Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 31
  1.    #1  
    Key Bush Intelligence Briefing Kept From Hill Panel

    Some Quotes:

    "Ten days after the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, President Bush was told in a highly classified briefing that the U.S. intelligence community had no evidence linking the Iraqi regime of Saddam Hussein to the attacks and that there was scant credible evidence that Iraq had any significant collaborative ties with Al Qaeda, according to government records and current and former officials with firsthand knowledge of the matter.
    .
    .
    .
    "One of the more intriguing things that Bush was told during the briefing was that the few credible reports of contacts between Iraq and Al Qaeda involved attempts by Saddam Hussein to monitor the terrorist group. Saddam viewed Al Qaeda as well as other theocratic radical Islamist organizations as a potential threat to his secular regime. At one point, analysts believed, Saddam considered infiltrating the ranks of Al Qaeda with Iraqi nationals or even Iraqi intelligence operatives to learn more about its inner workings, according to records and sources."



    Oh my!
  2. #2  
    We didn't invade Iraq because of 9/11.

    We invaded them because they had violated over 14 UN resolutions with the use of force a consequence. We finally backed up the resolutions. They (iraq) were firing on US AirForce Pilots on an almost daily basis while patroling the "no-fly zones".

    What argument are you try to prove/dis-prove?

    (happy Thanksgiving )
  3. #3  
    Time Magazine reported a few years ago that the neocons, including Cheney and Rumsfeld, came into office planning to do something about Iraq. Some of them felt there was unfinished business from the first Gulf war. The events of 9/11 gave them the excuse they needed to start going after Saddam. Bush Senior wisely didn't try to take out Saddam in the first Gulf war out of fear that a situation just like today would develop.
    There might not have been deliberate manipulation of the intelligence, but the neocons cherry-picked the reports that supported their view, and ignored the rest.
  4.    #4  
    Quote Originally Posted by dutchtrumpet
    We didn't invade Iraq because of 9/11.

    We invaded them because they had violated over 14 UN resolutions with the use of force a consequence. We finally backed up the resolutions. They (iraq) were firing on US AirForce Pilots on an almost daily basis while patroling the "no-fly zones".

    What argument are you try to prove/dis-prove?

    (happy Thanksgiving )
    "Along with the contention that Saddam Hussein was stockpiling weapons of mass destruction, President Bush, Vice President Cheney and other top administration officials have often asserted that there were extensive ties between Hussein's government and Osama bin Laden's terrorist network; earlier this year, Cheney said evidence of a link was "overwhelming."..."

    As of Feb 2005;
    47 percent believe that Saddam Hussein helped plan and support the hijackers who attacked the U.S. on September 11, 2001 (up six percentage points from November).
    44 percent actually believe that several of the hijackers who attacked the U.S. on September 11 were Iraqis (up significantly from 37% in November).

    Gee. I wonder why a bunch of people would get that idea?
  5. #5  
    Quote Originally Posted by daThomas
    Gee. I wonder why a bunch of people would get that idea?
    Perhaps if you could cite one example of just one administration official ever claiming Iraq had anything to do with 9/11 we'd all be closer to knowing.

    Can't do that? Oh. Maybe it's the poor job the media has done in reporting on the war?
    Current: iPhone 3G
    Retired from active duty: Treo 800w, Sprint Touch, Mogul, Apache, Cingular Treo 650, HP iPaq 4350, T|T, M505 - Nokia 3650 - SE R520m, T610, T637, Moto P280, etc, etc...
  6. #6  
    Quote Originally Posted by phurth
    Perhaps if you could cite one example of just one administration official ever claiming Iraq had anything to do with 9/11 we'd all be closer to knowing.

    Can't do that? Oh. Maybe it's the poor job the media has done in reporting on the war?
    Thats not fair! You know these arguments are about perception, not reality
  7. #7  
    Quote Originally Posted by daThomas
    Oh my!
    Wow. Newsflash - the administration didn't trust information coming out of the CIA. I'm shocked - I mean how could they... especially after such stellar successes as preventing 9/11 and predicting the collapse of the Soviet Union? This would be the same CIA that is almost certainly the sole source for your cited article...

