I think this says a lot about the "eminent threat"

[Anonymous]

and as far as I am concerned, using 9/11 as an excuse to go after Iraq (which several people in the current admin have wanted to do for a long time - since the first gulf war did not yield the results they wanted)


http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A31709-2003Jul9.html?nav=hptop_tb&nav=hptop_tb

This particularly (snip):

On Capitol Hill, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld said the United States did not go to war with Iraq because of new evidence of banned weapons but because it saw existing information on Iraqi arms programs in a new light after the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks.

"The coalition did not act in Iraq because we had discovered dramatic new evidence of Iraq's pursuit" of weapons of mass destruction, Rumsfeld told the Senate Armed Services Committee. "We acted because we saw the evidence in a dramatic new light -- through the prism of our experience on 9-11."

[Zero Signal]

"dramatic new light" = any excuse to take away civil liberties and spy on people on a whim

If Iraq had no hand in 9/11 (and I believe that they did not, directly or peripherally), then what makes before and after 9/11 relevant at all? They were simply looking for a way to finish the job that Bush 1.0 could not, and they found that in the 9/11 attacks.

Rummy is Bush's Goebbels, plain and simple.

[Abcdxxxx]

If Iraq had no hand in 9/11 (and I believe that they did not, directly or peripherally),....... Rummy is Bush's Goebbels, plain and simple.

If Al Qaeda is an amalgamation of several extremist Muslim terrorist groups of various nationalities (which we know it is) and we know Saddam has both directly and peripherally admitted to aiding some of these same groups... then what has lead you to believe he's "had no hand in 9/11" ?

Also, violating our civil rights does not a Hitler make. Get a book on the final solution because THAT is what made Hitler an icon of evil. There are plenty of dictators one could compare Bush to that didn't earn a rep through ethnic cleansing. Bush if a fucked up guy, but he's got a ways to go before he hits Hitler status. Your just cheapening the memory of one of many tragic incidents in modern history...not to mention cheapening your own argument at the same time.

[ranxer]

then what makes before and after 9/11 relevant at all?

it's not relevant(from my perspective) because 9/11 was planned on, the plans for destroying the constitution and grabbing oil/mideast foothold(among others) were ready for a while but they needed an emergency to move.

i don't think there was enough wrong with our intelligence to miss the terrorists if they were allowed to do thier job. im still hoping for more whistleblowers on that. .. it will all be in the movie in 15 years :cry

i can't imagine how nervous these questions make the administration.

[Dole]

Blair is now saying they will find evidence of 'Weapons of mass desctruction programs' -not 'weapons of mass destruction' -bit of a fucking turnaround....next it will be 'little drawings of weapons of mass destruction' or maybe just a copy of the comic 'weapon x'.

[Mike]

Damn this pisses me off. Unless Osama Bin Laden was running the Iraqi government at some point, the Iraqi government was not responsible for the attacks on 9/11. I will laugh when they can't even find a squirt gun in that place. How convenient that we just happened to conquer the country with one of the largest oil reserves, huh? Bullshit. I hate how they use emotional subjects like 9/11 (the action of a select terrorist group) to hypnotize Americans into being all anti-middle-east. :hypno

[Miss Modular]

Didn't Osama Bin Laden say that Saddam was an infidel?

[AChimp]

Yeah, I seem to recall hearing something about that. And regardless, Saddam's approval of the 9/11 attacks doesn't show that he had anything to do with them, only that he enjoyed watching buildings fall down in the U.S.

[Protoclown]

Dole made me :lol

[Abcdxxxx]

Mike "they use emotional subjects like 9/11 (the action of a select terrorist group) to hypnotize Americans into being all anti-middle-east. "

Actually Mike, Saudi Arabia has the largest oil reserve not Iraq. Also - Al Qaeda aren't "a select terrorist group" at all. They're a union of several terrorist groups mostly all hailing from the middle east. When a country is attacked by a group of people hailing from one part of the world, it's pretty obvious it's going to be followed by some disdain for part of said region. It's not in the corrupt Bush governments favor to be "anti middle east" when their strongest business ties are in fact in the fucking middle east, not to mention the key issues Bush hopes to get re-elected with. See Mike, Americans can have diverse opinions even within their sheep like masses. You sound pretty hypnotized yourself.


modular "Didn't Osama Bin Laden say that Saddam was an infidel?"

He also worked alongside the United State who he obviously holds in disdain. He's the blowback poster child, and loves nothing more then to get what he can from "infidels." It's a poor argument against a connection.

[Mike]

ABCDXXXX, you make valid point. Thanks for the correction on who has more oil. But even though SA has more, Iraq is close behind, and considering the oil history in the Bush family I strongly suspect that it is either a major factor or THE major factor in the decision to attack.

Whether or not Al Qaeda is a union of terrorist groups or not, it still doesn't merit the attack of the governments of Middle Eastern countries (at least not without concrete proof that the governments are actually part of said terrorist organizations). My information may not have been entirely acurate, but my main point still holds.

We have yet to see the validity of "Military Intelligence".

[El Blanco]

I misread the title and thought this thread was about the "eminem threat"

[Abcdxxxx]

My information may not have been entirely acurate, but my main point still holds.

We have yet to see the validity of "Military Intelligence".

Sorry Mike, but that means your main point is based on misinformation.

The second largest oil reserve is in Kuwait.
The majority of oil we use in the US is imported from Venezuela.


What we can be certain of is that free speech and underground movements within the Arab League are non-existant without government sponsorship and protection. It's easy to arrive in the US illegally, but not so easy to exit these nations without a visa.

If these nations were not aiding, and harboring Al Qaeda then who was?

[Mike]

Look, I'm not saying the second largest oil reserve is in Iraq, I just said Iraq is "close behind".

You're right that I should have gotten my info straight from the beginning, but that doesn't invalidate my point.

The point I was trying to make is that 9/11 was the act of terrorists, not governments, and that is not misinformation. My only misinformation is that I stated that it was a select terrorist group when really it was a union of terrorist groups. The point is, it was terrorists and not governments. I don't care if Saddam was happy about it or not, that doesn't make it Iraq's fault, and now Rumsfeld wants to go after Iran. What do you think about that? We know for a fact that Korea has WMDs but Bush doesn't care? Does the US harbor terrorists?

[Zero Signal]

The second largest oil reserve is in Kuwait.
The majority of oil we use in the US is imported from Venezuela.
For one, Venezuela cannot get their shit together with their problems, and secondly, Kuwait is third, not second.

Sorry Mike, but that means your main point is based on misinformation.
Who were you calling misinformed? :rolleyes

Anyway...

The dollar is falling, and taking control, whether overtly or covertly, is in the government's interest.

OPEC is beginning to turn to dealing in Euros, and securing the second largest producer of oil will force deals for that oil to be done in US Dollars, thus propping up our sagging currency.

[Abcdxxxx]

American militia groups haven't made attacks on foriegn governments.

As stated before, Arab nations have such a stronghold on their people, that a terrorist group couldn't exist without state sponsored support. In many cases it's not even hidden.

You're aware of Saddam's record assisting terrorists organizations right?

More so, he's a genocidal killer, and if you're going to compare anyone alive to Hitler at the moment, why not try him?

The situation in Iran is entirely different, and you surely couldn't think that too is for oil can you?

[VinceZeb]

What is with you fucking liberal idiots with the comparisons to Bush and Hitler? Has max's family been put in a camp yet? No. SO BUSH IS NOT LIKE HITLER!

I mean damn, Zero, I have seen your pic and know you're not too fucking intelligent, but my God man...

[CaptainBubba]

Has max's family been put in a camp yet? No. SO BUSH IS NOT LIKE HITLER!

What? Is Max Iraqi or something? I coulda sworn he was a Jew.

[Zero Signal]

I mean damn, Zero, I have seen your pic and know you're not too fucking intelligent, but my God man...
I see that you admit to being so shallow that you equate appearance to intelligence. Maybe you need a clue that the ONLY pic you could have possibly seen is one that was taken some 6 years ago, minimum.

What is with you fucking liberal idiots with the comparisons to Bush and Hitler? Has max's family been put in a camp yet? No. SO BUSH IS NOT LIKE HITLER!
You are so fucking one-dimensonal that I am surprised that you can even carry out any cognitive processes at all. If you think all Hitler did was put people in camps, then you are a sad and ignorant individual. Perhaps, I need to spell it out for you. Bush and his cronies are emplying the same tactics that Hitler, Goering and Goebbels used; create enemies for your people to hate and to rally behind you against them. Hitler wanted the Jews out of Germany as he knew that the German people were tired of getting fucked over by them. The Jews had most of the money in Germany at the time, and were extremely stingy with it. Hitler created some dogmatic agenda using the theory of the Aryan race to remove them. He knew how to manipulate people. It is an age-old tactic.

But let us have Goering explain it in his own words:

"Why of course the people don't want war. Why should some poor slob on a farm want to risk his life in a war when the best he can get out of it is to come back to his farm in one piece? Naturally the common people don't want war neither in Russia, nor in England, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood. But, after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the peacemakers for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country."

Bush is executing this same strategy at present. Use the event of 9/11 at a reason to carry out their agendas; invading sovereign countries (under false pretenses even), taking away civil liberties and increasing spying on the populace.

[Jeanette X]

He also worked alongside the United State who he obviously holds in disdain. He's the blowback poster child, and loves nothing more then to get what he can from "infidels." It's a poor argument against a connection.
Saddam is (was?) a secular pan-Arab nationalist, no an Islamic fundamentalist. If he used rhetoric like "infidels", it was only to appeal to the Iraqi people.

You're aware of Saddam's record assisting terrorists organizations right?

I am aware that he gives money to the families of suicide bombers. What else does he do?

[Sethomas]

But Israel is the center of the universe!!!! What else IS there to do?

[VinceZeb]

I don't like the Patriot Act at all. But besides that, and the whole spy camera networking thing they are going to have for foreign cities, Bush is doing what he can with what he has. He is still hindered by the Clinton years of destroying the military. Even if bush gets re-elected, I doubt the damage will be undone by then.

You act as if there was this big conspiracy that Bush and co had when they joined office to take over the freaking world. Where is this proof? I mean, you spout off the ignorant retoric enough so I guess I am entitled to see some REAL proof. If this was the case, every news source in the world would have jumped on it. To compare Bush to Hitler makes you deserve to have your teeth knocked out, because millions of dead Jews, Catholics, retards, blacks, and other "physically and mentally unfit" people know what Hitler was really like.

And I must have struck a chord with the picture statement. Hell, I lied. The only person I have seen on here is Chojin.... which was an "interesting" experience to say the least.

[Zero Signal]

I mean, you spout off the ignorant retoric enough so I guess I am entitled to see some REAL proof.
That coming from you is just priceless. Talk about the pot and the kettle. :rolleyes

If this was the case, every news source in the world would have jumped on it.
I do not confine my news sources to CNN and MSNBC like you apparently do. On the other hand, I do not believe every single thing that printed anywhere either.

But let us have Ariel Sharon explain spell it out to you in what he said to Shimon Perez on 10/3/2001:

"We control America. Every time we do something you tell me America will do this and will do that . . . I want to tell you something very clear: Don't worry about American pressure on Israel. We, the Jewish people, control America, and the Americans know it."

In true Vinth style, you will probably now accuse me of being an anti-Semite, thus further cementing your blatant hypocrisy.

To compare Bush to Hitler makes you deserve to have your teeth knocked out, because millions of dead Jews, Catholics, retards, blacks, and other "physically and mentally unfit" people know what Hitler was really like.
Would comparing him to Julius Caesar be more politically correct for you? He used the same tactics as well. :rolleyes
This also coming from someone who has repeatedly called Max a kike.

And I must have struck a chord with the picture statement. Hell, I lied. The only person I have seen on here is Chojin.... which was an "interesting" experience to say the least.
Struck a chord? You only showed how ignorant you really are. You say something that you exhibit as truth and use it to instigate a reaction out of someone, then admit later that you were mistaken or outright lying. That sounds like something your mentor Bush would do.

