Is Rumsfeld Right ?

[Trajan Octavian Titus]

I'm not sure how any of that means anything remotely related to what you said you think I said.
I said that these items are so important that they deserve their own thread. Then I said that I'd be "more than delighted to discuss these things."


AFAICT, I'd be more than delighted to discuss these things. These things deserve their own thread.

Well then let me refresh your memory; for every point I made you wanted me to make a new post:

For each point, you could provide a two parts,

Naaa, each point there is already established fact on this board.

 

[Thorgasm]

***Its called a war, Aps. Those tens of thousands pale in comparison to the hundreds of thousands if not millions that felt the sting of Saddam's sword.

It is really scary how often I keep hearing the "sword" metaphor lately. I am used to hearing that rhetoric from the Middle East, not Americans. I guess bloodthirsty people love that metaphor.

 

[Thorgasm]

So in other words you won't comment on these four points that are well known fact and which I've already gone over time and time again on this forum.

Well-known facts to whom?

 

[Trajan Octavian Titus]

Well-known facts to whom?

9-11 Commission Report

DOCEX release

9-11 Commissioner Bob Kerrey

 

[Les]

As a Republican for all my life and before (in mommy's womb) GW is a traitor to the U.S. and shold be impeached. Not for the reasons you all think. He #1: doesn't close the Southern border by arming the National Guard with guns. #2 Doesn't enforce the law of the land by running these illegal aliens either out of the country or put them in jail. #3 No Anchor Babies (Human Shields) ala Sylvia (song to come later) Arrellana. #4 Both wrongly convicted border patrol agents (Ramos and Campeon) are unconditionally freed and released and their accusers are in jail, along with Cardinal Roger Mahony and his cohorts. #5 Antonio Villaraigosa, Fabian Nunez and Gil (One Bill Gil) Cedillo are also run out of town. This is just CA and Los Angeles. Then we can make nice-nice. What does this have to do with Rummy? National Defense and Security. Mexico is NOT our friend. Chile Rellanos does not policy dictate. "NO SE PUEDES!!!!!" No Mexican policy in the U.S. ...No Problem.

 

[aps]

Just the Iran-Iraq war dropped at least a million people.

Since Bush took office, Iran has only gotten more dangerous. Did you know that?

 

[Les]

Hello Indy.. Miss you on the FBZ. Iran wasn't dangerous until the illegal overthrow of the Shah. This whole world is dangerous..especially MEXICO!

 

[aps]

Hello Indy.. Miss you on the FBZ. Iran wasn't dangerous until the illegal overthrow of the Shah. This whole world is dangerous..especially MEXICO!

Are you talking to me?

 

[Les]

Both, but I know Indy from the FB Zone.

 

[Les]

Gotta go. F-1 Qual. Set up Indy cars for Sunday in Chicago. 3 hr sleep..go fast...tonight be back to kick ....

 

[aps]

Both, but I know Indy from the FB Zone.

Ah, okay. That makes sense. I had no idea what you meant by that (since I have no idea what FB Zone means). Peace.

 

[Simon W. Moon]

Naaa, each point there is already established fact on this board.

Actually, they're not. Hence my request for more discussion and debate about these topics. However, if you'd rather not detail what exactly it is that you're saying, (for whatever reasons) and just make very vague references to items you may have misread that's your business.

I can't help but note that you came to the exactly wrong conclusion abut my previous post. You thought ity meant the opposite of what it meant and what it said. Can't help but wonder if you made similar mistakes with the info you're discussing.

Later, if you feel up to the challenge of making your case in its own thread, send me a pm and let me know you're ready to debate it.

 

[Trajan Octavian Titus]

Actually, they're not. Hence my request for more discussion and debate about these topics. However, if you'd rather not detail what exactly it is that you're saying, (for whatever reasons) and just make very vague references to items you may have misread that's your business.

I've gone over all this stuff to many times to count but if you insist:

So why was the VX found in the AQ weapons lab in the Sudan the exact same formula of the Iraqi's?

Paragraph #615 on page 128
Though intelligence gave no clear indication of what might be afoot, some intelligence reports mentioned chemical weapons, pointing toward work at a camp in southern Afghanistan called Derunta. On November 4, 1998, the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York unsealed its indictment of Bin Ladin, charging him with conspiracy to attack U.S. defense installations.The indictment also charged that al Qaeda had allied itself with Sudan, Iran, and Hezbollah.The original sealed indictment had added that al Qaeda had “reached an understanding with the government of Iraq that al Qaeda would not work against that government and that on particular projects, specifically including weapons development, al Qaeda would work cooperatively with the Government of Iraq.”109 This passage led Clarke, who for years had read intelligence reports on Iraqi-Sudanese cooperation on chemical weapons, to speculate to Berger that a large Iraqi presence at chemical facilities in Khartoum was “probably a direct result of the Iraq–Al Qida agreement.” Clarke added that VX precursor traces found near al Shifa were the “exact formula used by Iraq.”110 This language about al Qaeda’s “understanding” with Iraq had been dropped, however, when a superseding indictment was filed in November 1998.

