quite unequivocally that al-Qaeda has been in bed with the KLA and their various incarnations in Albania. Despite the fact that we continue to protect these jokers.

Yes. And around the time of the articles I am citing there was apparently a State Department report on al Qaeda ties to terrorism in Chechnya which also included the connection with Iraq.

I say apparently because it was mentioned in articles I read, but I have not found the report.

Around the same time Janet Reno was testifying to congress about the potential for terrorists to use anthrax or other WMD and that was associated with this information.

It is amazing how forgotten it is that the Clinton administration presented information that today the dems say doesn't exist or wasn't a realistic concern.

18 posted on 07/24/2003 11:31:09 AM PDT by tallhappy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: ravingnutter
Here is another article citing a Clinton official claiming ties between Iraq and bin Laden

___

This is G o o g l e's cache of http://www.theherald.co.uk/news/archive/28-12-1999-23-33-25.html.
G o o g l e's cache is the snapshot that we took of the page as we crawled the web.
The page may have changed since that time. Click here for the current page without highlighting.
To link to or bookmark this page, use the following url: http://www.google.com/search?q=cache:MgdvgyKTHKoJ:www.theherald.co.uk/news/archive/28-12-1999-23-33-25.html+chechnya+bin+laden+state+department+iraq&hl=en&ie=UTF-8


Google is not affiliated with the authors of this page nor responsible for its content.
These search terms have been highlighted:  chechnya  bin  laden  state  department  iraq 


Iraq tempts bin Laden to attack West

IAN BRUCE

The world's most wanted man, Osama bin Laden, has been offered sanctuary in Iraq if his worldwide terrorist network succeeds in carrying out a campaign of high-profile attacks on the West over the next few weeks.

Intelligence sources say the Saudi dissident believed responsible for the bombings of American embassies in Kenya and Tanzania and a US military barracks in Saudi Arabia in 1998, is running out of options for a safe haven.

He is now thought to have overcome his initial rejection of Saddam Hussein, whom he regarded as an exploiter of the Islamic cause rather than a true believer, and is considering the offer of a bolt-hole from which he can continue to mastermind terrorism on a global scale.

A US counter-terrorist source said yesterday: "Our State Department issued a worldwide warning on December 11. We have solid information that many of the groups operating under bin Laden's patronage are planning 'spectaculars' to coincide with the period leading up to and through the millennium celebrations.

"They want to inflict maximum loss of life in return for publicity. Now we are also facing the prospect of an unholy alliance between bin Laden and Saddam. The implications are terrifying.

"We might be looking at the most wanted man on the FBI's target list gaining access to chemical, biological or even nuclear weapons courtesy of Iraq's clandestine research programmes."

The US intelligence community has been squeezing bin Laden's finances steadily for several years. His personal fortune of anything up to £500m has been whittled down to single figures, although funds continue to flow into the coffers of his Al Qaeda - Arabic for "The Base" - organisation from wealthy individuals in the Middle East.

These include members of the Saudi royal family opposed to American involvement in the region and rich businessmen in the Gulf States hoping to buy themselves immunity if bin Laden's Islamic revolution ever manages to overthrow their governments.

But the bulk of his income comes from acting as middleman and fixer for the Afghan opium producers. According to the United Nations, Afghanistan supplies 75% of the world's opium and its heroin derivatives in a narcotics' trade worth an estimated £4bn to £6bn a year.

The Taleban religious fanatics who control 85% of Afghanistan need the cash to fund their never-ending civil wars. They gave bin Laden refuge because he had connections with the Chechen and Russian mafias and their access to money-laundering in the West.

According to Middle Eastern intelligence sources, bin Laden rakes off anything up to £500m a year from his pivotal role in the drugs' trade. It is more than enough to underwrite the cost of mujahideen training camps in Afghanistan, Pakistan and Sudan and the provision of weapons for bin Laden's personal war against the US and its allies.

Up to 20 Islamic extremist groups operate under the loose control of Al Qaeda.

They include Algeria's GSPC, responsible for the casual murder of civilians in the country's Kabylie region, and a network for recruiting Muslim volunteers to fight in the Balkans and Chechnya.

Al Qaeda's tentacles spread across Europe and the Middle East, including the United Kingdom. Up to 2000 young Muslims a year were enlisted in Britain between 1995 and 1998 to fight militant Islam's cause.

