No, Hussein oppressed Shiites. However, if you have evidence of Hussein oppressing Sunni/Wahabi Islamists, and not building Mosques of War in deferrence to his loyal Islamists ...
Posted on 02/20/2004 9:01:42 PM PST by RWR8189
Furtherest thing from my mind...
The last statement to date was made on October 26th, 2002 by Ambassador Kmonicek, who who was deputy Foreign Minister at the time and served the expulsion notice on al-Ani. He flatly told the Prague Post that "the meeting took place" and that "the Czech government collected detailed evidence of the al-Ani/Atta meeting." If anything, the government had confirmed the intelligence. link
No, Hussein oppressed Shiites. However, if you have evidence of Hussein oppressing Sunni/Wahabi Islamists, and not building Mosques of War in deferrence to his loyal Islamists ...
I don't think so, where?
Although I'm not sure how building a mosque is bowing to fundamentalists either.
Uhhh, ok, why then? If Bush orders the federal government to build a church in the South, you wouldn't be sure he was bowing or pandering to fundamentalist Christians?
The guy in the red is thinking Happy thoughts of the U.S...
To date have not been found. Of course this is the President's man who said that he did not believe there was a massive buildup in the 90s and still couldn't find the weapons from before the first Gulf War
2. Iraq had ties to terrorists, including Abu Abbas, Abu Nidal, Palestinian terror groups and AQ
Of course one meeting and a supposed visit from one terrorist ties this altogether does it?
At the same time, however, the letter, excerpts of which were published by the Project for the New American Century (PNAC) and the Weekly Standard, tends to debunk several of the neo-conservatives' own myths.Neocons Undermined By Zarqawi LetterFirst, it contains no suggestion at all of any preexisting cooperation or relationship between ousted Iraqi president Saddam Hussein and either Zarqawi or al-Qaeda, as the neo-conservatives have long contended.
It expresses great disappointment at the absence of al-Qaeda in Iraq, a disappointment that undermines the administration's insistence that it is that group that is behind a growing number of attacks in Iraq.
3. Iraq was committing human rights abuses that rivaled those in Nazi Germany and Stalin's Russia.
And so are China, North Korea, probably a few Southeast Asian nations, and more than a few African nations as well. Have the Wilsonians drawn up an invasion plan for all those nations too?
Good grief, do you even find out where your sources come from? The picture you hyperlinked, the first story at the bottom is sourced as CBS, the second is sourced as the BBC
Uhhh, ok, why then? If Bush orders the federal government to build a church in the South, you wouldn't be sure he was bowing or pandering to fundamentalist Christians?
One, Bush couldn't do that. No religion favored at the national level. However, there was no limitations originally at the state level, so if the governor of the state of North Carolina wants to start building churches more power to him. Unlike Iraq, it's in our Constitution. However, in what amounts to a dictatorship/theocracy, I imagine to stay in the good graces of the Islamics one should build a monument once in a while. Mind you it's to a false god but that's their business.
well said.
...no such thing as "conviction," only strategy.
LOL, that constitutes a quote? I could have gotten that pic anywhere but OK, I'll try to hotlink pics that have no stories nearby with stories from unapproved sources. Was there anything in those stories you found objectionable?
However, in what amounts to a dictatorship/theocracy, I imagine to stay in the good graces of the Islamics one should build a monument once in a while.
Careful, that sounds awfully close to a retraction of the violent secular dictatorship claim made previously.
Kay? Not sure what you mean here.
On the second point, Lobe fails the logic test. If the letter had stated all those missing ingredients lamenting the arrest of their buddy and long time associate Saddam who financed and trained the gloriously 9/11 martyrs it would have been (rightly) deemed a fake.
But logic has never been a strong point at that site.
And so are China, North Korea, probably a few Southeast Asian nations, and more than a few African nations as well. Have the Wilsonians drawn up an invasion plan for all those nations too?
Yep, guaranteed there are dusty OPLANS updated bi-annually for each and every nation to include forced entry and FID.
Are you advocating we go there? What would we gain? Are these the homelands of AQ training, financing, recruiting and export to the West?
We're not talking rocket science here. If it's a nuclear device, a suitcase will do. If it's bio, a vile might do. If it needs to be airborne, a crop duster or hijacked airliner will do. You don't need a rocket to poison a reservior. Enough conventional explosives on a ship in a busy harbor can do a lot damage. Yes? No?
Sure it is. You tell me you have evidence, and I ask you to produce it.
Then you can't or don't.
That Saddam supported al Qaeda terrorists wasn't questioned?
A link to al Qaeda is pretty significant, and far more important than the search for stockpiles of wmd's. Reason enough to go to war, even if that vial of botulinium is all they ever find.
Why, specifically, are you calling the Weekly Standard a "traitorous magazine"?
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.