Page 5 of 12 FirstFirst 12345678910 ... LastLast
Results 81 to 100 of 230
  1.    #81  
    Quote Originally Posted by daThomas
    The fact that you reference a "private effort" to translate the "saddam documents" and FOXNews is the source truly frightens me.
    Quote Originally Posted by theBlaze74
    Sigh. Hobbes, you just posted an article that summarized what Stephen Hayes wrote in "The Weekly Standard"! Half of what you bolded begins with Mr. Hayes reports, that should be a big hint.

    With all due respect, it seems you spend most of your day surfing less than mainstream websites trying to justify this war.
    Again, both of you attack sources in an attempt to brush off the content. No matter how many times you say it, it is NOT just a Fox News thing. To do so is to purposely keep yourself in denial of the latest information. Here are a collection of sources I have quoted from:

    • Operation Iraqi Freedom Document Portal
    • ABC News -- They broke the initial story.
    • MSNBC
    • The New Yorker
    • Seattle Post-Intelligencer
    • Global Security.org
    • Fox News
    • New York Sun
    • BBC
    • CNS News
    • Salt Lake City Tribune
    • Foreign Military Studies Office Joint Reserve Intelligence Center
    • Investors.com
    • UK Guardian
    • Federation of American Scientists
    • West Point's Combating Terrorism Center
    • Weekly Standard
    • andkronos International
    • UK Telegraph
    • MIPT Terrorism Knowledge Base
    • Wall Street Journal


    Again, these are not just mirrored sources as a vast majority of the sources are interdependent parts of the story, separate analysis, or confirmation of a prior report with further information with more translated docs.

    I am not attempting to justify the war, only sharing what new information is coming out. If it is for or against it, I have been more than willing to share it. Because both of your continual attacks at the sources, i.e. Fox News, Wall Street reporting on Weekly Standard, etc... I have posted at least 3 times in this thread links to the ORIGINAL documents so you can see them for yourselves (OP, #36, #58.

    Quote Originally Posted by HobbesIsReal
    If you are interested in direct access to many of these docs (some have been translated and posted in English while most of the others may show only the title or summary as they have yet to be translated and released), then you can read them here with out any dispute about the source ( i.e. Fox News, ABC News, Weekly Standard, MSNBC, etc...), that reports on them.

    http://70.168.46.200/recentPosted.aspx
    http://70.168.46.200/allFiles.aspx

    • Title: An order from Saddam Hussein to present $25,000 for the suicide bomber families in Palestine
    • Title: Article about CBS broadcast on AQ trying to manufacture a nuclear bomb
    • Title: Abu-Zubaydah Statement on the Capability of al-Qaidah to Manufacture and Deliver Nuclear Weapons to the U.S.
    • Title: A handwritten report within the IIS regarding information taken from the internet about the work of some Iraqi factories, such as the production of explosives, chemical products, and chemical research
    • Title: LETTER FROM SADDAM TO PUTIN
    • Title: Correspondence between various Iraqi organizations giving instructions to hide chemicals and equipment
    • Title: Biological tests, excluding items imported to meet UN regulation, dule usage etc.
    • Title: INTERNAL LETTERS WRITTEN WITHIN THE IIS IN REGARDS TO SOME CHEMICAL SUBSTANCE, ALSO QUESTIONS ABOUT THE NEW IRANIAN INTELLIGENCE STRUCTURE
    • Correspondence, dated 2001, within the General Military Intelligence Directorate (GMID), regarding information taken from several radio stations concerning several issues such conflicts, attacks, military training and the use of chemical weapons
    • Financial Forms, Administrative Orders and Correspondence Related to the Chemical Engineering Designs Directorate
    • Title: Memos dated 1992 to 1994 belonging to the Chemical Industries Department of the Military Industrialization Commission regarding Babil Project for producing Magnesium Oxide
    It is almost to the point of being funny that I have stated over and over and over again that NONE of the docs released so far are conclusive. But that they are currently only points of interest. I have stated several times that these docs may prove that Bush lied beyond even dreams of the most radical left wing liberal. Or that they may prove that there was more truth in the original causes than anyone even dared dream of at the time. Yet this is construed as hard line justification for Bush just because most of the docs at the moment point in that direction.

    I have quoted sources from ABC News (who broke the original story) to Weekly Standard to the Wall Street Journal to MSNBC to Fox News to the original source of the Documents with no 3rd party analysis....yet I am drawing at straws from obscure right wing radical sources?

    I have presented over 20 separate sources concerning the translation, analysis, review, etc... of these newly translated docs that have never before been seen by the public, with little regard to the fact if they support the war effort or not. Yet I do not see one single source debunking the authenticity of these documents from you to support your claims. You both seem to repeatedly fall back on attacking the sources instead of addressing the content.

    Fox News, MSNBC, Wall Street Journal, ABC News, The Weekly Standard Magazine, The New Yorker have all supported the authenticity of the documents. Analysis is up for discussion.
    Last edited by HobbesIsReal; 07/12/2006 at 12:33 AM.
  2. Micael's Avatar
    Posts
    736 Posts
    Global Posts
    739 Global Posts
    #82  
    Clearly no amount of evidence will have the effect that you hope for, Hobbes. It will simply be ignored. If it's remotely anti-administration, though, they'll leap on it. The worse thing about this war is its politicalization by the left.
    The Law of Logical Argument: Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
  3. #83  
    Quote Originally Posted by Micael
    Clearly no amount of evidence will have the effect that you hope for, Hobbes. It will simply be ignored. If it's remotely anti-administration, though, they'll leap on it. The worse thing about this war is its politicalization by the left.
    Really? That's the worst thing about this war?
  4. #84  
    It is almost to the point of being funny that you continually hide behind the pretense of being "balanced" yet you would pot the rewards for palestinian suicide bombers which is a desperate attempt to tie the saddam regime to terrorists thus to 9-11.
  5. #85  
    Quote Originally Posted by Micael
    The worse thing about this war is its politicalization by the left.
    The worse thing about this war/occupation, besides the dead & wounded Americans/****es/Sunnis/Kurds, is what it's doing to hundreds of thousands of our service people and their families.
  6.    #86  
    Quote Originally Posted by daThomas
    It is almost to the point of being funny that you continually hide behind the pretense of being "balanced" yet you would pot the rewards for palestinian suicide bombers which is a desperate attempt to tie the saddam regime to terrorists thus to 9-11.
    Stop Spinning.....

    As you know from the multiple times I have responded to this.......I have my views. I recognized the views I have. I am not affiliated or loyal to any party or to any man. No one man...aka Howard Dean...speaks for me. Just because I have my views does not mean that I am not unwilling or incapable of sharing information for both sides of the argument. No doubt I lean to the right, but have been more than willing to listen to and accept several points of views leaning to the left. As T2 and Barye...and you can attest to.

    As for the spin of the rewards for suicide bombers being a "desperate attempt to tie the Saddam regime to terrorists thus to 9-11" is pure and simple fiction. I have always noted that this is simply a single piece of a huge puzzle of questions of Saddam's actions and nothing more.

    I still see you did not address the content or authenticity of the docs.
    Last edited by HobbesIsReal; 07/11/2006 at 01:26 PM.
  7. #87  
    Quote Originally Posted by HobbesIsReal
    I still see you did not address the content or authenticity of the docs.
    Because we are not qualified to address content or authenticity of the docs, and we may not hear an analysis from the CIA for years.

    We do know what the CIA knew in the days and months leading up to the Iraq invasion, and we know that this administration, particularly the office of the Vice President, had already decided to go to war without respect to what the CIA knew, and that they were engaged in a campaign to gather their own intelligence through their own channels, and pressure the CIA to include it in the NIE.

    So forgive me if I am still a bit skeptical about your raw "new bombshell intelligence" right before the off term election that turns out to prove that everything the CIA told us was wrong, and despite any evidence at the time, the administration had been right since the beginning. Aside from the president's claims of devine inspiration, I don't see how that is possible.
    Last edited by theBlaze74; 07/11/2006 at 01:33 PM.
  8.    #88  
    Quote Originally Posted by theBlaze74
    So forgive me if I am still a bit skeptical about your raw "new bombshell intelligence" .
    Being skeptical is good. That is what I like....but only skepticism with the eye to learn, and not to dismiss, is productive.

    This is not a "new bombshell intelligence" thing as this has been going on since the end of last year. If anything there has been nothing but stalling from both the Admin and the intel community in releasing these docs.

    As for the the docs and the CIA, I think there is concern on all sides of the fence, i.e. the admin, the Intel community, etc... I think the Admin is gun shy to go toe to toe about the CIA previous and current analysis due to past situations and current political environment.

    I think the CIA is gun shy of the docs because they are scared it might prove how wrong they really were.

    Here is what the Wall Street Journal had to say in conjuncture with the Weekly Standard Magazine's report:

    A less benign explanation for the Bush Administration's lethargy is that its officials don't want to challenge the prewar CIA orthodoxy that the "secular" Saddam would never cavort with "religious" al Qaeda. They've seen what happened to others--"Scooter" Libby, Douglas Feith, John Bolton--who dared to question CIA analyses. Mr. Hayes reports that the Pentagon intelligence chief, Stephen Cambone, has been a particular obstacle to energetic document inspection.
    Last edited by HobbesIsReal; 07/11/2006 at 01:46 PM.
  9. Micael's Avatar
    Posts
    736 Posts
    Global Posts
    739 Global Posts
    #89  
    Quote Originally Posted by theBlaze74
    Really? That's the worst thing about this war?
    Actually, in the long term, it may well prove to be the worse thing.
    The Law of Logical Argument: Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
  10. cardio's Avatar
    Posts
    779 Posts
    Global Posts
    787 Global Posts
    #90  
    Quote Originally Posted by cellmatrix
    Sorry if I was too counter-sarcastic before but the point I was trying to make was that because these were not dangerous, they really did not represent a threat to anyone and they certainly should not be considered destructive, let alone mass-destructive. So branding these as WMDs is a little disingenuous or at least stretching it dont you think?
    Any chemical munition is considered a WMD. The three types of weapons that we normally associate with the phrase WMD ar Nuclear, Biological, and Chemical. Previously these were considered NBC weapons, and the military were trained on response to an attack from NBC, this has changed to being trained on the approprate response to an attack form WMD, this training includes appropriate shelter, blast protection, protective garments, decontamination of equipment and treating those who were exposed,etc. So, yes I consider these as well as the 500 or so other munitions that have been located to be WMDs. The military members who became ill, were treated according to the training they recieved, how would the subway riders in NY respond?
    "If It Weren't For The United States Military"
    "There Would Be NO United States of America"
  11. cardio's Avatar
    Posts
    779 Posts
    Global Posts
    787 Global Posts
    #91  
    Quote Originally Posted by daThomas
    It is almost to the point of being funny that you continually hide behind the pretense of being "balanced" yet you would pot the rewards for palestinian suicide bombers which is a desperate attempt to tie the saddam regime to terrorists thus to 9-11.
    Palestinan suicide bombers are terrorists.
    "If It Weren't For The United States Military"
    "There Would Be NO United States of America"
  12. Micael's Avatar
    Posts
    736 Posts
    Global Posts
    739 Global Posts
    #92  
    Quote Originally Posted by daThomas
    The worse thing about this war/occupation, besides the dead & wounded Americans/****es/Sunnis/Kurds, is what it's doing to hundreds of thousands of our service people and their families.
    Ok, maybe I shouldn't have said 'worse thing'. I opened the door and you kicked it down. My point stands, though. The left politicizes the war for election points. Good news and evidence that supports the reasons for the war are ignored. Any little negative is sloshed through all media outlets for months.
    The Law of Logical Argument: Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
  13. #93  
    Quote Originally Posted by HobbesIsReal
    Being skeptical is good. That is what I like....but only skepticism with the eye to learn, and not to dismiss, is productive.

    As for the the docs and the CIA, I think there is concern on all sides of the fence, i.e. the admin, the Intel community, etc... I think the Admin is gun shy to go toe to toe about the CIA previous and current analysis due to past situations and current political environment.

    I think the CIA is gun shy of the docs because they are scared it might prove how wrong they really were.

    Here is what the Wall Street Journal had to say in conjuncture with the Weekly Standard Magazine's report:
    Hobbes, are you saying that you are subscribing to the Weekly Standard's Notion that Cheney's Chief of staff and others were indicted for offering dissent from the consensus opinion that secular Saddam was not in league with Osama? And not because he actually outed one of the CIA agents who was critical of his tactics?
  14.    #94  
    Quote Originally Posted by theBlaze74
    Hobbes, are you saying that you are subscribing to the Weekly Standard's Notion that Cheney's Chief of staff and others were indicted for offering dissent from the consensus opinion that secular Saddam was not in league with Osama? And not because he actually outed one of the CIA agents who was critical of his tactics?
    I am saying the whether any or all parties involved are guilty or innocent, the political enviroment created by these situations may be a factor in the Admin's reluctance to push any cause, i.e. the rapid release of these docs, that could result in a direct or indirect challenge to the CIA.
  15. #95  
    Quote Originally Posted by HobbesIsReal
    I am saying the whether any or all parties involved are guilty or innocent, the political enviroment created by these situations may be a factor in the Admin's reluctance to push any cause, i.e. the rapid release of these docs, that could result in a direct or indirect challenge to the CIA.
    Ok, but we know that the administration has been leaking or even gathering, if not creating their own intelligence since before the Vice President's office outed the agent do we not?
  16.    #96  
    Sure, in the general terms of your statement, it sounds pretty boiler plate for any administration.

    If you want to continue the Bush lied, leaked, etc... discussion, it would probably better served in the Bush Lied thread or the Plume thread.
  17. #97  
    Quote Originally Posted by cardio
    Palestinan suicide bombers are terrorists.
    Completely and utterly unrelated to 9-11 which this admin tried to justify the Iraq invasion. But you keep clinging to that.
  18. #98  
    Quote Originally Posted by Micael
    Good news and evidence that supports the reasons for the war are ignored.
    You're right of course. multiple dozens of people being pulled from their vehicles and shot based on their ethnicity should not be covered by the media because three schools that were damaged by the US shock and Awe have reopened (albeit with electricity and running water). There is not an eye rolling smiley big enough for my feeling right now.
  19. TomUps's Avatar
    Posts
    22 Posts
    Global Posts
    28 Global Posts
    #99  
    Palestinan suicide bombers are terrorists.
    as discussed in other posts, they are not to DaT.

    Anyway, I think the removal from power of anyone that gives money to people that blow up children is a very good thing.
  20. #100  
    Quote Originally Posted by TomUps
    as discussed in other posts, they are not to DaT.

    Anyway, I think the removal from power of anyone that gives money to people that blow up children is a very good thing.
    Again I'm not debating that one way or another.

    Again pointing out that Palestine had nothing to do with 9-11 and trying to use it to jusify invading Iraq is disingenuous.
Page 5 of 12 FirstFirst 12345678910 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions