Simon W. Moon said: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.
Simon W. Moon said:For each point, you could provide a two parts,
ptsdkid said:***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.
Trajan Octavian Titus said: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.
independent_thinker2002 said:Well-known facts to whom?
akyron said:Just the Iran-Iraq war dropped at least a million people.
Les said: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!
Les said:Both, but I know Indy from the FB Zone.
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.Trajan Octavian Titus said:Naaa, each point there is already established fact on this board.
Simon W. Moon said: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.
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
Why do people point to DOCEX when it has not been confirmed by the people who released the documents?Originally Posted by Trajan Octavian Titus
Why does the DOCEX release confim that there were many collaborations between Saddam and AQ?
This is from the very people you point to as your source.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."
Billo_Really said: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.
You forgot the other half- the part where you explain what you think these things mean.Trajan Octavian Titus said:I've gone over all this stuff to many times to count but if you insist:
Unsurprisingly, the second quote you offer doesn't say what you say it says either.Trajan Octavian Titus said:Why was Zarqawi given safe passage to a Baghdad hospital?
Trajan Octavian Titus said:Why does the DOCEX release confim that there were many collaborations between Saddam and AQ?
aps said:Since Bush took office, Iran has only gotten more dangerous. Did you know that?
Simon W. Moon said: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.
aps said:Since Bush took office, Iran has only gotten more dangerous. Did you know that?
Trajan Octavian Titus said: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.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?