They received basic survival and unarmed combat training in Britain, and were then flown to various camps in Yemen, Pakistan, and Afghanistan to be instructed in the use of firearms and explosives. A few were involved in combat in the latter stages of the Bosnian conflict.

The spread of bin Laden's influence has spawned some strange alliances.

Israel's Mossad agency is currently helping the Russians identify known fundamentalist militants in Chechnya. British, Italian and US agents reportedly co-operated with Slobodan Milosevic's regime to root out veterans of the 1979-89 Afghan-Russia war while they were themselves on opposite sides in Bosnia.

The Americans have also resorted to hi-tech destabilisation. Various agencies inserted "sniffer" software programmes into the banking systems of Europe and the Middle East from the mid-1990s onwards.

These were targeted on known or suspected accounts for bin Laden's front men in Holland, Britain, Switzerland, Italy, the US and the Caribbean.

When large amounts of cash were moved around, the programmes flagged up the transactions. Computer experts then transferred or deleted the cash electronically to starve Al Qaeda of funding.

Bin Laden has almost outstayed his welcome in Afghanistan. Despite the Taleban's public declaration of protection for a "guest", the regime is suffering from international sanctions as long as it harbours him.

The Americans have a continually updated plan for a special forces' team to snatch him from his mountain lair in the Hindu Kush.

But they look back to a Soviet raid in the same area in April, 1986, when three battalions of elite Spetznaz commandos went in after a local Afghan commander. Few came back.

Bin Laden is understood to have selected Yemen, his father's birthplace, as a first alternative. But the Yemenis could not protect him from the wrath of the West or Saudi Arabia. Chechnya was his second choice, but the province is being ground under Russia's military jackboot.

That leaves Iraq, and the potential for an alliance which would be everyone else's nightmare. - Dec 28


19 posted on 07/24/2003 11:35:42 AM PDT by tallhappy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: traditionalist
Your post was the first report I've seen of Iraqis cheering on 9-12. Do you have anything with which to back that up?

And Iraq, alone among the 22 members of the Arab League, failed to condemn the atrocities of Sept. 11. Indeed, Baghdad celebrated them. Saddam's government issued a statement, quoted widely in Al-Iraq and other state-run papers, that said America deserved the attacks.
Perhaps Iraq's official response indicates nothing more than a continuing hatred of America, but Mideast leaders who are no friends of the U.S. acted differently. Iran sent its condolences. Yasser Arafat expressed sorrow and gave blood. Even Libya's Moammar Gadhafi called for Muslim aid groups to help Americans, adding that the U.S. had the "right to take revenge."

from THE VISIBLE HAND

This source was posted above by tailhappy.

20 posted on 07/24/2003 12:07:30 PM PDT by liberallarry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: tallhappy; onyx; Joy Angela; Ragtime Cowgirl; Alamo-Girl; Carl/NewsMax; Rush Limbaugh; ...
NEVER FORGET


-WHY did the CLINTONS fire the FBI's Chief Investigator of the World Trade Center Bombing-1993 just as he was finding its link to Iraq in the Mid-1990's..?

-WHY did the CLINTONS refuse 3 No Strings Offers during the 1990's to extradite our No. 1 Terrorist Enemy OSAMA bin LADEN from the Sudan to a U.S. Trial that would have prevented the Attacks on us on September 11, 2001..?

-WHY did the CLINTONS aid our Terrorist Enemy HO CHI MINH's Communist Victory over US and FREEDOM during the Vietnam War..?

-WHY won't the CLINTONS come over to our side in a new -Time of War-
with our own FREEDOM now at stake..?


NEVER FORGET
21 posted on 07/24/2003 12:42:21 PM PDT by ALOHA RONNIE (Vet-Battle of IA DRANG-1965 www.LZXRAY.com ..I)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tallhappy
No Way! And they didn't have WMD's either. Qusay and E-bay weren't bad people either! You can't prove Iraq will be any better off without them.

Yeah Right! Someone needs to toss these 'Democrats' on the nearest compost heap so that they can at least do something useful and fertilize the corn.
22 posted on 07/24/2003 12:43:24 PM PDT by .cnI redruM ("Yall can go to _ _ _ _, and I will go to Texas" - Davey Crockett)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rodeo-mamma
...Please see Post No. 21...ALOHA
23 posted on 07/24/2003 12:45:26 PM PDT by ALOHA RONNIE (Vet-Battle of IA DRANG-1965 www.LZXRAY.com ..I)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: ALOHA RONNIE
a NEVER FORGET BTTT!
24 posted on 07/24/2003 1:04:05 PM PDT by onyx (Name an honest democrat? I can't either!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: ALOHA RONNIE; tallhappy
Thank you for the ping, Ronnie. Thanks, tallhappy.

"No one has killed more Muslims than Saddam Hussein." - Lt. Gen. John Abizaird CENTCOM briefing Mar. 23, 2003

These 'leaders' care so much for their people, don't they?

25 posted on 07/24/2003 1:06:21 PM PDT by Ragtime Cowgirl ("I don't find myself in any quandry. I'm a soldier." Lt. Gen. Ricardo Sanchez *CENTCOM* July 23)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Tamsey
I've also seen this picture and sent it to a friend of mine. Do you have the original source for this? Also, is there an available translation of the Arabic writing on the poster? It all might go a long way to establishing Sadddam's involvement in 9/11.
26 posted on 07/24/2003 1:09:51 PM PDT by libstripper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: All
Isn't that cute! Hillary is rounding up donations from her Anti-American Socialist Friends so that she can win the US Presidency!

(But, you wont's see reports on her TREASON
in the Main Media)

Hillary Clinton Attacks Bush, U.S. Intelligence Services in Overseas Interview
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/930511/posts


*Hillary: "New Political Icon" Clinton's European Triumph
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/945376/posts

27 posted on 07/24/2003 1:22:25 PM PDT by Joy Angela (Freep Hillary at a Book Signing Now!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: liberallarry
And Iraq, alone among the 22 members of the Arab League, failed to condemn the atrocities of Sept. 11. Indeed, Baghdad celebrated them. Saddam's government issued a statement, quoted widely in Al-Iraq and other state-run papers, that said America deserved the attacks.

You know as well as I that Saddam's regime in no way represented the Iraqi people.

28 posted on 07/24/2003 1:39:47 PM PDT by traditionalist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: liberallarry
although not of Ba'athists and their supporters - the very people who so brutally ran the country until recently

Most Iraqis hate the Ba'athists.

29 posted on 07/24/2003 1:41:28 PM PDT by traditionalist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: traditionalist
You know as well as I that Saddam's regime in no way represented the Iraqi people.
Most Iraqis hate the Ba'athists.

Too strong. He had a lot of support among Sunnis, and probably among some other groups.

The point I'm trying to make is that the Muslim world is largely angry, violent, frustrated and humiliated...and a lot of blame for this is heaped on Westerners - particularly Americans. We cannot defend against boxcutters. So we have to try to change Muslim culture.

We chose Iraq for many reasons but one certainly is the support we were likely to find among the population, both for our culture and our policy of overthrowing the Ba'athists.

Here's another article which might interest you

Islam's future

I like Tahiri. I think he knows his stuff.

30 posted on 07/24/2003 2:20:35 PM PDT by liberallarry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: tallhappy
bttt for later read.
31 posted on 07/24/2003 2:47:14 PM PDT by justshutupandtakeit (RATS will use any means to denigrate George Bush's Victory.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ALOHA RONNIE
Thank you so much for the heads up!
32 posted on 07/24/2003 10:09:03 PM PDT by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: tallhappy

bump


33 posted on 06/17/2004 10:07:53 AM PDT by Chi-townChief
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Chi-townChief

Appropriate bump. Very timely.


34 posted on 06/17/2004 12:52:08 PM PDT by tallhappy (Juntos Podemos!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: tallhappy
Natl press club, invites quest to back-up THEIR President Clinton.
35 posted on 06/29/2005 11:09:09 AM PDT by roses of sharon (,)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Peach
Saddam and Sons could never be trusted, during and after their so-called "containment".
36 posted on 06/29/2005 11:31:39 AM PDT by roses of sharon (,)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: roses of sharon

That's for sure, Sharon.


37 posted on 06/29/2005 11:32:13 AM PDT by Peach
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Howlin

The Sons really scared me.


38 posted on 06/29/2005 11:53:57 AM PDT by roses of sharon (,)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #39 Removed by Moderator

To: tallhappy
In the Los Angeles Times editorial of this morning, these documented facts went down the Orwellian memory hole. Saddam did host, train. arm and pay al Zarqawi's al Qaeda thugs. Jean Francois Cheri is therefore incorrect along with the MSM in their claim the terrorists were not there before our invasion. They were there all along and as soon as they had the opportunity they launched bloody terrorist assaults against us. Those who do not remember the lessons of history are condemned to repeat them.

(Denny Crane: "Sometimes you can only look for answers from God and failing that... and Fox News".)
40 posted on 06/29/2005 12:42:03 PM PDT by goldstategop (In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives On In My Heart Forever)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cuteconservativechick
Who knows? How much did the world-wide intell know then, and what do they know now?

All I know for sure is that our so-called investigative reporters have an agenda, and it is not terrorism ties to Saddam and Sons, it is the defamation of a US President, the troops, and the WOT effort.
41 posted on 06/29/2005 12:46:54 PM PDT by roses of sharon (,)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop

For the left history begins when they wake up in the morning.

But only on issues that hurt them, and help the US.


42 posted on 06/29/2005 1:48:01 PM PDT by roses of sharon (,)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: tallhappy

Timely bump.


43 posted on 06/29/2005 3:32:15 PM PDT by roses of sharon (,)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: liberallarry

Great article.


44 posted on 06/29/2005 8:35:37 PM PDT by roses of sharon (,)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: roses of sharon
Thanks for the ping. I've never had a problem justifying the Administration's actions against Iraq.

Strangely, the Downing Street memos, which the Left has characterized as the smoking gun, only confirmed my views. After 911 the Administration decided Hussein was too dangerous to leave in power (He was a lightening rod for anti-American beliefs and actions and had a record of brutality and of using any means available to achieve his goals). George Friedman, in "America's Secret War", describes the Administration's shock at finding how little defense was possible against determined terrorism so its decision to pursue an offensive strategy is entirely reasonable.

The propanga used to sell the strategy - exagerating the immediacy of the threat (we had no proof of stockpiles of WMD or functional connections to Al Queda)- is entirely consistent with actions of all past Presidents who wished to justify military actions (Wilson and FDR both said they would not go to war, FDR provoked both the Germans and Japanese, "Remember the Maine" was largely unproved baloney as was Tonkin Bay, Mexico posed no threat to the US in 1845, etc).

We are in a war against a Muslim world view. Why not? Traditionally, the Muslims were not organized as nation states but as a theocracy spanning most of their conquests. The Islamists like bin Ladin seek to restore that organization. The only question is would sacrificing Israel moderate their conflict with us? My answer is no...or not enough to justify such an immoral act.

45 posted on 06/30/2005 6:21:11 AM PDT by liberallarry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: liberallarry
A few of us here yesterday were just finding old stories for fun to slam the MSM for their "vanished decade" of the 90's. In which they pretend their reporting never happened in order to keep the "Bush lied" myth alive.

Agree fully with your analysis on the DSM, a political document, where I believe that when Blair decided to join Bush he said no to "regime" change, and would only go with Bush under a UN WMD resolution banner for war.

Bush said yes to Tony and Powell, and no to Cheney.

If he had gone with Cheney would Tony have said NO, how would it have gone without months and months and months of wrangling with the UN, war protests, ect?

If you have time, let me know what you think.
46 posted on 06/30/2005 6:42:40 AM PDT by roses of sharon (,)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: roses of sharon
If he had gone with Cheney would Tony have said NO, how would it have gone without months and months and months of wrangling with the UN, war protests, etc?

The same or worse. We wouldn't have had allies or any international legitimacy and we would have gained little time since we were not militarily ready in 2002 and the weather was always a consideration.

47 posted on 06/30/2005 7:49:39 AM PDT by liberallarry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: liberallarry

What about Bosnia, and other wars the UN was not asked to "bless"?

Maybe because it was not a ground war?

Thanks.


48 posted on 06/30/2005 7:53:20 AM PDT by roses of sharon (,)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: tallhappy
Which one was Qusay?


49 posted on 06/30/2005 7:56:01 AM PDT by petercooper (Mark Levin for Supreme Court Justice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: roses of sharon

Diffent enemy. My opinion.


50 posted on 06/30/2005 7:58:00 AM PDT by liberallarry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-53 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