----- Original Message -----
From: "NOYB"
Newsgroups: rec.boats
Sent: Monday, May 17, 2004 9:15 PM
Subject: ( OT ) Beyond Apologies (A Coalition Of Nine Human Rights
Groups)



wrote in message
news

"NOYB" wrote in message
link.net...

wrote in message
news I have never quoted from either of those sources in this newsgroup.

And I don't need to verify.. If you want it believed, then source it

http://abcnews.go.com/sections/world...sar021231.html
This story appears to be from December 31, 2002 yet gives nothing
definitive
in a Saddam - Al Al-Qaeda connection... Only speculation

It was speculation in 2002. By now, it's pretty much confirmed
considering
the recent actions of al Zarqawi.


"Pretty much" is still speculation. There is no tie, only that of dreams in
certain minds.





http://www.csmonitor.com/2002/0402/p01s03-wome.html
And this story clearly states "The Al Qaeda-Kurdish ties appear to have
grown closer by the summer of 2000"

If I remember correctly, Saddam was out to kill the Kurds.....

Yes. So was the al Qaeda faction, Ansar-al-Islam. That gives them a
common
motive, no?

Ansar al-Islam, a Kurdish Islamic extremist group that has shaken Northern
Iraq with bloody episodes of killing over the past 14 months, is being
bolstered by the American rout of Osama bin Laden's diehards at Shah-e Kot,
Afghanistan.

Sorry you are still off on this.




http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,101635,00.html
That information is the first solid evidence of links between remnants
of
Saddam's regime and the non-Iraqi fighters responsible for at least some
of
the attacks on US forces and their Iraqi allies, the official said.

Funny thing with this story is they are talking of remenants of the
former
regime... Not talking about any connection prior to Saddam being
removed.

Miraculously, while we are looking for "remnants of the former regime",
the
al Qaeda terrorists manage to find them first and combine forces. I think
it's more realistic that they simply reunited through already-established
ties.



And the big one:
The group operated in a small section of northern Iraq surrounded by
Kurdish-controlled areas which were outside Saddam's control.

Kurdish officials have long alleged that Saddam's government helped
Ansar,
but US officials have said they haven't yet found definitive proof of
that.

"...haven't *YET* found definitive proof..."

October 30, 2003 and they still haven't found definitive proof





http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles...le.asp?ID=5571
Bush administration and PUK officials have also speculated that Ansar
may
be
working with Saddam through a man named Abu Wa'il, reportedly an
al-Qaeda
operative on Saddam's payroll.

Speculation is a bad thing.... Facts, now those are good things.

Facts are found when you pursue speculative leads. Remember, most of
these
articles are anywhere from 6 months to almost 2 years old. The facts will
be presented in due time. There's still a lot of time before the November
election.


January 17, 2003 and they still are chasing speculation rather than finding
the truth.

February 26, 1993 only 36 days after President Clinton took the oath of
office, a bomb detonated in the parking garage of the World Trade Center.

March 11, 1993 Ramzi Yousef indicted for bombing.

Wednesday February 8, 1995 Ramzi Yousef captured in Pakistan

Thursday November 13, 1997 Ramzi Yousef Found Guilty.

From what I see here, your gung-ho, terrorist fighting pResident is falling
way behind on his job... It only took the Clinton Administration 13 days to
find out who did it, get the indictment and start the search. It took less
than 2 years to capture the suspect....

Bush was ahead there for a few minutes.... Bin Laden Dead or Alive.... But
wasn't that soon followed by Bin Laden, I don't know where he is, he isn't
that important.... Which of course was followed by Saddam Hussein and his
suposed weapons of mass destraction.









http://www.weeklystandard.com/Conten...3/768rwsbj.asp
This article removes the validation of any prior to it. One man that was
suposed to be active with Ansar al Islam in Northern Iraq was actually
killed in January 2000 in a battle with Lebanese forces.... Sorry but a
dead
man can't be active 1 year 9 months after his death... Ansar al Islam
was
started September 1, 2001 according to all other accounts.

No. The date you mention is when bin Laden sent additional al Qaeda
terrorists from Afghanistan to northeastern Iraq...speculating that the
fallout just 10 days later would make Afghanistan unsuitable for further
al
qaeda operations. The new terrorists simply linked up with groups that
were
already there.


Sorry but you are wrong here, this article directly states:
Al-Shamari also told me that the links between Saddam's regime and the al
Qaeda network went beyond Ansar al Islam. He explained in considerable
detail that Saddam actually ordered Abu Wael to organize foreign fighters
from outside Iraq to join Ansar. Al-Shamari estimated that some 150 foreign
fighters were imported from al Qaeda clusters in Jordan, Turkey, Syria,
Yemen, Egypt, and Lebanon to fight with Ansar al Islam's Kurdish fighters.

I asked him who came from Lebanon. "I don't know the name of the group," he
replied. "But the man we worked with was named Abu Aisha." Al-Shamari was
likely referring to Bassam Kanj, alias Abu Aisha, who was a little-known
militant of the Dinniyeh group, a faction of the Lebanese al Qaeda affiliate
Asbat al Ansar. Kanj was killed in a January 2000 battle with Lebanese
forces.

Sorry but this statement is that Saddam reached out to other groups to build
Ansar al Islam, and that a dead man was one of the men that was brought in.








http://www.themercury.news.com.au/co...55E401,00.html
That information is the first solid evidence of links between remnants
of
Saddam's regime and the non-Iraqi fighters responsible for at least some
of
the attacks on US forces and their Iraqi allies, the official said.

Funny thing with this story is they are talking of remenants of the
former
regime... Not talking about any connection prior to Saddam being
removed.

And the big one:
The group operated in a small section of northern Iraq surrounded by
Kurdish-controlled areas which were outside Saddam's control.

Kurdish officials have long alleged that Saddam's government helped
Ansar,
but US officials have said they haven't yet found definitive proof of
that.

By the way... It is the same article from the Fox News site


http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/i...-attacks_x.htm
I won't repeat it a 3rd time... This is the same story as the Fox News
Site
again

Sorry but I don't get swayed by repetitive articles... My mind works
better
than that.


The point of listing the same article from three independent sites is to
show you that various mainstream media outlets have carried this
story...yet
I couldn't find a single mention of them in the NY Times, Washington Post,
LA Times, CNN, BBC, or al Jazeera. If you're getting your info solely
from
those sources, you're being spoon-fed liberal bull**** and spin.

I see the article on NY Times, the CNN and Washington Post sites are
difficult to search. I have never put much emphasis on the LA Times or BBC
and your right, we could never trust much of anything coming from Al
Jazeera... But then again, my Arabic isn't that good so I would have trouble
reading their site.



The al Qaeda-Saddam link will slowly grow into the most dominant news
story
flooding the airwaves this Summer and Fall. You're starting to see bits
and
pieces already...which is why I say that today's discovery of the sarin
gas
shell (and the discovery two weeks ago of the mustard gas shell) is just
the
tip of the iceberg.

Just watch. Bush and Co. will continue to build the case that al qaeda
and
Saddam were working together prior to and after 9/11.

Bush and company needs to build their case that they are doing something for
America, not for the rich, not for the oil industry but for America as a
whole, and chasing a pipe dream about a man that posed absolutely no threat
to the American people is not doing a thing for America, except for ticking
everyone off.