    We're also still waiting on an answer to dutchtrumpet's question:
    What argument are you try to prove/dis-prove?
    Current: iPhone 3G
    Retired from active duty: Treo 800w, Sprint Touch, Mogul, Apache, Cingular Treo 650, HP iPaq 4350, T|T, M505 - Nokia 3650 - SE R520m, T610, T637, Moto P280, etc, etc...
  8.    #8  
    Quote Originally Posted by phurth
    Perhaps if you could cite one example of just one administration official ever claiming Iraq had anything to do with 9/11 we'd all be closer to knowing.

    Can't do that? Oh. Maybe it's the poor job the media has done in reporting on the war?
    The poor job the media did was repeating the Bush administration's repeated statements of "Saddam...9-11... Saddam...9-11... Saddam...9-11... Saddam...9-11... Saddam...9-11... Saddam...9-11... Saddam...9-11... Saddam...9-11... Saddam...9-11... Saddam...9-11... Saddam...9-11... Saddam...9-11... Saddam...9-11... Saddam...9-11... "

    Can you honestly sit there and tell me they did not do that and that the general public's mis-belief of the association is not a direct result of this administrations attempt to tie the two together? Honestly?

    Edied to add:

    Example Here.
  9. #9  
    Quote Originally Posted by daThomas
    The poor job the media did was repeating the Bush administration's repeated statements of "Saddam...9-11... Saddam...9-11... Saddam...9-11... Saddam...9-11... Saddam...9-11... Saddam...9-11... Saddam...9-11... Saddam...9-11... Saddam...9-11... Saddam...9-11... Saddam...9-11... Saddam...9-11... Saddam...9-11... Saddam...9-11... "

    Can you honestly sit there and tell me they did not do that and that the general public's mis-belief of the association is not a direct result of this administrations attempt to tie the two together? Honestly?
    Cite....Cite....Cite....Cite....Cite

    Interesting that your post would imply that not only did it happen but it happened often. Yet you seem to be unable to post even one Cite!
  10.    #10  
    Quote Originally Posted by sxtg
    Cite....Cite....Cite....Cite....Cite

    Interesting that your post would imply that not only did it happen but it happened often. Yet you seem to be unable to post even one Cite!
    That was quick. Check my edit.
  11.    #11  
    Quote Originally Posted by phurth
    Wow. Newsflash - the administration didn't trust information coming out of the CIA. I'm shocked - I mean how could they... especially after such stellar successes as preventing 9/11 and predicting the collapse of the Soviet Union? This would be the same CIA that is almost certainly the sole source for your cited article...

    We're also still waiting on an answer to dutchtrumpet's question:

    The admin wanted the intelligence community to give the excuse to go into Iraq. I refuse to review this with cite's as it was shown in several people's statements throughout this fiasco. Research it yourself or keep your head in that hole. Your choice.
  12. #12  
    Quote Originally Posted by daThomas
    That was quick. Check my edit.
    From your Cite ...

    Even before the war in Iraq, most Bush officials did not explicitly state that Iraq had a part in the attack on the United States two years ago.
    Last edited by sxtg; 11/22/2005 at 10:39 PM.
  13. #13  
    More.....

    In particular, current intelligence officials reiterated yesterday that a reported Prague visit in April 2001 between Sept. 11 hijacker Mohamed Atta and an Iraqi agent had been discounted by the CIA, which sent former agency Director James R. Woolsey to investigate the claim. Woolsey did not find any evidence to confirm the report, officials said, and President Bush did not include it in the case for war in his State of the Union address last January.
  14. #14  
    More yet....