Why was Zarqawi given safe passage to a Baghdad hospital?

Zarqawi's activities are not confined to this small corner of north east Iraq. He traveled to Baghdad in May 2002 for medical treatment, staying in the capital of Iraq for two months while he recuperated to fight another day.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/02/20030205-1.html

Why does the DOCEX release confim that there were many collaborations between Saddam and AQ?

Saddam, Al Qaeda Did Collaborate, Documents Show
By ELI LAKE - Staff Reporter of the Sun
March 24, 2006


CAIRO, Egypt - A former Democratic senator and 9/11 commissioner says a recently declassified Iraqi account of a 1995 meeting between Osama bin Laden and a senior Iraqi envoy presents a "significant set of facts," and shows a more detailed collaboration between Iraq and Al Qaeda.

And why does 9-11 Commissioner Bob Kerrey now say that the Commission underestimated the collaborative relationship?

In an interview yesterday, the current president of the New School University, Bob Kerrey, was careful to say that new documents translated last night by ABC News did not prove Saddam Hussein played a role in any way in plotting the attacks of September 11, 2001.
Nonetheless, the former senator from Nebraska said that the new document shows that "Saddam was a significant enemy of the United States." Mr. Kerrey said he believed America's understanding of the deposed tyrant's relationship with Al Qaeda would become much deeper as more captured Iraqi documents and audiotapes are disclosed.

http://www.nysun.com/article/29746

 

[Billo_Really]

Originally Posted by Trajan Octavian Titus
Why does the DOCEX release confim that there were many collaborations between Saddam and AQ?

Why do people point to DOCEX when it has not been confirmed by the people who released the documents?

The DOCEX disclaimer (issued with the documents):
In releasing the material, intelligence officials added an unusual warning: "The U.S. government has made no determination regarding the authenticity of the documents, validity or factual accuracy of the information contained therein."

This is from the very people you point to as your source.

 

[Trajan Octavian Titus]

Why do people point to DOCEX when it has not been confirmed by the people who released the documents?This is from the very people you point to as your source.

They didn't confirm it because there's over 55,000 documents in the release, the DOCEX release is unprecedented in the U.S. intelligence Community because due to the sheer volume of documents they were released straight to the internet for the public to translate.

 

[Simon W. Moon]

First point

I've gone over all this stuff to many times to count but if you insist:

You forgot the other half- the part where you explain what you think these things mean.

However, lets take a look at the errors you've made thus far before we get to the second half.

You said ""VX found in the AQ weapons lab in the Sudan the exact same formula of the Iraqi's."

However, the document that you think says this says something different. It says, that Mr. Clarke said (which is different than the comission saying it) that the "VX precursor traces found near al Shifa." Precursors are something other than the actual item.

Further, it turns out that al-Shifa bombing was a mistake that the US ponied up reparations for. It did however serve to distract the Press from one of Clinton's many scandals for a moment.
A quote from one of my previous posts about al-Shifa:

Yet another one of Clinton's ****-ups. IIRC, it was based on a single field test that was unable to distinguish between EMPTA and herbicides and pesticides. The Clinton Admin "also conceded that they [had] overstated evidence of [Osama] bin Laden's ties to the factory"
​

IIRC, the follow up tests on the site revealed no traces of anything resembling EMPTA inside the factory though they did reveal more traces of herbicide outside the plant.

Ironically, your first assertion relies entirely upon the credibility of Mr Richard Clarke who you labelled as "full of ****" just yesterday.

A man who's full of **** is the sole source you've provided for your first assertion that "VX found in the AQ weapons lab in the Sudan the exact same formula of the Iraqi's."

Yet, the full-of-**** guy didn't even say what you said he said.

If you like, you may now proceed to explain what the implication of the quote you provided is.

 

[Simon W. Moon]

Second point

Why was Zarqawi given safe passage to a Baghdad hospital?

Unsurprisingly, the second quote you offer doesn't say what you say it says either.

There's no mention of "being given safe passage." It merely says he went to a hospital. IIRC, it was supposed to have been to get his leg amputated. (Yet, he somehow regrew his leg in the meantime.)
That Z went to a hospital is markedly different from being given "safe passage." What you quoted does not support your over zealous assertion that Z was given anything by Hussein. It merely says that Z went to a hospital in Iraq.
IIRC, Hussein's not omniscient. As aQ agents moved about in the US, it's also necessary to establish something more than mere proximity to show that... Well whatever it is exactly you're trying to show.

