BoatBanter.com

BoatBanter.com (https://www.boatbanter.com/)
-   General (https://www.boatbanter.com/general/)
-   -   OT--Even more good news from the Middle East! (https://www.boatbanter.com/general/28618-ot-even-more-good-news-middle-east.html)

John H March 4th 05 07:45 PM

On 4 Mar 2005 08:17:43 -0800, wrote:

John H wrote:


Does attempting to provide good news to go along with the bad make one
a war
monger

*********************************

No, but discounting all aspects of the tragedy of war and concentrating
only on the rare humanitarian moments or the rebuilding of bombed out
infrastructure does.

Who has discounted the tragedies of war? They are published here on a daily
basis, and the major media talk of *nothing* else.

Rooting, tooting, blood-lusting, and abandoning critical thought in
favor of flag waving patriotic zeal on the eve of war makes one a war
monger.

Discounting or rejecting other solutions and ignoring all evidence
contrary to the trumped up justification for invading another country
makes one a war monger.

Despairing that we have not killed a sufficient number of foreign
persons and calling for the wide spread use of nuclear weapons in a
region (as some in this forum have done) makes one a war monger.

Accepting ridiculous claims as the basis for the invasion of another
country, and then allowing, accepting, endorsing, and applauding the
tactic of shifting the justification between a series of additional
reasons as the former claims are proven untrue makes one a war monger.

When we were kids we were told that Russia was a threat to the US. They
were likely to invade us and try to set up their preferred form of
government here. Now that the US is doing *exactly* that elsewhere in
the world, it is no longer an unthinkable, shameful, immoral action-
it's a heroic
quest? Believing that makes one a war monger.

So if you see yourself described in one or more paragraphs above, shame
on you for war mongering.


Good. Except for a couple facetious comments made by NOYB, there aren't any war
mongers among us.


John H

"All decisions are the result of binary thinking."

Mule March 4th 05 08:08 PM


wrote:

***********



People like myself would have at least heard what Hussein had to say
when he asked for a meeting with Bush or the Secty of State just

hours
before the invasion began.


When would it have been ok with you to finally go in and get Saddam
out?We had been screwing wit this guy for twelve years. I guess the
twelve years of double talk, lies and stalling from Saddam to the rest
of the world are just fine with you but for the people of Iraq it met
many more death from his hands than needed to be. We should have taken
care of him during the first Iraq war and even less would have died.
But instead we waited and more people died.


Heck, for all we know he might have offered to go
into exile if we'd let him take a couple of billion of his bucks with
him.


We did offer him exile or don't you remember.

When we faced the Russians in the Cuban
Missle Crisis we used the military to make the other side "blink".

That
was statesmanship. We prevailed. Using the other side's "blink" as a
prime opportunity to hit the opponent with eyes closed may be
effective, but it's not statesmanship and it will come back to bite

us
on the butt.


Are you trying to say that we just went in blindly with no warning?
Wow! Your sense of recent history is really confused. Since you don't
seem to remember ... We haggle with the UN for months on end to comply
with their own resolutions to no avail. Bush gave a deadline to Saddam
and the UN and nothing was done. Should he just ignore that deadline
and just give another then another and another? It was time to **** or
get off the pot.

Oh yea! you're the one that wanted to give him the 1000th chance in
hopes that it wouldn't have gone to 1001st and meanwhile the people
of Iraq where still being throw off buildings by Saddam and his thugs,
and their wife's were being rape by professional government sponsored
rapist.


[email protected] March 4th 05 09:49 PM

Your sense of recent history is really confused. Since you don't
seem to remember ... We haggle with the UN for months on end to comply
with their own resolutions to no avail. Bush gave a deadline to Saddam
and the UN and nothing was done.

***************

Really?

Think back to December 2002. You may recall a deadline by which we
demanded that Saddam Hussein account for the disposition of all the
WMD's that we knew he, at one time or another, had in Iraq. Iraq met
that deadline, delivering something like 17 volumes of printed material
and some extensive computer files to the United Nations. A matter of
hours later, George Bush was already dismissing the 17 volumes as "all
lies".

Think back a bit further to September 12, 2001. Bush calls his cabinet
together and asks, "What evidence can we find that Iraq was involved in
these attacks?" One of his top security advisors said, "Mr. President,
there is no evidence that Iraq was involved in any way at all." Bush's
response: "Wrong answer."

We were destined to go to war with Iraq beginning on the first day of
Bush II's regime. When we couldn't find a good excuse, we invented one.


John H March 4th 05 10:17 PM

On 4 Mar 2005 13:49:31 -0800, wrote:

Your sense of recent history is really confused. Since you don't
seem to remember ... We haggle with the UN for months on end to comply
with their own resolutions to no avail. Bush gave a deadline to Saddam
and the UN and nothing was done.

***************

Really?

Think back to December 2002. You may recall a deadline by which we
demanded that Saddam Hussein account for the disposition of all the
WMD's that we knew he, at one time or another, had in Iraq. Iraq met
that deadline, delivering something like 17 volumes of printed material
and some extensive computer files to the United Nations. A matter of
hours later, George Bush was already dismissing the 17 volumes as "all
lies".


I think your memory is wrong. I think the problem was one of substance. There
were 17 volumes of nothing. Who indicated there *was* something worthwhile
there?

John H

"All decisions are the result of binary thinking."

[email protected] March 4th 05 10:59 PM

I think your memory is wrong. I think the problem was one of substance.
There
were 17 volumes of nothing. Who indicated there *was* something
worthwhile
there?

*********************************

There were 17 volumes of material that said, "We don't have any WMD in
Iraq."

Bush said, the day the material was delivered, "That's all lies". This
from a guy who admits he doesn't read and has probably not read 17
volumes of anything except Playboy magazine in his life.

Nobody every really took a serious look at the material the Iraqis
provided.

Subsequent events and non discoveries support the statement made by the
Iraqi report, and refute the accusation made by Bush.

Point here is....don't yammer on about all the dealines the Iraqis
missed. Even when they complied and conformed we dismissed their
efforts as false or meaningless. We were going to have our little war
come hell or high water. Nothing that Iraq could have done would have
prevented Bush from ivading the country.


John H March 4th 05 11:07 PM

On 4 Mar 2005 14:59:14 -0800, wrote:

I think your memory is wrong. I think the problem was one of substance.
There
were 17 volumes of nothing. Who indicated there *was* something
worthwhile
there?

*********************************

There were 17 volumes of material that said, "We don't have any WMD in
Iraq."

Bush said, the day the material was delivered, "That's all lies". This
from a guy who admits he doesn't read and has probably not read 17
volumes of anything except Playboy magazine in his life.

Nobody every really took a serious look at the material the Iraqis
provided.

Subsequent events and non discoveries support the statement made by the
Iraqi report, and refute the accusation made by Bush.

Point here is....don't yammer on about all the dealines the Iraqis
missed. Even when they complied and conformed we dismissed their
efforts as false or meaningless. We were going to have our little war
come hell or high water. Nothing that Iraq could have done would have
prevented Bush from ivading the country.


I will agree to disagree as to the 'value' of the 17 volumes. You seem to have
been one of the few to think of that pile as an actual indication of something
worthwhile.

Besides, it's a mute point.


John H

"All decisions are the result of binary thinking."

JimH March 4th 05 11:25 PM


wrote in message
ups.com...
I think your memory is wrong. I think the problem was one of substance.
There
were 17 volumes of nothing. Who indicated there *was* something
worthwhile
there?

*********************************

There were 17 volumes of material that said, "We don't have any WMD in
Iraq."


Facts:

We are in Iraq.

We captured Saddam and many of the terrorist leaders.

The rapes, tortures and murders of Iraqi citizens have ended.

Iraq had a free election this past January.

We have yet to find WMD in any large quantity, but that does not mean they
never existed. Reports are now that Russia helped in the transport of them
to other countries.

We are making a positive impact in the Middle East.

So focus on one thing if you want. When it proves that WMD existed, what
will your complaint be? The Liberals are running out of "....but" excuses.

An interesting side note: Nancy Soderbergh, a former Clinton official,
admitted to John Stewart (he was interviewing her after the release of her
book) that the Democrats hope for a failure in the Middle East, and that the
signs of progress are disturbing to them. When asked about Iran and the
positive things being reported in the Middle East she said " There's always
hope that this might not work."

Her closing comments were "Well, I think, you know, as a Democrat, you don't
want anything nice to happen to the Republicans, and you don't want them to
have progress."

How revealing. How disturbing.




DSK March 4th 05 11:52 PM

Think back to December 2002. You may recall a deadline by which we
demanded that Saddam Hussein account for the disposition of all the
WMD's that we knew he, at one time or another, had in Iraq. Iraq met
that deadline, delivering something like 17 volumes of printed material
and some extensive computer files to the United Nations. A matter of
hours later, George Bush was already dismissing the 17 volumes as "all
lies".



John H wrote:
I think your memory is wrong.


You're thinking is wrong. Look it up.

... There
were 17 volumes of nothing. Who indicated there *was* something worthwhile
there?


I guess you read all 17 volumes yourself?

The final conclusion of almost 2 years of hunting & digging in
post-invasion Iraq is that Saddam Hussein had no WMDs, and no serious
facilities for producing any.

You're just plain wrong, John. But hey, I guess you can stamp your foot
and insist that water really really *does* flow up hill. A lot of the
retardo fascist nut cases in this newsgroup will agree with you. Makes
you feel good to be part of a group, doesn't it?

DSK


John H March 5th 05 12:13 AM

On Fri, 04 Mar 2005 18:52:21 -0500, DSK wrote:

Think back to December 2002. You may recall a deadline by which we
demanded that Saddam Hussein account for the disposition of all the
WMD's that we knew he, at one time or another, had in Iraq. Iraq met
that deadline, delivering something like 17 volumes of printed material
and some extensive computer files to the United Nations. A matter of
hours later, George Bush was already dismissing the 17 volumes as "all
lies".



John H wrote:
I think your memory is wrong.


You're thinking is wrong. Look it up.

... There
were 17 volumes of nothing. Who indicated there *was* something worthwhile
there?


I guess you read all 17 volumes yourself?

The final conclusion of almost 2 years of hunting & digging in
post-invasion Iraq is that Saddam Hussein had no WMDs, and no serious
facilities for producing any.

You're just plain wrong, John. But hey, I guess you can stamp your foot
and insist that water really really *does* flow up hill. A lot of the
retardo fascist nut cases in this newsgroup will agree with you. Makes
you feel good to be part of a group, doesn't it?

DSK


This is the best I could find on worthwhile Iraqi documents. If you can show me
anything which shows Saddams 'other' documents were more than show, I'd
appreciate it.
**********************************************



Iraqi Documents Show Saddam Possessed WMD, Had Extensive Terror Ties

Scott Wheeler, CNSNews.com
Monday, Oct. 4, 2004

Iraqi intelligence documents, confiscated by U.S. forces and obtained by
CNSNews.com, show numerous efforts by Saddam Hussein's regime to work with some
of the world's most notorious terror organizations, including al-Qaida, to
target Americans.

The documents demonstrate that Saddam's government possessed mustard gas and
anthrax, both considered weapons of mass destruction, in the summer of 2000,
during the period in which United Nations weapons inspectors were not present in
Iraq. And the papers show that Iraq trained dozens of terrorists inside its
borders.

Story Continues Below

One of the Iraqi memos contains an order from Saddam for his intelligence
service to support terrorist attacks against Americans in Somalia. The memo was
written nine months before U.S. Army Rangers were ambushed in Mogadishu by
forces loyal to a warlord with alleged ties to al-Qaida.

Other memos provide a list of terrorist groups with whom Iraq had relationships
and considered available for terror operations against the United States.

Among the organizations mentioned are those affiliated with Abu Musab al-Zarqawi
and Ayman al-Zawahiri, two of the world's most wanted terrorists. Zarqawi is
believed responsible for the kidnapping and beheading of several American
civilians in Iraq and claimed blame for a series of deadly bombings in Iraq
Sept. 30. Al-Zawahiri is the top lieutenant of al-Qaida chief Osama bin Laden,
allegedly helped plan the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist strikes on the U.S., and is
believed to be the voice on an audio tape broadcast by Al-Jazeera television
Oct. 1, calling for attacks on U.S. and British interests everywhere.

The Source

A senior government official who is not a political appointee provided
CNSNews.com with copies of the 42 pages of Iraqi Intelligence Service documents.
The originals, some of which were hand-written and others typed, are in Arabic.
CNSNews.com had the papers translated into English by two individuals separately
and independent of each other.

There are no handwriting samples to which the documents can be compared for
forensic analysis and authentication. However, three other experts - a former
weapons inspector with the United Nations Special Commission (UNSCOM), a retired
CIA counter-terrorism official with vast experience dealing with Iraq, and a
former advisor to then-presidential candidate Bill Clinton on Iraq - were asked
to analyze the documents. All said they comport with the format, style and
content of other Iraqi documents from that era known to be genuine.

Laurie Mylroie, who wrote the book "Study of Revenge: Saddam Hussein's
Unfinished War Against America," and advised Bill Clinton on Iraq during the
1992 presidential campaign, told CNSNews.com that the papers represented "the
most complete set of documents relating Iraq to terrorism, including Islamic
terrorism" against the U.S.

Mylroie has long maintained that Iraq was a state sponsor of terrorism against
the United States. The documents obtained by CNSNews.com, she said, include
"correspondence back and forth between Saddam's office and Iraqi Mukhabarat
[intelligence agency]. They make sense. This is what one would think Saddam was
doing at the time."

Bruce Tefft, a retired CIA official who specialized in counter-terrorism and had
extensive experience dealing with Iraq, said that "based on available,
unclassified and open source information, the details in these documents are
accurate ..."

The former UNSCOM inspector zeroed in on the signatures on the documents and
"the names of some of the people who sign off on these things.

"This is fairly typical of that time era. [The Iraqis] were meticulous record
keepers," added the former U.N. official, who spoke with CNSNews.com on the
condition of anonymity.

The senior government official, who furnished the documents to CNSNews.com, said
the papers answer "whether or not Iraq was a state sponsor of Islamic terrorism
against the United States. It also answers whether or not Iraq had an ongoing
biological warfare project continuing through the period when the UNSCOM
inspections ended."

Presidential Campaign

The presidential campaign is currently dominated by debate over whether Saddam
procured weapons of mass destruction and whether his government sponsored
terrorism aimed at Americans before the U.S. invaded Iraq last year. Democrat
nominee Sen. John Kerry has repeatedly rejected that possibility and criticized
President Bush for needlessly invading Iraq.

"[Bush's] two main rationales - weapons of mass destruction and the
al-Qaida/September 11 connection - have been proved false ... by the president's
own weapons inspectors ... and by the 9/11 commission," Kerry told an audience
at New York University on Sept. 20.

The Senate Intelligence Committee's probe of the 9/11 intelligence failures also
could not produce any definitive links between Saddam's government and 9/11. And
United Nations as well as U.S. weapons inspectors in Iraq have been unable to
find the biological and chemical weapons Saddam was suspected of possessing.

But the documents obtained by CNSNews.com shed new light on the controversy.

They detail the Iraqi regime's purchase of five kilograms of mustard gas on Aug.
21, 2000 and three vials of malignant pustule, another term for anthrax, on
Sept. 6, 2000. The purchase order for the mustard gas includes gas masks,
filters and rubber gloves. The order for the anthrax includes sterilization and
decontamination equipment.

The documents show that Iraqi intelligence received the mustard gas and anthrax
from "Saddam's company," which Tefft said was probably a reference to Saddam
General Establishment, "a complex of factories involved with, amongst other
things, precision optics, missile, and artillery fabrication."

"Sa'ad's general company" is listed on the Iraqi documents as the supplier of
the sterilization and decontamination equipment that accompanied the anthrax
vials. Tefft believes this is a reference to the Salah Al-Din State
Establishment, also involved in missile construction.

Jaber Ibn Hayan General Co. is listed as the supplier of the safety equipment
that accompanied the mustard gas order. Tefft described the company as "a
'turn-key' project built by Romania, designed to produce protective CW
[conventional warfare] and BW [biological warfare] equipment [gas masks and
protective clothing]."

"Iraq had an ongoing biological warfare project continuing through the period
when the UNSCOM inspections ended," the senior government official and source of
the documents said. "This should cause us to redouble our efforts to find the
Iraqi weapons of mass destruction programs."

'Hunt the Americans'

The first of the 42 pages of Iraqi documents is dated Jan. 18, 1993,
approximately two years after American troops defeated Saddam's army in the
first Persian Gulf War. The memo includes Saddam's directive that "the party
should move to hunt the Americans who are on Arabian land, especially in
Somalia, by using Arabian elements ..."

On Oct. 3, 1993, less than nine months after that Iraqi memo was written,
American soldiers were ambushed in Mogadishu, Somalia by forces loyal to Somali
warlord Mohammed Farah Aidid, an alleged associate of Osama bin Laden. Eighteen
Americans were killed and 84 wounded during a 17-hour firefight that followed
the ambush in which Aidid's followers used civilians as decoys.

An 11-page Iraqi memo, dated Jan. 25, 1993, lists Palestinian, Sudanese and
Asian terrorist organizations and the relationships Iraq had with each of them.
Of particular importance, Tefft said, are the relationships Iraq had already
developed or was in the process of developing with groups and individuals
affiliated with al-Qaida, such as Abu Musab al-Zarqawi and Ayman al-Zawahiri.
The U.S. is offering rewards of up to $25 million for each man's capture.

The documents describe Al-Jehad wa'l Tajdeed as "a secret Palestinian
organization" founded after the first Persian Gulf War that "believes in armed
struggle against U.S. and western interests." The leaders of the group,
according to the Iraqi memo, were stationed in Jordan in 1993, and when one of
those leaders visited Iraq in November 1992, he "showed the readiness of his
organization to execute operations against U.S. interests at any time."

Tefft believes the Tajdeed group likely included al-Zarqawi, whom Teft described
as "our current terrorist nemesis" in Iraq, "a Palestinian on a Jordanian
passport who was with al-Qaida and bin Laden in Afghanistan prior to this period
[1993]."

Tajdeed, which means Islamic Renewal, "has a Web site that posts Zarqawi's
speeches, messages, claims of assassinations and beheading videos," Tefft told
CNSNews.com. "The apparent linkages are too close to be accidental" and might
"be one of the first operational contacts between an al-Qaida group and Iraq."

Tefft said the documents, all of which the Iraqi Intelligence Service labeled
"Top secret, personal and urgent," showed several links between Saddam's
government and terror groups dedicated not only to targeting America but also
U.S. allies such as Egypt and Israel.

The same 11-page memo refers to the "re-opening of the relationship" with
Al-Jehad al-Islamy, which is described as "the most violent in Egypt,"
responsible for the 1981 assassination of Egyptian President Anwar Sadat. The
documents go on to describe a Dec. 14, 1990 meeting between Iraqi intelligence
officials and a representative of Al-Jehad al-Islamy, that ended in an agreement
"to move against [the] Egyptian regime by doing martyr operations on conditions
that we should secure the finance, training and equipments."

Al-Zawahiri was one of the leaders of Jehad al-Islamy, also known as Egyptian
Islamic Group, and participated in the assassination of Sadat, Tefft said.
"Iraq's contact with the Egyptian Islamic Group is another operational contact
between Iraq and al-Qaida," he added.

One of the Asian groups listed on the Iraqi intelligence memo is J.U.I., also
known as Islamic Clerks Society. The group is led by Mawlana Fadhel al-Rahman,
whom Tefft said is "an al-Qaida member and co-signed Osama bin Laden's 1998
fatwa (religious ruling) to kill Americans." The Iraqi memo from 1993 states
that J.U.I.'s secretary general "has a good relationship with our system since
1981 and he is ready for any mission." Tefft said the memo shows "another direct
Iraq link to an al-Qaida group."

Iraq had also maintained a relationship with the Afghani Islamist party since
1989, according to the memo. The "relationship was improved and became directly
between the leader, Hekmatyar and Iraq," it states, referring to Gulbuddin
Hekmatyar, an Afghani warlord who fought against the Soviet Union and current
al-Qaida ally, according to Tefft.

Last year, American authorities in Afghanistan ranked Hekmatyar third on their
most wanted list, behind only bin Laden and former Taliban leader Mullah Omar.
Hekmatyar represents "another Iraqi link to an al-Qaida group," Tefft said.

The Iraqi intelligence documents also refer to terrorist groups previously
believed to have had links with Saddam Hussein. They include Palestine
Liberation Front, a group dedicated to attacking Israel, and according to the
Iraqi memo, one with "an office in Baghdad."

Abu Nidal

The Abu Nidal group, suspected by the CIA of having acted as surrogates for
Iraqi terrorist attacks, is also mentioned.

"The movement believes in political violence and assassinations," the 1993 Iraqi
memo states in reference to the Abu Nidal organization. "We have relationships
with them since 1973. Currently, they have a representative in the country.
Monthly helps are given to them - 20 thousand dinars - in addition to other
supports," the memo explains. (See Saddam's Connections to Palestinian Terror
Groups)

Iraq not only built and maintained relationships with terrorist groups, the
documents show it appears to have trained terrorists as well. Ninety-two
individuals from various Middle Eastern countries are listed on the papers.

Many are described as having "finished the course at M14," a reference to an
Iraqi intelligence agency, and to having "participated in Umm El-Ma'arek," the
Iraqi response to the U.S. invasion in 1991. The author of the list notes that
approximately half of the individuals "all got trained inside the 'martyr act
camp' that belonged to our directorate."

The former UNSCOM weapons inspector who was asked to analyze the documents
believes it's clear that the Iraqis "were training people there in assassination
and suicide bombing techniques ... including non-Iraqis."

Bush Administration Likely Unaware of Documents

The senior government official and source of the Iraqi intelligence memos,
explained that the reason the documents had not been made public before now was
that the government has "thousands and thousands of documents waiting to be
translated.

"It is unlikely they even know this exists," the source added.

The government official also explained that the motivation for leaking the
documents "is strictly national security and helping with the war on terrorism
by focusing this country's attention on facts and away from political
posturing."

"This is too important to let it get caught up in the political process," the
source told CNSNews.com.

To protect against the Iraqi intelligence documents being altered or
misrepresented elsewhere on the Internet, CNSNews.com has decided to publish
only the first of the 42 pages in Arabic, along with the English translation.
Portions of some of the other memos in translated form are also being published
to accompany this report. Credentialed journalists and counter-terrorism experts
seeking to view the 42 pages of Arabic documents or to challenge their
authenticity may make arrangements to do so at CNSNews.com's headquarters in
Alexandria, Va.

Copyright CNSNews.com


John H

"All decisions are the result of binary thinking."

DSK March 5th 05 03:35 AM

John H wrote:
This is the best I could find on worthwhile Iraqi documents.


You mean the best looney-tunes ultra-right-wing fascist fantasy?

The grown-ups, like the DIA and the Duelfer report, all concluded very
very differently.

Feel free to believe that water runs up hill. The great thing about the
internet is that no matter messed up in the head you are, you can find
somebody on line that agrees with you.

DSK



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:39 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com