    Bush administration officials insisted yesterday that they are learning more about various Iraqi connections with Al Qaeda. They said there is evidence suggesting a meeting took place between the head of Iraqi intelligence and Osama bin Laden in Sudan in the mid-1990s; another purported meeting was said to take place in Afghanistan, and during it Iraqi officials offered to provide chemical and biological weapons training, according to officials who have read transcripts of interrogations with Al Qaeda detainees.

    But there is no evidence proving the Iraqi regime knew about or took part in the Sept. 11 attacks, the Bush officials said.
  15.    #15  
    Yes, of course the admin never came out and stated explicitly. They suggested ENDLESSLY!

    Now that the invasion/occupation has drawn foreign fighters including their poster boy, Zarqawi, now thay can keep saying, "We're fighting them there instead of here." Bollocks and lame. Show that you can apprehend the person(s) responsible for 9-11 before you glom onto your new terrorist boogie-man-boyfriend please.

    Goals and Metrics for Iraq please!
  16. #16  
    Quote Originally Posted by daThomas
    Can you honestly sit there and tell me they did not do that and that the general public's mis-belief of the association is not a direct result of this administrations attempt to tie the two together? Honestly?

    Edied to add:

    Example Here.
    Ties between Al Qaeda and Iraq and Iraq plotting over 9/11 are not the same thing. That was never used as a justification for the war.
    Current: iPhone 3G
    Retired from active duty: Treo 800w, Sprint Touch, Mogul, Apache, Cingular Treo 650, HP iPaq 4350, T|T, M505 - Nokia 3650 - SE R520m, T610, T637, Moto P280, etc, etc...
  17.    #17  
    Quote Originally Posted by phurth
    Ties between Al Qaeda and Iraq and Iraq plotting over 9/11 are not the same thing. That was never used as a justification for the war.
    Yea, that's why the % of Americans I cited above believe that. Again, why, after several months of reported investigations pointed to Al Qaeda with majority bases in Taliban controlled Afghanistan, AND a HUGE majority of Americans (INCLUDING MYSELF) supported military action there to capture/destroy/disrupt Al Qaeda, why, oh WHY, would HALF of America start thinking Iraq was involved?

    Did this happen in a vacumn? NO! This admin took our justified jingoism from 9-11 and warped it to their already pre-determined agenada and manipulated the public perception to match it. If you can't see that, then wait for a history book in 40 years.
  18. #18  
    The admin wanted the intelligence community to give the excuse to go into Iraq. I refuse to review this with cite's as it was shown in several people's statements throughout this fiasco. Research it yourself or keep your head in that hole. Your choice.
    You really haven't a clue. Excuse? There was no shortage of reasons - we've been over this before. Shadow boxing with fantasies about the war is tiring. I'm ducking back into my hole where we have this thing I like to call "reality".
    Current: iPhone 3G
    Retired from active duty: Treo 800w, Sprint Touch, Mogul, Apache, Cingular Treo 650, HP iPaq 4350, T|T, M505 - Nokia 3650 - SE R520m, T610, T637, Moto P280, etc, etc...
  19. #19  
    Had we gone into afghanistan pre 911, Instead of complaining that the admin knew and didn't do anything to prevent it, you would be complaining that there was no justification to invade. The way I see it, the "rather fight them there than here" holds a lot of merit.
  20. #20  
    Yea, that's why the % of Americans I cited above believe that. Again, why, after several months of reported investigations pointed to Al Qaeda with majority bases in Taliban controlled Afghanistan, AND a HUGE majority of Americans (INCLUDING MYSELF) supported military action there to capture/destroy/disrupt Al Qaeda, why, oh WHY, would HALF of America start thinking Iraq was involved?
    Half of America believes Elvis is still alive - and **** Cheney had nothing to do with it.
    Current: iPhone 3G
    Retired from active duty: Treo 800w, Sprint Touch, Mogul, Apache, Cingular Treo 650, HP iPaq 4350, T|T, M505 - Nokia 3650 - SE R520m, T610, T637, Moto P280, etc, etc...
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions