• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

New Documents - Saddam hid WMD

Stinger

DP Veteran
Joined
May 3, 2005
Messages
15,097
Reaction score
537
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2005/11/16/122915.shtml

Citing new article in this weeks Weekly Standard

"Recently discovered Iraqi documents now being translated by U.S. intelligence analysts indicate that Saddam Hussein's government made extensive plans to hide Iraq's weapons of mass destruction before the U.S. invasion in March 2003 - and had deep ties to al Qaida before the 9/11 attacks."

Nothing those who have ignored the Democrat spin and actually read the evidence would be surprised about. But those who claim Bush lied and that Saddam was just a warm fuzzy fur ball should read this before they continue with their claims.
 

Old and wise

Active member
Joined
Aug 28, 2005
Messages
310
Reaction score
0
Location
New England
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Stinger said:
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2005/11/16/122915.shtml

Citing new article in this weeks Weekly Standard

"Recently discovered Iraqi documents now being translated by U.S. intelligence analysts indicate that Saddam Hussein's government made extensive plans to hide Iraq's weapons of mass destruction before the U.S. invasion in March 2003 - and had deep ties to al Qaida before the 9/11 attacks."

Nothing those who have ignored the Democrat spin and actually read the evidence would be surprised about. But those who claim Bush lied and that Saddam was just a warm fuzzy fur ball should read this before they continue with their claims.
Yeah sure, and the moon is made of green cheese.:rofl
 

Stinger

DP Veteran
Joined
May 3, 2005
Messages
15,097
Reaction score
537
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
Old and wise said:
Yeah sure, and the moon is made of green cheese.:rofl
Obviously you did not read the news story.

Here are some of the titles of the documents that are being researched, again according to the Weekly Standard up coming report.

• Chemical Agent Purchase Orders (Dec. 2001)
• Formulas and information about Iraq's Chemical Weapons Agents
• Locations of Weapons/Ammunition Storage (with map)
• Denial and Deception of WMD and Killing of POWs
• Ricin research and improvement

• Chemical Gear for Fedayeen Saddam • Memo from the [Iraqi Intelligence Service] to Hide Information from a U.N. Inspection team (1997)
• Iraq Ministry of Defense Calls for Investigation into why documents related to WMD were found by UN inspection team
• Correspondence between various Iraq organizations giving instructions to hide chemicals and equipment
• Correspondence from [Iraqi Intelligence Service] to [the Military Industrial Commission] regarding information gathered by foreign intelligence satellites on WMD (Dec. 2002) • Cleaning chemical suits and how to hide chemicals
• [Iraqi Intelligence Service] plan of what to do during UNSCOM inspections (1996)
Still other reports suggest that Iraq's ties to al Qaida were far deeper than previously known, featuring headlines like:
• Secret Meeting with Taliban Group Member and Iraqi Government (Nov. 2000)
• Document from Uday Hussein regarding Taliban activity
• Possible al Qaeda Terror Members in Iraq
• Iraqi Effort to Cooperate with Saudi Opposition Groups and Individuals
• Iraqi Intel report on Kurdish Activities: Mention of Kurdish Report on al Qaeda - reference to al Qaeda presence in Salman Pak
• [Iraqi Intelligence Service] report on Taliban-Iraq Connections Claims
• Money Transfers from Iraq to Afghanistan


Green cheese?

What will it do to the Democrat party and the political left if they lose the one and only thing they have (misrepresented at that)..................no WMD. They will be totally empty.
 

oldreliable67

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 3, 2005
Messages
4,641
Reaction score
1,102
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Stinger,

It appears to be you that have not read the Weekly Standard story by Stephen Hayes. If you had, you would most likely have observed that the Newsmax description...

"Recently discovered Iraqi documents now being translated by U.S. intelligence analysts indicate that Saddam Hussein's government made extensive plans to hide Iraq's weapons of mass destruction before the U.S. invasion in March 2003 - and had deep ties to al Qaida before the 9/11 attacks."


...exaggerates the situation with these documents considerably. Yes, the titles of the docs are quite suggestive, but apparently the contents are still virtually unkown, hence the above description by Newsmax seems quite presumptive at the moment. The docs in question may indeed - eventually - provide the kind of information touted by newsmax, but right now, the contents are largely still unknown.

