----- 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.

wrote in message
link.net...
----- 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....

Yousef was a soldier for bin Laden. It took Clinton 5 years to even
acknowledge that the first WTC attack was the work of al Qaeda...and
orchestrated by bin Laden.



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.

Nowhere does it say *when* Saddam began reaching out to Bassam Kanj in order
to create chaos in the Kurdish region. It sounds to me as if Kanj was one
of the early organizers who helped recruit foreigners to take up jihad in
northeastern Iraq. Later (September 2001), the foreign recruits merged
together into the Ansar-al-Islam terrorist group.











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.

There was a definite link between Saddam and the international terrorist
groups that we now refer to as al Qaeda...dating back to the time period
immediately following the first Gulf War. We've only been sifting through
documents and building a case with hard evidence for about a year now since
Baghdad fell. You mentioned above that it took Clinton 2 years to build a
case against *one* man. This is a lot more complicated than that. And,
yes, I'm afraid that politics will play a role in the timing of the report.
Expect to hear a lot more about the Saddam/al Qaeda connection in the coming
months...

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


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....

Yousef was a soldier for bin Laden. It took Clinton 5 years to even
acknowledge that the first WTC attack was the work of al Qaeda...and
orchestrated by bin Laden.

No, it took the Clinton administration only 4 years to find him guilty....
At the time it was believed that Yousef was fighting for Saddam.... It was
during the investigation and trial that other information was found that put
him into the hands of Al Qaeda

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.

Nowhere does it say *when* Saddam began reaching out to Bassam Kanj in
order
to create chaos in the Kurdish region. It sounds to me as if Kanj was one
of the early organizers who helped recruit foreigners to take up jihad in
northeastern Iraq. Later (September 2001), the foreign recruits merged
together into the Ansar-al-Islam terrorist group.


This article was in direct talking of Ansar-al-Islam, and the Saddam Hussein
connection to that said group. Ansar-al-Islam was not started until
September 1, 2001 by your own admission which started this entire thread of
communications between us.


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.

There was a definite link between Saddam and the international terrorist
groups that we now refer to as al Qaeda...dating back to the time period
immediately following the first Gulf War. We've only been sifting through
documents and building a case with hard evidence for about a year now
since
Baghdad fell. You mentioned above that it took Clinton 2 years to build a
case against *one* man. This is a lot more complicated than that. And,
yes, I'm afraid that politics will play a role in the timing of the
report.
Expect to hear a lot more about the Saddam/al Qaeda connection in the
coming
months...


I did not say it took 2 years to build a case, I said it took 13 days to
build a case, get the indictment... It took less than 2 years to capture the
man. It did take 2 years 8 months and 4 days between capture and conviction,
but the courts are known to be slow. You must also take into account that he
was convicted not only on the WTC bombing but also on a plot to blow up 12
aircraft that were to be flying to the USA.

See that is how a proper government works, find the man and convict him
without losing several aircraft and thousands of lives.