I don't like the Patriot Act at all. But besides that, and the whole spy camera networking thing they are going to have for foreign cities, Bush is doing what he can with what he has. He is still hindered by the Clinton years of destroying the military. Even if bush gets re-elected, I doubt the damage will be undone by then.
The PATRIOT Act is another can of worms entirely. So they drafted and finalized a 342 page bill and sent it through the process of becoming a law (which takes a while) all in 5 weeks? Right. They were so afraid of what it contained that they did not let Congress members even read what was in it before they signed it. Those very few that did, rejected it outright. We can all thank your mentors in the Bush administration for that.

[ziggytrix]

You act as if there was this big conspiracy that Bush and co had when they joined office to take over the freaking world. Where is this proof?

ABC News (http://abcnews.go.com/sections/nightline/DailyNews/pnac_030310.html) ran a story on it.

You could also try PNAC's own site (http://www.newamericancentury.org/), but it was down at the time of this posting.

It's not like the fuckers are really even hiding it.

[Abcdxxxx]

Jeanette - "Saddam is (was?) a secular pan-Arab nationalist, no an Islamic fundamentalist. If he used rhetoric like "infidels", it was only to appeal to the Iraqi people. "

I was actually talking about Bin Laden's two faced ability to work alongside his enemies, including Saddam. While Saddam might have run a "secular pan-Arab nationalist" government (and how secular was it if every religion outside of Islam was persecuted?) He himself has put up a strong Muslim identity.and that's a pretty strong message in a "my way goes" dictatorship.

Jeanette "I am aware that he gives money to the families of suicide bombers. What else does he do?"

Ask Abu Nidal.


Seth - "But Israel is the center of the universe!!!! What else IS there to do?"

Go read the message board rules and come back when you can add something pertinant to this conversation.

Vince, you need a brush up yourself, because it makes your argument sound idiotic the second you start talking about people's families and gas chambers. Stop it.

[Sethomas]

Go read the message board rules and come back when you can add something pertinant to this conversation.

Go read the goddamn URL of this page. Hint: it rhymes with "i-clockery". Then try to attain at least a middle school comprehension of satire.

[Abcdxxxx]

Zero " If you think all Hitler did was put people in camps, then you are a sad and ignorant individual. Perhaps, I need to spell it out for you. "

So it wasn't Hitlers ACTIONS towards his plan of a final solution that gave Hitler his reputation? You're just impressed with yourself because you understand how Germany was manipulated into rallying behind such a plan. If Bush is writing a new Holocaust intended for the Arab population, he's barely cracked the first few pages.

Zero "Bush and his cronies are emplying the same tactics that Hitler, Goering and Goebbels used; create enemies for your people to hate and to rally behind you against them."

If that's your point, then chose a dictator (and there have been many) better suited to your analogy. Hitler, Goering and Goebbels did much, much more then merely create enemies for their people to solve some domestic problems. Their motives were far deeper then economics, and nationalism.

Zero - "Hitler wanted the Jews out of Germany as he knew that the German people were tired of getting fucked over by them. The Jews had most of the money in Germany at the time, and were extremely stingy with it."

According to you the Germans were "fucked over", and the Jews were "rich" and "stngy". You are a Nazi sympathiser.

Zero - "Hitler created some dogmatic agenda using the theory of the Aryan race to remove them. He knew how to manipulate people. It is an age-old tactic. "

"remove them" or attempt to eradicate their existance from the earth? There's a difference. It matters a great deal.


Also , on your oddly out of place Sharon quote...could you cite a source please? maybe explain how it's relevant to the discussion in this thread? Otherwise I just see you belittling, and rewriting the Holocaust while tossing in some fabricated quote feeding into the blood libels that antisemites have used for years to persecute Jews.

[Jeanette X]

I was actually talking about Bin Laden's two faced ability to work alongside his enemies, including Saddam. While Saddam might have run a "secular pan-Arab nationalist" government (and how secular was it if every religion outside of Islam was persecuted?) He himself has put up a strong Muslim identity.and that's a pretty strong message in a "my way goes" dictatorship.
I have yet to see any proof of Bin Laden working with Saddam. Furthermore, although Saddam has put up a strong Muslim identity, he has persecuted other Muslims, not just non-Muslim religions. The Shiite Muslims of southern Iraq and the Sunni Muslim Kurds (Saddam is a Sunni Muslim, by the way) of northern Iraq have both been horribly persecuted by Saddam for purely political reasons.

Ask Abu Nidal.

I'm afraid don't even know who that is. :blush Please explain further.

[Zero Signal]

Zero " If you think all Hitler did was put people in camps, then you are a sad and ignorant individual. Perhaps, I need to spell it out for you. "

So it wasn't Hitlers ACTIONS towards his plan of a final solution that gave Hitler his reputation? You're just impressed with yourself because you understand how Germany was manipulated into rallying behind such a plan. If Bush is writing a new Holocaust intended for the Arab population, he's barely cracked the first few pages.
I am impressed with myself? For reading about the history of what went on? Right.

"Bush has barely cracked the first few pages" What, were you expecting him to completely carry out his agenda in just two and a half years? Oh please. You are so short-sighted you cannot even see the nose on your own face.

Zero "Bush and his cronies are emplying the same tactics that Hitler, Goering and Goebbels used; create enemies for your people to hate and to rally behind you against them."

If that's your point, then chose a dictator (and there have been many) better suited to your analogy. Hitler, Goering and Goebbels did much, much more then merely create enemies for their people to solve some domestic problems. Their motives were far deeper then economics, and nationalism.
Sure their motives were deeper. You do not think that Bush's are not either? Bush used the word "crusade" to describe their campaigns in the Arab world, and said that God was behind him in doing that. Hitler honestly thought he was carrying out the will of God, too, but that is beside the point.

Zero - "Hitler wanted the Jews out of Germany as he knew that the German people were tired of getting fucked over by them. The Jews had most of the money in Germany at the time, and were extremely stingy with it."

According to you the Germans were "fucked over", and the Jews were "rich" and "stngy". You are a Nazi sympathiser.
So I am a Nazi sympathizer because I explained it in the mindset of what Hilter was feeding his people? :rolleyes He convinced the Germans that the Jews were to blame for the economic depression that Germany was experiencing. People lit their woodstoves with piles of German marks because they were so worthless. So I guess all of the history books are sympathizing with the Nazis, too. :rolleyes

Zero - "Hitler created some dogmatic agenda using the theory of the Aryan race to remove them. He knew how to manipulate people. It is an age-old tactic. "

"remove them" or attempt to eradicate their existance from the earth? There's a difference. It matters a great deal.
Eradicating their existence from the Earth is a moot point. He would do the same thing to anyone that disagreed with him, Jews or not. His initial plan was getting them out of Germany first, and as he conquered nations he would remove them from there as well.

[Zero Signal]

Ask Abu Nidal.

I'm afraid don't even know who that is. :blush Please explain further.
http://i-cias.com/e.o/abu_nidal.htm

[Jeanette X]

Thank you for the link Zero Signal. Very informative.

[Abcdxxxx]

Zero -

A) if a history book explained Hitler's motivations by describing the mass majority of WW2's victims with such blame and scorn - it most certainly would be considered sympathetic and antisemetic. Worse you're doing it to back up a lame Hitler-Bush comparison.


B) Hitler's targets were a lot more specific then "anyone who disagreed with him". The periphial deaths involved with large scale war play do zero to negate that.

Jeanette - That bio doesn't really explain what I was getting at...plus he cut of most of his Palestinian ties 25 years ago. Abu Nidal was a mercenery for hire used by everyone from the IRA to the Japanese Red army. Sometimes they'd hire him just to take credit for terrorist actions. He was untouchable. His strongest relations were with Libya and most recently - Iraq, where he was found dead. The official story is he commited suicide but, in reality it's more likely that Saddam wanted him to train the Al Qaeda sects in Iraq, and when he refused, they assasinated him... even if you don't want to believe that, one thing is for certain.... Abu Nidal was living in a retirement complex near the Tibris set up for Senior Terrorists of virtually every terrorist group, both state sponsored or otherwise - regardless of affiliations.

[Anonymous]

uh, just to clarify, do we have any proof that Osama and/or Al Qaeda were responsible for the 9/11 attacks yet? I mean, when I was watching the news that day they already had his picture up and were listing him as the prime suspect within 30 minutes of the second tower getting hit. Just seems a little...uh...stupid?

[Zhukov]

I was watching the news that day they already had his picture up and were listing him as the prime suspect within 30 minutes of the second tower getting hit. Just seems a little...uh...stupid?


Maybe it wasn't the total surprise to the CIA as they led you to believe. :rolleyes

[Jeanette X]

Why would Nidal refuse though?

[Abcdxxxx]

Nidal was sick. He was in Iraq to recieve treatments for a mild skin cancaer. He was trying ti retire...

...plus he was living undergound as one of the most wanted men alive , before popping up in Egypt around 1997. Pres. Mubarak hired him to fight Al Qaeda and Islamic Jihad, before they gained too much power. Even the Clinton White House backed the plan to try and turn the fundamentalist groups against each other. There's no proof, but it's been said that the Abu Nidal Organization worked alongside US Special Ops to clear out terrorist cells in prep for maneuvers in Kosovo.

In 2000. Nidal started double dealing, and selling intelligence on the US and Egypt, most likely to Al Qaeda itself, then took off for Iraq Clinton killed the CIA investigation into Nidal and Al Qaeda went ahead with 9/1 shortly after.

If you believe there were Al Qarda training camps in pro-Iraq fundamentalist Kurdish towns of Biyar and Tawil in the shoman district of Norhtern Iraq - then Nidal played the laison role between Saddam and the Al Qada. He would have been killed for knowing too much, and to send a message to Yassar Arafat and others who might want to deal with the US. A terrorist by the name of Abu Iyad was killed in 1991 for the same reason.

If you don't believe the training camps existed, or that a connection exists, then it's like Abu Nidal was killed for refusing to make the arrangements. He was brought to Baghdad shortly after working with Bin Laden.

[Jeanette X]

If you believe there were Al Qarda training camps in pro-Iraq fundamentalist Kurdish towns of Biyar and Tawil in the shoman district of Norhtern Iraq -
Wait...why would any Kurd be pro-Iraq, given the past history of atrocites enacted against them by Saddam? And why would any fundamentalist Kurd support Saddam, when he is not a fundamentalist?

[Abcdxxxx]

Wait...why would any Kurd be pro-Iraq, given the past history of atrocites enacted against them by Saddam? And why would any fundamentalist Kurd support Saddam, when he is not a fundamentalist?

Not all Kurds are anti-Iraq. Not all Kurds belong to the same faction.

Weren't you the one trying to call Saddam an equal opportunist mass murderer? I think you're confused.

Saddam wasn't some liberal or progressive leader, and his support/opposition wasn't as black and white as you seem to think. Remember that when Saddam stopped the coup attempt against him after the first Gulf War it was because of inside tip offs. Once again it's a case of "my brother, my enemy". To understand why Kurds, Bin Laden and Saddam would all work together you have to also ask yourself why Saddam and Iran would want to work together? Or Syria with Sadam? You don't have to agree or like your partners in terror to make deals with them, and use their resources.

[Jeanette X]

I just can't understand how any Kurd would be pro-Iraq. Can you tell me more about the pro-Iraq Kurdish faction(s)?

[Abcdxxxx]

The Kurds are known for being the best fighters in the Middle East, and they work as guns for hire. The Patriotic Union of Kurdistan has a long standing feud with the Kurdistan Democratic Party, who joined up with Iraqi troops.

Some of it also goes back to wars against Iran, and the Turks.

It's confusing, but I think all this stuff is VERY relevant to forming an opinion based on something other then distrust and dissent.