In fact, Hayes actually spends very little time discussing the articles themselves. The majority of the article recounts his efforts at simply retrieving copies of the docs (they are unclassified). For example, he says,

"...the quest for the documents, while frustrating, has also been highly amusing. It is a story of bureaucratic incompetence and strategic incoherence. It is also a story--this one not funny at all--about the failure to explain the Iraq war. Two years after I started my pursuit, I'm not much closer to my goal."

Hayes goes on to recount some of his frustrations, which I won't repeat here. Instead, here is a link to the article...

"Where are the Pentagon Papers?" article
 
Last edited:

Billo_Really

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 6, 2005
Messages
18,930
Reaction score
1,040
Location
HBCA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
Excerpt from link originally posted by Stinger:
Iraq Ministry of Defense Calls for Investigation into why documents related to WMD were found by UN inspection team
I wonder if these documents that were "found by the UN inspection team" made it into Hans Blix final report.

I was going to say more, but oldreliable67 covered the bases well enough.
 

Simon W. Moon

Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 20, 2005
Messages
22,807
Reaction score
8,096
Location
Fayettenam
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
I think I'll wait until the pros have their go at it. All that here is now is some breathless speculation.
 

Stinger

DP Veteran
Joined
May 3, 2005
Messages
15,097
Reaction score
537
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
oldreliable67 said:
Stinger,

It appears to be you that have not read the Weekly Standard story by Stephen Hayes. If you had, you would most likely have observed that the Newsmax description...
Didn't say the Weekly Standard article did I, wasn't post last time I looked but will be a the bookstore today for my weekly visit. I referred to the cite I posted.

"Recently discovered Iraqi documents now being translated by U.S. intelligence analysts indicate that Saddam Hussein's government made extensive plans to hide Iraq's weapons of mass destruction before the U.S. invasion in March 2003 - and had deep ties to al Qaida before the 9/11 attacks."


...exaggerates the situation with these documents considerably.
I don't see where you have a basis for that statement at all.

Yes, the titles of the docs are quite suggestive, but apparently the contents are still virtually unkown, hence the above description by Newsmax seems quite presumptive at the moment. The docs in question may indeed - eventually - provide the kind of information touted by newsmax, but right now, the contents are largely still unknown.
I don't think they are about how to cook lamb.

In fact, Hayes actually spends very little time discussing the articles themselves. The majority of the article recounts his efforts at simply retrieving copies of the docs (they are unclassified). For example, he says,
And I await his full story on the contents, but if the left want's to continue with their statements that there were no WMD no WMD programs no ties to terrorist they can go right ahead, this was an advisory.
 

oldreliable67

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 3, 2005
Messages
4,641
Reaction score
1,102
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Didn't say the Weekly Standard article did I, wasn't post last time I looked but will be a the bookstore today for my weekly visit.
The article in question was available online at the link I posted. It was available for me, consequently I assumed it was available for you as well. Perhaps that was an erroneous assumption on my part. If so, apologies.

I don't see where you have a basis for that statement at all.
This comment is an observation on the differing emphasis of the newsmax story purporting to describe the Stephen Hayes article as compared to the article itself.

The newsmax commentary suggests with near-certainty that the docs in question will show..."that Saddam Hussein's government made extensive plans to hide Iraq's weapons of mass destruction before the U.S. invasion in March 2003 - and had deep ties to al Qaida before the 9/11 attacks."

After you have read the article, you will find that the article documents Hayes quest for the documents rather significantly more than it discusses their possible content and implications. Consequently, the emphasis on the quest itself suggests a significantly lesser degree of certainty about the presence of WMDs and AQ - Iraqi ties. Hayes acknowledges the possibility that the papers might demonstrate such, but this is not the major thrust of the article. To wit, the article is titled "Where are the Pentagon Papers", , not "Untranslated Docs Show Ties and WMDs!".

After you have read the article, I would be interested in hearing whether or not you agree with my observation. If you don't, thats certainly ok -- I recognize that there is a certain element of 'beauty in the eye of the beholder' at work here. We all tend to see/hear/read what we want to see/hear/read and as always, your mileage may vary.
 

