Forum Settings
       
« Previous 1 2 3 4
Reply To Thread

Hey gbajiFollow

QuoteReply
#1 Sep 08 2006 at 12:11 PM Rating: Decent
Nobby
Ministry of Silly Cnuts
*****
19,524 posts
You were right all along

Quote:
'No Saddam link to Iraq al-Qaeda'

There is no evidence of links between former Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein and al-Qaeda leaders in Iraq prior to the 2003 war, a US Senate report has said.

The revelation comes from a 2005 CIA report released by the Senate's Intelligence Committee on Friday.

US President George W Bush has said that the presence of late al-Qaeda leader Abu Musab al-Zarqawi in Iraq before the war was evidence of a link.
Others may interpret this differently, but I'm confident you'll explain to us how it vindicates your standpoint (whatever it is today)
____________________________
"I started out with nothin' and I still got most of it left" - Seasick Steve
▲ Page top
QuoteReply
#2 Sep 08 2006 at 12:29 PM Rating: Excellent
Samira
View User Forum
Will swallow your soul
******
29,360 posts
Quote:
There's no evidence Saddam Hussein had a relationship with Abu Musab al-Zarqawi and his Al-Qaida associates


Now, now, let's not be hasty. Just because he didn't sleep with them doesn't mean he didn't conspire with them.
____________________________
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.

▲ Page top
QuoteReply
#3 Sep 08 2006 at 12:31 PM Rating: Good
__DEL__1695601009560
Guru
*****
18,463 posts
The both have facial hair. It's obviously a signal of some sort!
▲ Page top
QuoteReply
#4 Sep 08 2006 at 12:35 PM Rating: Good
__DEL__1651450735431
View User Forum
Sage
*****
10,246 posts
Lemme get this straight...

An intelligence estimate 2 years after the war started contradicted intelligence on hand prior to the war starting and this is supposed to mean what exactly?

No, seriously. What's your point Nobbs? Hindsight being 20/20 and all, looks like you guys should have f'ucked off and left "The Colonies" alone, what with us kicking your *** twice, saving it twice and turning your entire country in to colon tongue-ing psycho-phants.
▲ Page top
QuoteReply
#5 Sep 08 2006 at 12:42 PM Rating: Decent
Nobby
Ministry of Silly Cnuts
*****
19,524 posts
MoebiusLord wrote:

No, seriously. What's your point Nobbs?

Not mine, but your Senate Intelligence Committee seems to have gone slightly off-message with your C-inC and my terminally stupid Prime Minister
MoebiusLord wrote:
Hindsight being 20/20 and all, looks like you guys should have f'ucked off and left "The Colonies" alone, what with us kicking your *** twice, saving it twice and turning your entire country in to colon tongue-ing psycho-phants.
I Love You
____________________________
"I started out with nothin' and I still got most of it left" - Seasick Steve
▲ Page top
QuoteReply
#6 Sep 08 2006 at 1:00 PM Rating: Good
__DEL__1651450735431
View User Forum
Sage
*****
10,246 posts
Quote:
Not mine, but your Senate Intelligence Committee seems to have gone slightly off-message with your C-inC and my terminally stupid Prime Minister

Or, the SIC simply released a year old document from the CIA to which correct thinking people are responding in a "much ado" manner, and democrats are trying to craft in to a damning endictment. I suppose it all depends on our own personal biases as to how we view the situation.

We obviously know I think most democratic politicians couldn't find oil in olive press, but whattayagonnado?
▲ Page top
QuoteReply
#7 Sep 08 2006 at 1:03 PM Rating: Decent
__DEL__1591797278547
Sage
***
3,829 posts
Isn't it funny how at every press conference, Bush STILL keeps saying that the war in Iraq is vital to the "War on Tara" even though Tony Snow claims this information is nothing new?

Yet, I'm sure any minute now, Gbaji will trot in here and claim that the Bush camp never deliberately attempted to graft Al-Qaeda into Iraq to justify a war they wanted to wage before they ever took office.

▲ Page top
QuoteReply
#8 Sep 08 2006 at 1:05 PM Rating: Good
__DEL__1651450735431
View User Forum
Sage
*****
10,246 posts
Quote:
Isn't it funny how at every press conference, Bush STILL keeps saying that the war in Iraq is vital to the "War on Tara" even though Tony Snow claims this information is nothing new?

How does that even begin to relate? Further proof that dizzy ******* should be *** receptacles and not heard.
▲ Page top
QuoteReply
#9 Sep 08 2006 at 1:16 PM Rating: Decent
__DEL__1591797278547
Sage
***
3,829 posts
MoebiusLord wrote:

How does that even begin to relate? Further proof that dizzy ******* should be *** receptacles and not heard.


If you can't see the connection between repeatedly equating the war in Iraq to the "war on tara" and the fact that it's be confirmed now by freaking Congress that there was never any connection between the Iraqi leader and terrorists, then I'd say you're the one who should be guzzling ***, rather than spewing your ignorance around here.

Be sure to swallow.
▲ Page top
QuoteReply
#10 Sep 08 2006 at 1:16 PM Rating: Good
__DEL__1695601009560
Guru
*****
18,463 posts
/popcorn
▲ Page top
QuoteReply
#11 Sep 08 2006 at 1:27 PM Rating: Decent
RedPhoenixxx
View User Forum
Sage
****
7,735 posts
Gabji is gonna say, if he's conciliatory, that we *needed* to invade Iraq to remove Saddam, so that we could make the US troops leave Saudi Arabia, and therefore appease Al-Qaeada.

No, wait, not "appease" that's for liberals.

Erm, so that we could "get to the source of the problem". Yeah, that sounds much better.

So, by invading and bloodily occupying a country full of Muslims, without the support of the international community or the Security Council, but with Poland's logistical help, we would calm down the fanatics that claim that America is a colonising and aggressive force bent on oppressing Muslims.

Ha! That showed them...


Edit: slleping

Edited, Sep 8th 2006 at 2:28pm EDT by RedPhoenixxxxxx
____________________________
My politics blog and stuff - Refractory
▲ Page top
QuoteReply
#12 Sep 08 2006 at 1:29 PM Rating: Good
__DEL__1616977010829
View User Forum
Sage
*****
13,880 posts
Ambrya wrote:
I'd say you're the one who should be guzzling ***, rather than spewing your ignorance around here.

Be sure to swallow.
That's hawt.
▲ Page top
QuoteReply
#13 Sep 08 2006 at 1:34 PM Rating: Decent
Nobby
Ministry of Silly Cnuts
*****
19,524 posts
RedPhoenixxxxxx wrote:
Gabji is gonna say, if he's conciliatory, that we *needed* to invade Iraq to remove Saddam, so that we could make the US troops leave Saudi Arabia, and therefore appease Al-Qaeada.

No, wait, not "appease" that's for liberals.

Erm, so that we could "get to the source of the problem". Yeah, that sounds much better.

So, by invading and bloodily occupying a country full of Muslims, without the support of the international community or the Security Council, but with Poland's logistical help, we would calm down the fanatics that claim that America is a colonising and aggressive force bent on oppressing Muslims.

Ha! That showed them...
You REMEMBERED POLAND!!!1!eleven!1
____________________________
"I started out with nothin' and I still got most of it left" - Seasick Steve
▲ Page top
QuoteReply
#14 Sep 08 2006 at 1:36 PM Rating: Good
__DEL__1695601009560
Guru
*****
18,463 posts
King Nobby wrote:
You REMEMBERED POLAND!!!1!eleven!1

Andd just when I had managed to forget. Smiley: frown


/rails at fate
▲ Page top
QuoteReply
#15 Sep 08 2006 at 1:37 PM Rating: Good
__DEL__1651450735431
View User Forum
Sage
*****
10,246 posts
Quote:
If you can't see the connection between repeatedly equating the war in Iraq to the "war on tara" and the fact that it's be confirmed now by freaking Congress that there was never any connection between the Iraqi leader and terrorists, then I'd say you're the one who should be guzzling ***, rather than spewing your ignorance around here.

Where as if you can't see that removing from power a dictator who had repeated contacts with a known terrorist group (as well as a desire to attain more weapons of mass destruction and a shocking willingness to use them) is an important part of a global war on Terrorism, then perhaps you should stop talking now and let grown folks handle their business.

By the way, it wasn't confirmed by congress in the story. There was a document written by the CIA that was released by congress today. Arguing with a liberal apologist is a simple task. All I really have to do is say "nuh uh" to anything you write and I pretty much win.
▲ Page top
QuoteReply
#16 Sep 08 2006 at 1:41 PM Rating: Decent
Nobby
Ministry of Silly Cnuts
*****
19,524 posts
MoebiusLord wrote:

By the way, it wasn't confirmed by congress in the story. There was a document written by the CIA that was released by congress today.


Nope, it is a summary by the Senate's Intelligence Committee, following their analysis of CIA reports.
Quote:

The committee concluded that the CIA had evidence of several instances of contacts between the Iraqi authorities and al-Qaeda throughout the 1990s but that these did not add up to a formal relationship.

It added that the government "did not have a relationship, harbour or turn a blind eye toward Zarqawi and his associates".

It said that Iraq and al-Qaeda were ideologically poles apart.

"Saddam Hussein was distrustful of al-Qaeda and viewed Islamic extremists as a threat to his regime, refusing all requests from al-Qaeda to provide material or operational support," it said.

The Senate report added that the Iraqi regime had repeatedly rejected al-Qaeda requests for meetings.


Full report here

Edited, Sep 8th 2006 at 2:48pm EDT by Nobby
____________________________
"I started out with nothin' and I still got most of it left" - Seasick Steve
▲ Page top
QuoteReply
#17 Sep 08 2006 at 1:43 PM Rating: Decent
RedPhoenixxx
View User Forum
Sage
****
7,735 posts
King Nobby wrote:
You REMEMBERED POLAND!!!1!eleven!1


I'll NEVER FORGET PLOLANDIA!!!1

Jeszcze Polska nie zginela,
Kiedy my zyjemy.
Co nam obca przemoc wziela,
Szabla odbierzemy!!

Marsz, marsz, Dabrowski,
Z ziemi wloskiej do Polski,
Za twoim przewodem
Zlaczym sie z narodem!!

Przejdziem Wisle, przejdziem Warte,
Bedziem Polakami,
Dal nam przyklad Bonaparte,
Jak zwyciezac mamy!!

last paragraph translates as:

Cross the Vistula and Warta
And Poles we shall be;
We've been shown by Bonaparte
Ways to victory
____________________________
My politics blog and stuff - Refractory
▲ Page top
QuoteReply
#18 Sep 08 2006 at 1:57 PM Rating: Decent
__DEL__1592266717703
View User Forum
Scholar
***
3,494 posts
Why does the Senate Intelligence Committee hate America? Smiley: frown
▲ Page top
QuoteReply
#19 Sep 08 2006 at 2:47 PM Rating: Decent
__DEL__1594570947417
Scholar
****
6,318 posts
<Insert crappy joke about the Senate Intelligence Committe being an oxymoron>
▲ Page top
QuoteReply
#20 Sep 08 2006 at 2:57 PM Rating: Decent
__DEL__1704672981712
Scholar
*****
10,755 posts
Who f'uckin cares. His was still a crackpot despot that would have nuked us off the map if he had the chance.

Survival of the fittest *****.
▲ Page top
QuoteReply
#21 Sep 08 2006 at 3:06 PM Rating: Decent
__DEL__1594570947417
Scholar
****
6,318 posts
NephthysWanderer the Charming wrote:
Who f'uckin cares. His was still a crackpot despot that would have nuked us off the map if he had the chance.

Survival of the fittest *****.

gbaji? Smiley: confused

I thought he was republican, and thus could not hate america...
▲ Page top
QuoteReply
#22 Sep 08 2006 at 3:07 PM Rating: Excellent
Jophiel
View User Forum
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
The Trib wrote:
Republicans countered that there was little new in the report and Democrats were trying to score election-year points with it.
Next thing you know, the Democrats will be dusting off reports of antiquated mortar shells and holding them up as proof of a WMD program!
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
▲ Page top
QuoteReply
#23 Sep 08 2006 at 3:22 PM Rating: Decent
__DEL__1704672981712
Scholar
*****
10,755 posts
Ambrya wrote:
MoebiusLord wrote:

How does that even begin to relate? Further proof that dizzy ******* should be *** receptacles and not heard.


If you can't see the connection between repeatedly equating the war in Iraq to the "war on tara" and the fact that it's be confirmed now by freaking Congress that there was never any connection between the Iraqi leader and terrorists, then I'd say you're the one who should be guzzling ***, rather than spewing your ignorance around here.

Be sure to swallow.


Because Al Qaeda owns the copyrights to terrorists. Smiley: oyvey

I just can't believe that even the pinkest of you tree hugging pansies refuses to condemn Saddam for his actions against his own people.
▲ Page top
QuoteReply
#24 Sep 08 2006 at 3:32 PM Rating: Excellent
Jophiel
View User Forum
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
If I condemn him, I'm still allowed to disagree with the given pretext, timing, means, planning and execution of the invasion and occupation, right?

Or is this one of those "If you think we did something wrong, you want Saddam to rape little girls" things?

Edited, Sep 8th 2006 at 4:40pm EDT by Jophiel
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
▲ Page top
QuoteReply
#25 Sep 08 2006 at 3:34 PM Rating: Decent
__DEL__1594570947417
Scholar
****
6,318 posts
NephthysWanderer the Charming wrote:

I just can't believe that even the pinkest of you tree hugging pansies refuses to condemn Saddam for his actions against his own people.


I guess my reading comp must be "teh suxorz", but I don't remember seeing anyone say that Sadam was a great guy, comperable to a CareBear.

If the only reason we went over to Iraq was because he was such a meany, then why aren't we liberating the people of Cuba, or China, or Vietnam, or Poland?
▲ Page top
QuoteReply
#26 Sep 08 2006 at 3:40 PM Rating: Excellent
Jophiel
View User Forum
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Stop hating on Poland or I'll rate camp you.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
▲ Page top
« Previous 1 2 3 4
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 378 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (378)
© 2024 Fanbyte LLC