![]() |
( OT ) Beyond Apologies (A Coalition Of Nine Human Rights Groups)
"Dave Hall" ... If anyone still doubts that this story is nothing more than attempts to further smear the president, I'd suggest that you are more than just a little naive..... You appear to be claiming absolute knowledge of others thoughts and motivations. I'd suggest that is more than just a little ignorant... |
( OT ) Beyond Apologies (A Coalition Of Nine Human Rights Groups)
-rick- wrote:
"Dave Hall" ... If anyone still doubts that this story is nothing more than attempts to further smear the president, I'd suggest that you are more than just a little naive..... You appear to be claiming absolute knowledge of others thoughts and motivations. I'd suggest that is more than just a little ignorant... I'm offering to sponsor a road trip to Dave's lawn for a group of guys with large dogs. Dave is hoping to cover his front lawn in dog poop. |
( OT ) Beyond Apologies (A Coalition Of Nine Human Rights Groups)
Interesting....
I copy the same paragraph you do and find it says "MEQUON, Wis., May 14 -- President Bush told graduates of a Christian college Friday that the abuse of Iraqi prisoners has embarrassed the country, and he offered "compassionate conservatism" as an antidote to "show the good heart of our country to the whole world." " Now further down in the story it does say: "Bush spoke of Nicholas Berg, the young American who was recently beheaded in Iraq. The CIA has blamed Abu Musab Zarqawi, a Jordanian terrorist connected to the al Qaeda terrorist network, and Bush used the killing to make the case that Saddam Hussein "had terrorist ties." "The person responsible for the Berg death, Zarqawi, was in and out of Baghdad prior to our arrival, for example," the president said. " But I don't see bush quoted here as blaming "al Qaeda supporter Abu Musab Zarqawi for beheading American Nicholas Berg" I do see the CIA blaming him Funny how you try to twist things your way, and find the twist isn't there. "NOYB" wrote in message ... wrote in message ink.net... Well I guess we have located the naive fool http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/...in573801.shtml President Bush and other administration officials have recently acknowledged there are no links between Saddam and Sept. 11. http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/relea...030131-23.html Q One question for you both. Do you believe that there is a link between Saddam Hussein, a direct link, and the men who attacked on September the 11th? THE PRESIDENT: I can't make that claim. In January 2003, we had plenty of circumstantial evidence linking them. Bush never said "there's no link". He said "I can't make that claim". That's a pretty big difference. Why don't you look for something more current? Like this, for example: Bush Says Berg's Death Links Hussein, Al Qaeda Reuters Saturday, May 15, 2004; Page A07 MEQUON, Wis., May 14 -- President Bush on Friday blamed al Qaeda supporter Abu Musab Zarqawi for beheading American Nicholas Berg and cited Zarqawi as an example of Saddam Hussein's "terrorist ties" before the U.S.-led war in Iraq. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...2004May14.html |
( OT ) Beyond Apologies (A Coalition Of Nine Human Rights Groups)
wrote in message ink.net... Interesting.... I copy the same paragraph you do and find it says "MEQUON, Wis., May 14 -- President Bush told graduates of a Christian college Friday that the abuse of Iraqi prisoners has embarrassed the country, and he offered "compassionate conservatism" as an antidote to "show the good heart of our country to the whole world." " Now further down in the story it does say: "Bush spoke of Nicholas Berg, the young American who was recently beheaded in Iraq. The CIA has blamed Abu Musab Zarqawi, a Jordanian terrorist connected to the al Qaeda terrorist network, and Bush used the killing to make the case that Saddam Hussein "had terrorist ties." "The person responsible for the Berg death, Zarqawi, was in and out of Baghdad prior to our arrival, for example," the president said. " But I don't see bush quoted here as blaming "al Qaeda supporter Abu Musab Zarqawi for beheading American Nicholas Berg" Huh? You don't see Bush quoted as blaming Zarqawi? Here's what *your* article says: "The person responsible for the Berg death, Zarqawi, was in and out of Baghdad prior to our arrival, for example," the president said. " I do see the CIA blaming him Funny how you try to twist things your way, and find the twist isn't there. Twist things my way? All I did was post a story from Friday's Washington Post. The title of the article was "Bush Says Berg's Death Links Hussein, Al Qaeda". What more proof do you need that Bush will use the time between now and November to show the link between al Qaeda and Hussein? |
( OT ) Beyond Apologies (A Coalition Of Nine Human Rights Groups)
NOYB wrote:
In January 2003, we had plenty of circumstantial evidence linking them. Bush never said "there's no link". He said "I can't make that claim". That's a pretty big difference. Why don't you look for something more current? Like this, for example: Bush Says Berg's Death Links Hussein, Al Qaeda Hel-lo, NOBBY, anybody home? Zarqawi was living in Kurdish controlled territory... you know, our friends, the Kurds, who are such strong Saddam supporters that he gassed them many times? DSK |
( OT ) Beyond Apologies (A Coalition Of Nine Human Rights Groups)
On Mon, 17 May 2004 11:04:59 -0400, DSK wrote:
NOYB wrote: In January 2003, we had plenty of circumstantial evidence linking them. Bush never said "there's no link". He said "I can't make that claim". That's a pretty big difference. Why don't you look for something more current? Like this, for example: Bush Says Berg's Death Links Hussein, Al Qaeda Hel-lo, NOBBY, anybody home? Zarqawi was living in Kurdish controlled territory... you know, our friends, the Kurds, who are such strong Saddam supporters that he gassed them many times? DSK So if a bad guy lives in California, then the California government supports him? Is that your logic here? John H On the 'Poco Loco' out of Deale, MD on the beautiful Chesapeake Bay! |
( OT ) Beyond Apologies (A Coalition Of Nine Human Rights Groups)
John H
If the bad guy lived in California, and the California Government supported him, there would be a connection.... But a bad guy living in the Kurdish area, gassed by Saddam... I think it is safe to say Saddam didn't support him. "John H" wrote in message ... On Mon, 17 May 2004 11:04:59 -0400, DSK wrote: NOYB wrote: In January 2003, we had plenty of circumstantial evidence linking them. Bush never said "there's no link". He said "I can't make that claim". That's a pretty big difference. Why don't you look for something more current? Like this, for example: Bush Says Berg's Death Links Hussein, Al Qaeda Hel-lo, NOBBY, anybody home? Zarqawi was living in Kurdish controlled territory... you know, our friends, the Kurds, who are such strong Saddam supporters that he gassed them many times? DSK So if a bad guy lives in California, then the California government supports him? Is that your logic here? John H On the 'Poco Loco' out of Deale, MD on the beautiful Chesapeake Bay! |
( OT ) Beyond Apologies (A Coalition Of Nine Human Rights Groups)
wrote in message link.net... John H If the bad guy lived in California, and the California Government supported him, there would be a connection.... But a bad guy living in the Kurdish area, gassed by Saddam... I think it is safe to say Saddam didn't support him. Saddam had Iraqi agents working up there with al Zaqarwi and his Ansar al-Islam branch of al Qaeda. The Patriotic Union of Kurdistan peshmerga began battling the group after a failed assassination attempt on the Kurdish Prime Minister in 2002. bin Laden sent the terrorists to the Northeast part of Iraq on September 1, 2001 to set up safe-haven for terrorists following the 9/11 attacks that were to follow 10 days later. Also, the terrorists were working with Saddam with the agreement to provide terrorist attacks against the flank of any US troop movement or special forces ops advancing on Baghdad from the north. If Ansar-al-Islam was battling the PUK soldiers but helping Saddam, I think it's safe to say that Saddam *did* support al Zaqarwi and his group. |
( OT ) Beyond Apologies (A Coalition Of Nine Human Rights Groups)
John H wrote:
So if a bad guy lives in California, then the California government supports him? Is that your logic here? It seems better logic than to claim that if a bad guy lives in California, then the North Korean gov't must be supporting him. If the Kurds were Saddam's enemies, and Al Zaqwari was living & operating there, then it seems likely that he was one of Saddam's enemies too. Is that too logical and consistent for you? DSK |
( OT ) Beyond Apologies (A Coalition Of Nine Human Rights Groups)
More information that has no place to verify it.... How much time do you
spend making this stuff up? "NOYB" wrote in message hlink.net... wrote in message link.net... John H If the bad guy lived in California, and the California Government supported him, there would be a connection.... But a bad guy living in the Kurdish area, gassed by Saddam... I think it is safe to say Saddam didn't support him. Saddam had Iraqi agents working up there with al Zaqarwi and his Ansar al-Islam branch of al Qaeda. The Patriotic Union of Kurdistan peshmerga began battling the group after a failed assassination attempt on the Kurdish Prime Minister in 2002. bin Laden sent the terrorists to the Northeast part of Iraq on September 1, 2001 to set up safe-haven for terrorists following the 9/11 attacks that were to follow 10 days later. Also, the terrorists were working with Saddam with the agreement to provide terrorist attacks against the flank of any US troop movement or special forces ops advancing on Baghdad from the north. If Ansar-al-Islam was battling the PUK soldiers but helping Saddam, I think it's safe to say that Saddam *did* support al Zaqarwi and his group. |
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:30 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com