Stinger

DP Veteran
Joined
May 3, 2005
Messages
15,097
Reaction score
537
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
oldreliable67 said:
The article in question was available online at the link I posted. It was available for me, consequently I assumed it was available for you as well. Perhaps that was an erroneous assumption on my part. If so, apologies.
It was posted apparently after my first post. Not on the newstand yet, TWS is a weekly purchase for me. However I have read the entire article online now and it is quite amusing as to what he is having to through. Typical of government. But then there is the last part, did you read that? Where he goes into detail about one of the documents that offers proof of the Saddam Al Qaeda connection? And that is only one of the documents? And as stated the titles of the documents do not describe how to wrap your turban or cook goat meat, the titles are quite descriptive.


This comment is an observation on the differing emphasis of the newsmax story purporting to describe the Stephen Hayes article as compared to the article itself.

The newsmax commentary suggests with near-certainty that the docs in question will show..."that Saddam Hussein's government made extensive plans to hide Iraq's weapons of mass destruction before the U.S. invasion in March 2003 - and had deep ties to al Qaida before the 9/11 attacks."
If you read the titles of the documents and you read the last part that is not an unreasonable assumption. Put that along side the other reporting NewsMax has done and the assertion is even more reasonable.

After you have read the article, you will find that the article documents Hayes quest for the documents rather significantly more than it discusses their possible content and implications.
Yes and then he goes into detail about one of those documents.


After you have read the article, I would be interested in hearing whether or not you agree with my observation. If you don't, thats certainly ok -- I recognize that there is a certain element of 'beauty in the eye of the beholder' at work here. We all tend to see/hear/read what we want to see/hear/read and as always, your mileage may vary.
I agree in part, and Hayes who is a brilliant writer gives a good story about what is going on with the documents. But he also describes on in detail, I am interested in your comments on it.

"One of the documents, "Iraqi Efforts to Cooperate with Saudi Opposition Groups and Individuals," had been provided to the New York Times last summer. Thom Shanker, one of the Times's best reporters, wrote a story based on the document, which was an internal Iraqi Intelligence memo. The Iraqi document revealed that a Sudanese government official met with Uday Hussein and the director of the Iraqi Intelligence Service in 1994 and reported that bin Laden was willing to meet in Sudan. Bin Laden, according to the Iraqi document, was then "approached by our side" after "presidential approval" for the liaison was given. The former head of Iraqi Intelligence Directorate 4 met with bin Laden on February 19, 1995. The document further states that bin Laden "had some reservations about being labeled an Iraqi operative"--a comment that suggests the possibility had been discussed. (According to another Iraqi Intelligence document, authenticated by the DIA and first reported on 60 Minutes, the regime considered bin Laden an "Iraqi Intelligence asset" as early as 1992, though it's unclear that bin Laden shared this view.)"
 
Joined
Nov 9, 2005
Messages
2,669
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
and there's this...

WMD Findings Reported To Date From Dec., 2002 through June, 2004

Date: Dec 4, 2002
Place: al-Muthanna
Outfit: UN inspectors
Finding: mustard gas & shells
Effects:
Source: [UN, AP, Fox News]

Date: Apr 5, 2003
Place: Euphrates River near Nasiriyah
Outfit: marines
Finding: mustard gas and cyanide [believed to have been dumped in the Euphrates either by Iraqi soldiers fleeing from American troops or local factories that produced weapons of mass destruction.]
Effects:
Source: [London Daily Telegraph; MSNBC, citing marine officials]

Date: Apr 5, 2003
Place: Albu Muhawish on the Euphrates River about 100km south of Baghdad
Outfit: 101st Airborne
Finding: tabun and sarin, plus 55-gallon chemical drums, hundreds of gas masks and chemical suits
Effects: more than a dozen soldiers; vomiting, dizziness and skin blotches. [soldiers hosed down with water and bleach]
Source: [Knight Ridder reporter, and CNN]

Date: Apr 6, 2003
Place: near airport Karbala, just south of Hindiyah
Outfit: 101st Airborne
Finding: two dozen drums that initially tested positive for Sarin and mustard gas
Effects: 11 soldiers, were treated for symptoms of low-level exposure - vomiting, dizziness and skin blotches.
Source: [Major Michael Hamlet, 101st, cited by Reuters ]

Date: Apr 7, 2003
Place: near Baghdad
Outfit: 1st Marine Division
Finding: 20 medium-range BM-21 missiles equipped with sarin and mustard gas
Effects:
Source: [per top marine official cited in NPR, Fox News]

Date: Apr 10, 2003
Place: near Baghdad
Outfit: marines
Finding: mobile biological- or chemical-weapons lab
Effects:
Source: [Fox News, Rick Leventhal]

Date: Apr 9, 11, 2003
Place: underground tunnels at al Tawaitha facility, 18 mi. south of Baghdad
Outfit: marines
Finding: stocks of low-grade nuclear materials, uranium and possibly plutonium
Effects: radiation levels are high [many drums of highly radioactive material]
Source: [Capt. John Seegar; Pittsburgh Tribune-Review][Lt. Cmdr. Charles Owens]




Date: Apr 12, 2003
Place: northern Iraqi air base in Kirkut
Outfit: army intelligence posting
Finding: chemical warhead with trace amounts of nerve gas
Effects:
Source: [military sources to CNN]

Date: Apr 25, 2003
Place: site east of Bayji, Iraq
Outfit: U.S. Special Forces reconnaissance team later: experts from Army's 1-10 Cavalry
Finding: a dozen 55-gallon drums; mixture of three chemicals, including a nerve agent and blistering agent
Effects:
Source: [Lt. Col. Ted Martin of the 10th Cavalry Regiment; Lt. Valerie Phipps, cited by ABC News]

Date: May 9, 2003
Place: near Mosul, Iraq
Outfit: 101st Airborne
Finding: mobile biological weapons laboratory [incomplete]
Effects:
Source: [Army Maj. Gen. David H. Petraeus]

Date: Oct 4, 2003
Place: Iraqi scientist's refrigerator
Outfit: U.S. arms inspectors led by David Kay
Finding: vial of botulinum bacteria [the most poisonous substance known to man]
Effects:
Source: [Richard Boucher, State Dept. spokesman to Agence France-Presse WorldNetDaily.com]

Date: May - Oct, 2003
Place: various parts of Iraq
Outfit: U.S. arms inspectors led by David Kay
Finding: "a clandestine network of biological laboratories"; dozens of WMD- related program activities and significant amounts of equipment"
Effects:
Source: [Richard Boucher, State Dept. spokesman to Agence France-Presse, WorldNetDaily.com]

Date: Oct 4, 2003 [earlier in wk]
Place: smuggled from Iraq to Kuwait [destination:. a Eur. country]
Outfit: Kuwaiti security forces
Finding: biological and chemical weapons, and biological. warheads
Effects:
Source: [Kuwaiti newspaper Al-Siyassah WorldNetDaily.com]

Date: January 4, 2004
Place: Al Quarnah near Basra
Outfit: Danish troops
Finding: 200 Iraqi mortar shells containing a deadly liquid blister agent
Effects: Multiple tests [conducted in Iraq by Danish and British experts] all confirm shells contain blister agent
Source: Danish official sources to Fox News Channel, Reuters and the Associated Press [find also confirmed by Ali Nimir, a former colonel in an Iraqi Republican Guard artillery unit]




Date: April 17, 2004
Place: Amman, Jordan, 75 miles from the Syrian border [believed derived from Iraq]
Outfit: Jordanian officials
Finding: al-Qaida car "carried explosives, a chemical bomb and poisonous gas."
Effects: "The bomb, had it been detonated, could have affected people in a one-kilometer radius and cause the deaths of up to 20,000 people," Jordanian officials told Maariv.
Source: Jordanian officials to the London-based newspaper al-Hayat ; see also the Israeli newspaper Maariv; U.P.I.

Date: April 26, 2004
Place: Baghdad
Outfit: U.S. troops
Finding: workshop "suspected of producing and supplying chemical agents" to Iraqi insurgents]
Effects: [workshop exploded in flames Monday moments after U.S. troops broke in to search it]
Source: Brig. Gen. Mark Kimmitt; Fox News; A.P.