Though you forgot to say, I assume that you're implying that this visit to the hospital shows that Hussein was willing to risk national obliteration by aiding aQ in an attack on the US.
Is this correct?

Are you in fact trying to tell us that Z's visit to a Baghdadi hospital is proof that Hussein was willing to risk national obliteration by aiding aQ in an attack on the US?

If you like, you may now proceed to explain what the implication of the quote you provided is.

 

[Simon W. Moon]

Third Point

Why does the DOCEX release confim that there were many collaborations between Saddam and AQ?

The actual money quote from the article you linked to:

The document, which has no official stamps or markers, reports that when Saddam was informed of the meeting on March 4, 1995 he agreed to broadcast sermons of a radical imam, Suleiman al Ouda, requested by Mr. bin Laden
​

(I can't help but wonder if this document has been approached as skeptically as the DSM)

The "many collaborations" you mention is a radio show being aired.

Though you forgot to say, I assume that you're implying that this radio show proves that Hussein was willing to risk national obliteration by aiding aQ in an attack on the US.
Is this correct?

Are you in fact trying to tell us that this radio show proves that Hussein was willing to risk national obliteration by aiding aQ in an attack on the US?

If you like, you may now proceed to explain what the implication of the quote you provided is.

 

[Simon W. Moon]

Though I could go on with the fact finding part of your exploration, it would really be even frther out of the bounds of this thread.

If you would provide "what it is you think the quotes mean," we could discuss that as well. But, yet again, I think it's outside the purview of our current thread and really deserves its own thread.
YMMV

 

[akyron]

Since Bush took office, Iran has only gotten more dangerous. Did you know that?

Not that level of dangerous yet. We have 45 years to catch up to that.

 

[Trajan Octavian Titus]

Re: First point

You forgot the other half- the part where you explain what you think these things mean.

However, lets take a look at the errors you've made thus far before we get to the second half.

You said ""VX found in the AQ weapons lab in the Sudan the exact same formula of the Iraqi's."

However, the document that you think says this says something different. It says, that Mr. Clarke said (which is different than the comission saying it) that the "VX precursor traces found near al Shifa." Precursors are something other than the actual item.

Further, it turns out that al-Shifa bombing was a mistake that the US ponied up reparations for. It did however serve to distract the Press from one of Clinton's many scandals for a moment.

A quote from one of my previous posts about al-Shifa:

Yet another one of Clinton's ****-ups. IIRC, it was based on a single field test that was unable to distinguish between EMPTA and herbicides and pesticides. The Clinton Admin "also conceded that they [had] overstated evidence of [Osama] bin Laden's ties to the factory"

​

IIRC, the follow up tests on the site revealed no traces of anything resembling EMPTA inside the factory though they did reveal more traces of herbicide outside the plant.

Ironically, your first assertion relies entirely upon the credibility of Mr Richard Clarke who you labelled as "full of ****" just yesterday.

A man who's full of **** is the sole source you've provided for your first assertion that "VX found in the AQ weapons lab in the Sudan the exact same formula of the Iraqi's."

Yet, the full-of-**** guy didn't even say what you said he said.

If you like, you may now proceed to explain what the implication of the quote you provided is.

What I think it means is that “AQ reached an understanding with the government of Iraq that al Qaeda would not work against that government and that on particular projects, specifically including weapons development, al Qaeda would work cooperatively with the Government of Iraq.”

Regardless if the claim made by Clarke about the VX in this particular scenario is correct or not the fact remains that AQ reached an understanding to cease hostilities against the government of Iraq and on weapons development to work cooperatively.

 

[MSgt]

Since Bush took office, Iran has only gotten more dangerous. Did you know that?

So...without Bush.......Iran would not be seeking the nuke? All of their work since Khomeini would have just not continued if say...Kerry was the President? Surely you can at least try to be a little more honest to the world's situation.

Iran's two decade quest has nothing to do with Bush.

 

[Simon W. Moon]

Re: First point

What I think it means is that “AQ reached an understanding with the government of Iraq that al Qaeda would not work against that government and that on particular projects, specifically including weapons development, al Qaeda would work cooperatively with the Government of Iraq.”

Regardless if the claim made by Clarke about the VX in this particular scenario is correct or not the fact remains that AQ reached an understanding to cease hostilities against the government of Iraq and on weapons development to work cooperatively.

So in your world, indictments are facts?
Fascinating.

 

[mikhail]

Rumsfeld is a classic example of talk is cheap to be honest the guy should have ran away from politics in general he proberly messed up more than anyone with regards to the war?

Islamic extremism is proberly more like communism than facism as its ment to spread however you have to pick your battles more carefully and also i hope people remember there was alot of the media that almost supported the nazis e.g the daily mail in the uk the same kind of people who have such outrage at islamic extremists.

The fact is the current US government lacks the sophistication to deal with the diplomatic or strategic military tasks at hand.