Date: c. May 3, 2004
Place: Baghdad
Outfit: U.S. military units
Finding: artillery shell containing trace elements of mustard agent
Effects: [analysis confirmed]
Source: senior Bush Admin. official to Fox News

Date: [rptd] May 17, 2004
Place: Baghdad
Outfit: U.S. military units
Finding: 155-millimeter artillery shell containing chemical cweapon sarin
Effects: two American soldiers who removed the round had symptoms of low-level nerve agent exposure [analysis confirmed]
Source: Brig. Gen. Mark Kimmitt to Fox News

Date: late June, 2004; rptd July 2, 2004
Place: South-central Iraq
Outfit: Polish troops
Finding: 16-17 warheads, containing cyclosarin, a deadly nerve agent
Effects: a very toxic gas, five times stronger than sarin and five times more durable
Source: Gen. Marek Dukaczewski and Polish Gen. Mieczyslaw Bieniek to Polish TV; A.P., Newsmax

Date: 1999 - 2000 [causes]; 2003-2004[effects]
Place: [cause] laboratories outside Iraq [per Iraqi defector quoting Saddam]; Cuba [per Cuban defectors]
Outfit: Iraqi and Cuban defectors [causes]; health officials [effects]
Finding: strain SV 141 of the West Nile virus
Effects: [initial effects] Florida Keys and eastern half of U.S., now spreading throughout U.S. and Israel
Source: Richard Preston in The New Yorker magazine, (7/12/99); Joseph Farah in WND, (6/27/04)

Date: June 19 -23, 2004
Place: sprawling Tuwaitha nuclear complex, 12 miles south of Baghdad [removed to U.S.]
Outfit: U.S. nuclear authorities (U.S. National Nuclear Security Admin.)
Finding: (1) c. 1.8 tons of uranium, enriched to a level of 2.6 %, (2) 6.6 lbs. of low-enriched uranium, (3) c. 1,000 highly radioactive sources*
Effects: *[3, cont.] that could be used in so-called "dirty bombs"
Source: (1) Spencer Abraham, U.S. Energy Scty.; (2) Paul Longsworth, Dep.Admin. for def. nuclear nonprolif. in the U.S. Natl. Nuclear Secur. Admin., (A.P., 7/07/04)
 

Stinger

DP Veteran
Joined
May 3, 2005
Messages
15,097
Reaction score
537
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
KCConservative said:
and there's this...

WMD Findings Reported To Date From Dec., 2002 through June, 2004
And now we know Sen. Jay Rockefeller warned the Syrians about the invasion giving them time to help Saddam move anything he needed to move.


I wonder if the leftest here realize how silly and misinformed they appear whenever they repeat the mantra "NO WMD". Looks to me like the Bush administration is just taking it's time and then they will pounce with the overwhelming evidence that Saddam was a WMD danger. The Democrats and the extremist on the left with then have egg on their face and will have to admit that had they been in power, had we listened to them we would be in such danger I can't imagine.
 

libertarian_knight

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 23, 2005
Messages
997
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
KCConservative said:
and there's this...

WMD Findings Reported To Date From Dec., 2002 through June, 2004
Not entirely sure, but I do recall some of these having been retracted, and how many of these have been substantiated by the US government or the UN analysts? I also notice some of the items are refered to as "nerve agent" or some other categorization, which leads me to suspect they contents have not been examined, or at least, the list innacurate or not up-to-date.

Mind, you I am not a Saddam supporter, and glad to see him gone. Nor am I a democrat. I just don't take reporters and government officials at face value.
 
Last edited:

Simon W. Moon

Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 20, 2005
Messages
22,807
Reaction score
8,096
Location
Fayettenam
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
libertarian_knight said:
Not entirely sure, but I do recall some of these having been retracted, and how many of these have been substantiated by the US government or the UN analysts?
Well, the the ISG's report of what was actually found once the dust settled is a lot less supportive of KCC's stance. So the use of anecdoatal and later retracted itmes is the best he's got. So cut him some slack.
 

akyron

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 17, 2004
Messages
10,337
Reaction score
2,432
Location
Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
oldreliable67 said:
Stinger,

It appears to be you that have not read the Weekly Standard story by Stephen Hayes. If you had, you would most likely have observed that the Newsmax description...

"Recently discovered Iraqi documents now being translated by U.S. intelligence analysts indicate that Saddam Hussein's government made extensive plans to hide Iraq's weapons of mass destruction before the U.S. invasion in March 2003 - and had deep ties to al Qaida before the 9/11 attacks."


...exaggerates the situation with these documents considerably. Yes, the titles of the docs are quite suggestive, but apparently the contents are still virtually unkown, hence the above description by Newsmax seems quite presumptive at the moment. The docs in question may indeed - eventually - provide the kind of information touted by newsmax, but right now, the contents are largely still unknown.

In fact, Hayes actually spends very little time discussing the articles themselves. The majority of the article recounts his efforts at simply retrieving copies of the docs (they are unclassified). For example, he says,

"...the quest for the documents, while frustrating, has also been highly amusing. It is a story of bureaucratic incompetence and strategic incoherence. It is also a story--this one not funny at all--about the failure to explain the Iraq war. Two years after I started my pursuit, I'm not much closer to my goal."

Hayes goes on to recount some of his frustrations, which I won't repeat here. Instead, here is a link to the article...

"Where are the Pentagon Papers?" article

Newsmax sux but that Hayes guy said Case Closed

"But there can no longer be any serious argument about whether Saddam Hussein's Iraq worked with Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda to plot against Americans."

"The memo, dated October 27, 2003, was sent from Undersecretary of Defense for Policy Douglas J. Feith to Senators Pat Roberts and Jay Rockefeller, the chairman and vice chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee. It was written in response to a request from the committee as part of its investigation into prewar intelligence claims made by the administration. Intelligence reporting included in the 16-page memo comes from a variety of domestic and foreign agencies, including the FBI, the Defense Intelligence Agency, the Central Intelligence Agency, and the National Security Agency. Much of the evidence is detailed, conclusive, and corroborated by multiple sources. Some of it is new information obtained in custodial interviews with high-level al Qaeda terrorists and Iraqi officials, and some of it is more than a decade old. The picture that emerges is one of a history of collaboration between two of America's most determined and dangerous enemies."




It is an interesting article but it is all as suspect as anything else we receive labeled as "news" nowdays. At least he didnt destroy all his originals and retype them up later though. Nice of him.
 

ProudAmerican

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 13, 2005
Messages
2,694
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
after months and months of debating this with the left, I am convinced that if tomorrow, evidence came out that proved beyond a doubt that saddam supported al queda and had WMD, the enemies of America would only claim it was manufactured.

I am constantly baffled that there is a debate in the first place.

if I made the claim that Elton John was gay.....would I have to provide you with proof? or could we just agree that it was much more logical to conclude he was?

thats how I feel when someone asks me to PROVE saddam had ties with terrorists and had a WMD program!!!!

simply put.....its much more in the best intrest of America that we ASSUME HE DID and force Americas enemies to prove he didnt.

I cant for the life of me figure out why people who CLAIM to support America want it the other way around.
 

kal-el

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 22, 2005
Messages
3,412
Reaction score
8
Location
United States
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Stinger said:
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2005/11/16/122915.shtml

Citing new article in this weeks Weekly Standard

"Recently discovered Iraqi documents now being translated by U.S. intelligence analysts indicate that Saddam Hussein's government made extensive plans to hide Iraq's weapons of mass destruction before the U.S. invasion in March 2003 - and had deep ties to al Qaida before the 9/11 attacks."

Nothing those who have ignored the Democrat spin and actually read the evidence would be surprised about. But those who claim Bush lied and that Saddam was just a warm fuzzy fur ball should read this before they continue with their claims.
Dude, if this article had any credibility or truth to it whatsoever, I have no doubt that the Bush Administration would pounce on it and showcase it like it was the ****ing olympics!:lol:
 

ANAV

Member
Joined
Jun 7, 2005
Messages
172
Reaction score
0
Of course Saddam had these weapons and he moved/hid them before the invasion. Only an blind idiot who wants America, the President, and our troops to look bad would believe otherwise.

 

Stinger

DP Veteran
Joined
May 3, 2005
Messages
15,097
Reaction score
537
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
kal-el said:
Dude, if this article had any credibility or truth to it whatsoever, I have no doubt that the Bush Administration would pounce on it and showcase it like it was the ****ing olympics!:lol:
Why when this administration has a history of no speaking up and defending it's policies? Of course is easy to believe that people would if they had read the reports but then most rely on CNN and MSNBC and CBS et al for their news and they don't hear what has actually been found.
 

libertarian_knight

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 23, 2005
Messages
997
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Stinger said:
Why when this administration has a history of no speaking up and defending it's policies? Of course is easy to believe that people would if they had read the reports but then most rely on CNN and MSNBC and CBS et al for their news and they don't hear what has actually been found.
Just because President Bush does not speak up as much as he should in my opinion to clarify and defend his policies... wait well he does actually, just not well enough... but anyway, this administration has press conferences every day just about by the White House, DOD, and Various Generals. Particularly Concerning the War Rusmfeld and the Generals have been quick to point out sucesses. Don't pretend they are simple Humble men, unwilling to tout their achievements.
 

kal-el

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 22, 2005
Messages
3,412
Reaction score
8
Location
United States
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Stinger said:
Why when this administration has a history of no speaking up and defending it's policies? Of course is easy to believe that people would if they had read the reports but then most rely on CNN and MSNBC and CBS et al for their news and they don't hear what has actually been found.
Especially if these same people rely on such gimic shows such as "FOX news" and such, who just propogate what the Bush Administration tells them.
 

Simon W. Moon

Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 20, 2005
Messages
22,807
Reaction score
8,096
Location
Fayettenam
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
ProudAmerican said:
I am constantly baffled that there is a debate in the first place.
Me too. The consensus of the US Intel Community was that and is that there was no collaborative nor operational relationship between Hussein and Hussein. So what's there left to debate? Are the various talking heads more knowledgable or just as knowledgable of a source than the US Intel Community's consensus judgment?
 

libertarian_knight

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 23, 2005
Messages
997
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Simon W. Moon said:
Me too. The consensus of the US Intel Community was that and is that there was no collaborative nor operational relationship between Hussein and Hussein. So what's there left to debate? Are the various talking heads more knowledgable or just as knowledgable of a source than the US Intel Community's consensus judgment?
I assume you meant Hussein and bin Laden right? Isn't it amazing how often people confuse the two names now? A sure sign of an attempt to associate them. People didn't Confuse Arafat and Sharon, or Hitler and Stalin, Clinton or Bush, Mao or Kai-Shek. they don't even Confuse Saddam and al-Zarqarwi, or Osama and al-Zarqawi... hell they don't even confuse al-Zarquawi and Ayeh Allawi (which sound pretty similar, and even rhyme). Time and time again, i will even see people whose job it is to know about these men say the wrong ones.
 
Joined
Nov 9, 2005
Messages
2,669
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
kal-el said:
Especially if these same people rely on such gimic shows such as "FOX news" and such, who just propogate what the Bush Administration tells them.
I am so tired of this lie. Listen Michael Moore Jr., either show evidence that Fox News only "propogates what the Bush Administration tells them" or shut up.

On second thought, keep the lie going. Red state America loves it.....and remembers it in the voting booth.;)
 

cnredd

Major General Big Lug
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 5, 2005
Messages
8,682
Reaction score
262
Location
Philadelphia,PA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
KCConservative said:
I am so tired of this lie. Listen Michael Moore Jr., either show evidence that Fox News only "propogates what the Bush Administration tells them" or shut up.

On second thought, keep the lie going. Red state America loves it.....and remembers it in the voting booth.;)
[Moderator mode]
:smash:

While requesting proof of an accusation is acceptable, telling another forum member to "shut up" is not...

Whether or not you agree with what other members have to say, they ARE free to expess their opinions in a public forum.

Within the forum rules, of course...

[/Moderator mode]
 
Joined
Nov 9, 2005
Messages
2,669
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
You're right. Forgive me.

Dearest kal-el,

Either provide your evidence that Fox "only proports what the White House tells them" or kindly refrain from uttering such foolish, rhetorical and slanderous comments.

Love,
KC
 
Top Bottom