FRIHOSTFORUMSSEARCHFAQTOSBLOGSCOMPETITIONS
You are invited to Log in or Register a free Frihost Account!


Previously dismissed by "Bush Lied" crowd...





S3nd K3ys
MORE evidence that the WMD issue in Iraq was real...

http://www.nysun.com/article/26514?page_no=1 wrote:
Iraq's WMD Secreted in Syria, Sada Says

By IRA STOLL - Staff Reporter of the Sun
January 26, 2006

The man who served as the no. 2 official in Saddam Hussein's air force says Iraq moved weapons of mass destruction into Syria before the war by loading the weapons into civilian aircraft in which the passenger seats were removed.


I have always suspected the Baathist Syrian government was helping Saddam.

I remember the intelligence photos showing what lookd like a huge convoy of trucks heading near the Syrian border. the Bush lied crowd dismissed them because the intelligence community could not confirm what was being transported.
S3nd K3ys
The jig is up!

FoxNews.com wrote:
Iranian President Meets Palestinian Leaders in Syria
Saturday, January 21, 2006

DAMASCUS, Syria — Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad met Friday with the leaders of the Palestinian groups Hamas and Islamic Jihad in Syria, expressing his support a day after 20 people were wounded in Tel Aviv in a suicide attack claimed by Jihad.


I wonder what else he's doing there???
Soulfire
For all you know that picture could've been staged, or it could've been kids at a terrorist training school.

There are so many factors that go into it, so don't take that picture for face value.
wolfhnd
If Syria accepted the chemical weapons where did they store them?
S3nd K3ys
wolfhnd wrote:
If Syria accepted the chemical weapons where did they store them?


Damascus
jaysen
Check between thier mattress and boxspring... isn't that where most people hide things?
diverden
Somehow the news media does not qualify as a reliable source. I am certain that if we look at pre-iraq war, many of the same sources were saying the Iraq has WMD's. Ultimately it is about money and power. Oil is money and money is power. You don't see us invading the Sudan or Rwanda because of evil regimes.
horseatingweeds
diverden wrote:
Somehow the news media does not qualify as a reliable source. I am certain that if we look at pre-iraq war, many of the same sources were saying the Iraq has WMD's. Ultimately it is about money and power. Oil is money and money is power. You don't see us invading the Sudan or Rwanda because of evil regimes.


Don't worry; our glorious leader will deal with them soon, as long as S3nd can find a loop-hole to get Bush a third term.

Anyway, I was tempted to write a post about this, but have all af the anti-war chimps fallen out of their rainbow colored trees?

I haven't heard too much opposition to our current presence in Iraq. Either one of two things is happening.

1. They have finally realize how ridiculous the arguments for staying our of Iraq are. (I'm not saying arguing is ridiculous, just that I have yet to hear an even reasonable one)

2. They still believe that their arguments are valid but have decided to role over and let this president give it to them hard and clumsy.

I’m still waiting though, does anyone have a reasonable argument against being in Iraq?
nopaniers
Quote:
I’m still waiting though, does anyone have a reasonable argument against being in Iraq?


The obvious one is that the majority of Iraqis want US forces to withdraw.
LeviticusMky
Or the fact that the majority of Americans believe that the Iraq war was a debacle.

But mainly, it's that we get tired of trying to debate blind belief. People who accept dogmatic responses to major issues don't respond to logic, simply because it is oppositional.

I thin I encountered one or two actual logical debates on this forum, the other hundred or so are all completely entrenched warfare posts.

I enjoy debating with conservatives about political policy, but not here. This forum is possibly the worst debate area that I've come across.
LeviticusMky
I'm sure someone will come in quickly here and call my post "cowardly" or something to that effect.

Fine with me, I tend to not react to that kind of inflammatory behavior. Suffice to say that if it does happen it will prove my point.
S3nd K3ys
LeviticusMky wrote:


I enjoy debating with conservatives about political policy, but not here. This forum is possibly the worst debate area that I've come across.


I'm sure you find it easier to debate over at DU.
horseatingweeds
nopaniers wrote:
Quote:
I’m still waiting though, does anyone have a reasonable argument against being in Iraq?


The obvious one is that the majority of Iraqis want US forces to withdraw.


See, that is what I mean. No good arguments.

Listen nopaniers, the Iraqis don't want the US in their country. Yes indeed! They vocalize it all the time. There like "we don't even whant you here, get out please", then looking over their sholder to see if any suiciders are whatching they slip a piece of paper in a soldier's hand with a clue about where some rat Sadam loyalist are hiding.

You have to understand how much progress this is. The Iraquis didn't like Sadam either. But then, if they were like "we don't even want you here, get out" Sadam would chop there wife and childrens' arms and legs off and mail them to the grand parents.

Do you understand... Do you see???? They are now FREE to bitch, just like us.

Now bring me a Good argument please. And by good I don't mean one that rymes. Wink

LeviticusMky wrote:
Or the fact that the majority of Americans believe that the Iraq war was a debacle.


The majority of americans get their news from comedy central. Put away your generalities and bring forth a good argument.
nopaniers
Quote:
Listen nopaniers, the Iraqis don't want the US in their country.


Exactly. That is what I said. In a recent poll, for example, only 5% of Iraqis said that it was not a priority for the occupying troops to leave the country. More than half "Strongly oppose" or "Oppose" the US troops in the country, and a majority would like to see the US troops leave.

Quote:
they slip a piece of paper in a soldier's hand with a clue about where some rat Sadam loyalist are hiding


According to the poll, the US troops were also the least trusted (42.8% said they had no confidence at all, and 23.5% said not very much) of any official group in the country.

You seem to be implying that US troops should stay for Iraqi security. This is something that plays well in Washington. Believe it or not, US policians opinions don't reflect Iraqis opinions. Only 18% of Iraqis have that opinion.

Read for yourself:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/nol/shared/bsp/hi/pdfs/15_03_04_iraqsurvey.pdf
horseatingweeds
nopaniers wrote:
Quote:
Listen nopaniers, the Iraqis don't want the US in their country.


Exactly. That is what I said. In a recent poll, for example, only 5% of Iraqis said that it was not a priority for the occupying troops to leave the country. More than half "Strongly oppose" or "Oppose" the US troops in the country, and a majority would like to see the US troops leave.


Right, and it's a poor argument for the US not being there. The fact that the Iraqis are able to speach it. Do you think they enjoyed Sadam's rule? They didn't say anything about not liking while he was in power. I don't remember seeing any servase done then.

nopaniers wrote:
Quote:
they slip a piece of paper in a soldier's hand with a clue about where some rat Sadam loyalist are hiding


According to the poll, the US troops were also the least trusted (42.8% said they had no confidence at all, and 23.5% said not very much) of any official group in the country.


Understandable, but is still a poor argument. The Iraqis I don't imagin will be trusting any leaders or police or security forces for a long time.

nopaniers wrote:
You seem to be implying that US troops should stay for Iraqi security. This is something that plays well in Washington. Believe it or not, US policians opinions don't reflect Iraqis opinions. Only 18% of Iraqis have that opinion.


What makes you say that? Regardless, the Iraqis know as well as anyone that they need someone keeping the piece during this transition.

So stop with the good arguments FOR being there and get me one NOT for being there.

Arrow
Valleyman
For those of us who still believe Colin Powell's famed speech before the security council, or who are just a bit confused over the WMD issue look at these:
Quote:
The United States admitted on Wednesday that Iraq had no weapons of mass destruction (WMDs) before the US-led invasion in March 2003, but President George W. Bush defended the war, saying "the path to safety is the path of action."


http://english.people.com.cn/200410/07/eng20041007_159245.html

http://www.pbs.org/now/

and:

http://www.pbs.org/now/politics/iraqdocuments.html

For those of us who think that Iraq is well on its way to becoming a truly free, democratic, and stable state; look at these:

http://www.pinr.com/report.php?ac=view_report&report_id=420&language_id=1

For those of us who want a solid analyisis of the case for war and how it was made:

http://www.pinr.com/report.php?ac=view_report&report_id=94&language_id=1

And for those of us that want more info:

http://www.pinr.com/report.php?ac=view_region&region_id=20&language_id=1


Please note, however, that I have not been fool enough to advocate an immediate and complete withdrawl of forces, that would be foolish. However, what I have done is frame for you the situation and how we got there. Please read and understand these before you go any farther.
horseatingweeds
Good posting Valleyman...., "Valley" man a. Like CA and all that right...

Hmmm, Promising, this one seems
S3nd K3ys
http://www.nysun.com/article/27110

Quote:
Congress's Secret Saddam Tapes

By ELI LAKE - Staff Reporter of the Sun
February 7, 2006

The House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence is studying 12 hours of audio recordings between Saddam Hussein and his top advisers that may provide clues to the whereabouts of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction.

The committee has already confirmed through the intelligence community that the recordings of Saddam's voice are authentic, according to its chairman, Rep. Peter Hoekstra of Michigan, who would not go into detail about the nature of the conversations or their context. They were provided to his committee by a former federal prosecutor, John Loftus, who says he received them from a former American military intelligence analyst.
...

The audio recordings are part of new evidence the House intelligence committee is piecing together that has spurred Mr. Hoekstra to reopen the question of whether Iraq had the biological, chemical, and nuclear weapons American inspectors could not turn up. President Bush called off the hunt for those weapons last year and has conceded that America has yet to find evidence of the stockpiles.

prongs_386
maybe there hasn't been much opposition to america being in iraq recently but the outcry for them invading in the firstplace is still there.
There are far too many jingoistic americans who believe that they have the right to 'make the world a better place' under their terms.
S3nd K3ys
prongs_386 wrote:

'make the world a better place' under their terms.


If by "their terms" you mean the Iraqi's terms, i.e. voting for themselves, instead of putting in a US puppet, then you're right. Wink
tidruG
Quote:
I haven't heard too much opposition to our current presence in Iraq. Either one of two things is happening.

Quote:
But mainly, it's that we get tired of trying to debate blind belief. People who accept dogmatic responses to major issues don't respond to logic, simply because it is oppositional.

I thin I encountered one or two actual logical debates on this forum, the other hundred or so are all completely entrenched warfare posts.

I enjoy debating with conservatives about political policy, but not here. This forum is possibly the worst debate area that I've come across.


More interestingly...
Quote:
I'm sure someone will come in quickly here and call my post "cowardly" or something to that effect

and...
Quote:
I'm sure you find it easier to debate over at DU.


Quote:
Right, and it's a poor argument for the US not being there.

So, basically, it's what? Job well done, you've given them free speech, and now that they're using it to show they don't want you around, you're still going to stick around anyway?

Quote:
So stop with the good arguments FOR being there and get me one NOT for being there.

Maybe the fact that if the Iraqis don't want the US troops there, then the US is intruding on a country's internal affairs... (nothing new, btw)

No offense intended to anyone... I am just replying to some posts that I noticed... and admittedly do not have much time to use the proper news sources and other links that I normally would have done with... apologies.
horseatingweeds
tidruG wrote:


Quote:
Right, and it's a poor argument for the US not being there.

So, basically, it's what? Job well done, you've given them free speech, and now that they're using it to show they don't want you around, you're still going to stick around anyway?


Yes, the Iraqis need the practice. Once we leave they will have their own gov't. If that gov't does something they don't like, for instance gassing some citizens or absorbing a neighbor, they will be ready to speak up.

Quote:
So stop with the good arguments FOR being there and get me one NOT for being there.

Maybe the fact that if the Iraqis don't want the US troops there, then the US is intruding on a country's internal affairs... (nothing new, btw)

No offense intended to anyone... I am just replying to some posts that I noticed... and admittedly do not have much time to use the proper news sources and other links that I normally would have done with... apologies.[/quote]

Indeed, the US is intruding on the Iraqi internal affairs. Without the intrusion Iraq would still be under a dictatorship fostering terror. If the US stopped its intrusion currently there would likely we civil war. Like a surgeon removing cancer.
prongs_386
Quote:
Indeed, the US is intruding on the Iraqi internal affairs. Without the intrusion Iraq would still be under a dictatorship fostering terror. If the US stopped its intrusion currently there would likely we civil war. Like a surgeon removing cancer.

What gives them the rigth to do that?
Who gave them permission to do that? No-one.
The fact is NATO did not say they could invade so therefore their invasion was completely illegal and illegitimat.
If they had done it properly then maybe not so many people right now would hate the usa.
horseatingweeds
Quote:
Indeed, the US is intruding on the Iraqi internal affairs. Without the intrusion Iraq would still be under a dictatorship fostering terror. If the US stopped its intrusion currently there would likely we civil war. Like a surgeon removing cancer.


Quote:
What gives them the rigth to do that?


Less of a right and more of an obligation. The US is the world power and in mine and many others opinion has the responsibility to maintain stability. This certainly is an easy thing to complain about WHILE the US is keeping up.

Quote:
Who gave them permission to do that? No-one.


Sadam’s belligerence and Congress.

Quote:
The fact is NATO did not say they could invade so therefore their invasion was completely illegal and illegitimat.


No my friend. The fact that NATO could not act decisively forced the US to go alone or otherwise show the worlds, tyrants, terrorist and otherwise aggressors that the civilized world is incapable of moving against their aggression.

Quote:
If they had done it properly then maybe not so many people right now would hate the usa.


Properly, in this statement is the opinion of an individual with the benefit of hind sight and lacking the accountability to make such decisions. The fact that there are people angry with the US does not mean they did anything improperly. Unless proper, by your definition, means waiting until the situation deteriorates to the point where the world is crying out for the US to help.
prongs_386
Why is it that the US feels that most people in the world are crying out for america to help them, the us may invade a country because it believes that country is worse off than them. I'm not saying it for this case, but just because america looks down upon different lifestyles, doesnt mean they want to or should operate like the us.
horseatingweeds
prongs_386 wrote:
Why is it that the US feels that most people in the world are crying out for america to help them, the us may invade a country because it believes that country is worse off than them. I'm not saying it for this case, but just because america looks down upon different lifestyles, doesnt mean they want to or should operate like the us.


I'm sorry. Could you please re-word this. I am not able to understand what you are intending. I would like to understand.
nam_siddharth
Quote:
Iraq moved weapons of mass destruction into Syria before the war by loading the weapons into civilian aircraft in which the passenger seats were removed.
It is funny. Iraq exported his weapons, when he most needed it. Rolling Eyes
It shows the currupt mentality of USA media.

When USA will attack Iran, most probably Iran will export its nukes to India, rather than using it against USA. Laughing
manumiglani
nam_siddharth wrote:
Quote:
Iraq moved weapons of mass destruction into Syria before the war by loading the weapons into civilian aircraft in which the passenger seats were removed.
It is funny. Iraq exported his weapons, when he most needed it. Rolling Eyes
It shows the currupt mentality of USA media.

When USA will attack Iran, most probably Iran will export its nukes to India, rather than using it against USA. Laughing


you are right, dam US media supproted, paid, threatened by US government.
prongs_386
horseatingweeds wrote:
prongs_386 wrote:
Why is it that the US feels that most people in the world are crying out for america to help them, the us may invade a country because it believes that country is worse off than them. I'm not saying it for this case, but just because america looks down upon different lifestyles, doesnt mean they want to or should operate like the us.


I'm sorry. Could you please re-word this. I am not able to understand what you are intending. I would like to understand.

I was merely trying to say that the us may view a certain lifestyle as being bad because it is different to their own and they want to change that, however the people living in their way should be able to stay unaffected and not have another country trying to change them.
horseatingweeds
prongs_386 wrote:
horseatingweeds wrote:
prongs_386 wrote:
Why is it that the US feels that most people in the world are crying out for america to help them, the us may invade a country because it believes that country is worse off than them. I'm not saying it for this case, but just because america looks down upon different lifestyles, doesnt mean they want to or should operate like the us.


I'm sorry. Could you please re-word this. I am not able to understand what you are intending. I would like to understand.

I was merely trying to say that the us may view a certain lifestyle as being bad because it is different to their own and they want to change that, however the people living in their way should be able to stay unaffected and not have another country trying to change them.


I emphatically agree, unless that lifestyle includes fostering terrorist, threatening our allies with wmd, or desecrating human rights. Sadam’s “life style” mother Fing had to go.

Iraq’s “life style” will now be what Iraqis decide it to be, and not a deranged individual who enjoys torturing those that he rules for their disobedience.
Lied
Most of EU citizens hate US.The way they play the "Pimp of the world" is the main reason.The latest action that made the matters worse was Condolisa (if i spelled it corectly) The foreighn minister if i recal corectly.Phoning in every PrimeMinister in EU for the Acceptance of Turky in the EU.The photos on the other hand showing tracks!! cannot be valitated as the righht to bomb.And as you say "No evidence, no crime" the bombing was illigal.

And US terrorise Iraqi and other middle east countries with bombing so US is Terrorist.(Vocabulary meaning)
Also US abducts ppl from other countries to interogate them (well many of them do not come back and consider missing)
The civilized US was shown in the Iraqi prisons i belive.

Thanks to the US that always shows the right way to make things worse.
Ofc most of them like burned children by bombs and Iraqi saing I preffer Sadam than this and the full plan of the statue demolution which shows that they where only about 100 ppl there and not thousands as TV said where critisized by your networks and never shown to the public.
horseatingweeds
Lied wrote:
Most of EU citizens hate US.The way they play the "Pimp of the world" is the main reason.The latest action that made the matters worse was Condolisa (if i spelled it corectly) The foreighn minister if i recal corectly.Phoning in every PrimeMinister in EU for the Acceptance of Turky in the EU.The photos on the other hand showing tracks!! cannot be valitated as the righht to bomb.And as you say "No evidence, no crime" the bombing was illigal.

And US terrorise Iraqi and other middle east countries with bombing so US is Terrorist.(Vocabulary meaning)
Also US abducts ppl from other countries to interogate them (well many of them do not come back and consider missing)
The civilized US was shown in the Iraqi prisons i belive.

Thanks to the US that always shows the right way to make things worse.
Ofc most of them like burned children by bombs and Iraqi saing I preffer Sadam than this and the full plan of the statue demolution which shows that they where only about 100 ppl there and not thousands as TV said where critisized by your networks and never shown to the public.


I think your perspective could be valuable in our discusions here but no one is going to take you seriously if you reply to every post with this "US is a terrorist and every body hates YOU" nonsense.
prongs_386
horseatingweeds wrote:
Lied wrote:
Most of EU citizens hate US.The way they play the "Pimp of the world" is the main reason.The latest action that made the matters worse was Condolisa (if i spelled it corectly) The foreighn minister if i recal corectly.Phoning in every PrimeMinister in EU for the Acceptance of Turky in the EU.The photos on the other hand showing tracks!! cannot be valitated as the righht to bomb.And as you say "No evidence, no crime" the bombing was illigal.

And US terrorise Iraqi and other middle east countries with bombing so US is Terrorist.(Vocabulary meaning)
Also US abducts ppl from other countries to interogate them (well many of them do not come back and consider missing)
The civilized US was shown in the Iraqi prisons i belive.

Thanks to the US that always shows the right way to make things worse.
Ofc most of them like burned children by bombs and Iraqi saing I preffer Sadam than this and the full plan of the statue demolution which shows that they where only about 100 ppl there and not thousands as TV said where critisized by your networks and never shown to the public.


I think your perspective could be valuable in our discusions here but no one is going to take you seriously if you reply to every post with this "US is a terrorist and every body hates YOU" nonsense.

well to be perfectly honest, it's not really nonsense. A vast number of people across the world in many countries do hate the US. And at what point is something for the better of the world, or a terrorist act?
horseatingweeds
prongs_386 wrote:

well to be perfectly honest, it's not really nonsense. A vast number of people across the world in many countries do hate the US.


A lot of bratty kids say they hate their parents too.

Quote:

And at what point is something for the better of the world, or a terrorist act?


Is this a real question?

Lets not forget that the US feeds half of the world and all the aid that flows out of her. People will always complain and hate those that have the power. Just be glad its not Iran or North Korea or the old USSR that currently has this power.

Death to America.
prongs_386
horseatingweeds wrote:


Death to America.

err.. you just stuck up for the US completely, then in one line say that without justification. Why exactly did you say that.
And my previous question was asking has the US crossed the line and performed it's own terrorist acts on another country.
bangala
nopaniers wrote:
Quote:
I’m still waiting though, does anyone have a reasonable argument against being in Iraq?


The obvious one is that the majority of Iraqis want US forces to withdraw.


I'm not American but I live nearby Iraq. I opposed the war in Iraq becauase I usually think that wars kill innocents and can be avoided.
However, I have to dissagree with you here. Presently, Iraqis do NOT want US forces to leave their country. Why am I saying this? because:

1- The present US forces are no longer named as occupying forces. They are there because of a UN resolution that organizes their presence. Iraqis do not call them occupying forces, but instead " coalition forces."
Its freely elected government (more than 70% of Iraqis participated in its recent elections) has officially requested the United Nations to renew the presence of coalition forces lead by the US. In fact, Dr. Ebrahim Al Jaa'fari, the elected Iraqi priminitser has visited Washington last year and thanked President Bush for his support and publicly requested US forces to stay in Iraq. The question now is not whether Iraqis want the US forces to leave or not, as they do want them. The question, however, is whether Americans are willing to stay there or leave.

2- All fairly conducted polls by international research centers have shown that Iraqis do NOT want American troops to leave now. In fact, even the poll results that you have posted yourself shows that. I encourage you o go back and read through it carefully.

3- I live nearby Iraq and I communicate with Iraqis myself.

Having said that, I am still against wars. However, despite all the sufferings, the majority of Iraqis are happier now.
S3nd K3ys
bangala wrote:
nopaniers wrote:
Quote:
I’m still waiting though, does anyone have a reasonable argument against being in Iraq?


The obvious one is that the majority of Iraqis want US forces to withdraw.


I'm not American but I live nearby Iraq. I opposed the war in Iraq becauase I usually think that wars kill innocents and can be avoided.
However, I have to dissagree with you here. Presently, Iraqis do NOT want US forces to leave their country. Why am I saying this? because:

1- The present US forced are no longer occuping forces. They are there because of a UN resolution that organizes their presence. Iraqis do not call them occuping forces, but instead " coalition forces."
Its freely elected government (more than 70% of Iraqis participated in its recent elections) has requested united nations to renew the presence of coalition forces lead by the US. In fact, Dr. Ebrahim Al Jaa'fari, the elected Iraqi priminitser has visited Washington last year and thanked President Bush for his support and publicly requested US forces to stay in Iraq. The question now is not whether Iraqis want the US forces to leave or not, as they do want them. The question, however, is whether Americans are willing to stay their or leave.

2- All fairly conducted polls by international research centers have shown that Iraqis do NOT want American troops to leave now. In fact, even the poll results that you have posted yourself shows that. I encourage you o go back and read through it carefully.

3- I live nearby Iraq and I communicate with Iraqis myself.

Having said that, I am still against wars. However, despite all the sufferings, the majority of Iraqis are happier now.


That's pretty close to what I've heard from all the people I've talked to there. (close to two dozen). It's nice to hear from people that are there, who KNOW what is going on. And every single person I've talked to there, tells the same story.
horseatingweeds
prongs_386 wrote:
horseatingweeds wrote:


Death to America.

err.. you just stuck up for the US completely, then in one line say that without justification. Why exactly did you say that.
And my previous question was asking has the US crossed the line and performed it's own terrorist acts on another country.


Don't you get Saturday Night Live in Australia? It's a comedy show that was live but is now "taped" live earlier in the day and then shown at night. They are famous comedians that do a combination of sketch comedy and mock commercials and things. One of there skits was depicting Al jazeera TV who claims to be unbiased as they always have representatives of both sides of the issues they discus.

The S&L team went about playing the characters discussing the issues and presenting the news. However, the atmosphere, tone and presentation was blatantly anti-American and anti-Israeli. So much so, that instead of greeting one another with a hello or passing the issue of new to another with a normal word the said “death to America”.

Good evening and death to America.

It was hilarious. I may have pulled on of those little muscles in my back laughing so hard. And now I can’t help it when I slap up a post on a subject with individuals who are blatant America haters but to through that on the end. It is rather tasteless but it keeps me entertained.

As for the question of the US committing acts of terror, I have hear no valid argument nor can I imagine one. I think folks tend to us words like “terrorist” poorly because they hear them so much. “A US bomb is said to have killed a family on their farm? Why thats terroristably terroristic!”

An act of terror is committed for no other reason then to disrupt a society. The US is interested in stabilizing societies. If an individual is seeking an argument to present the US as destructive one would have a much easier time claiming the US to be a colonialist, with the one discrepancy of instead of setting up colonies it sets up friendly democratic governments.

Gooday-mate and death to America.
S3nd K3ys
Link

Quote:
By Jim Kouri

(AXcess News) New York - When former federal prosecutor and terrorism expert John Loftus announced in Janurary that his organization, Intelligence Summit (intelligencesummit.com), would host a special conference in order to reveal the contents of 12 hours of Saddam Hussein audiotapes discovered in Iraq, there was hardly any press coverage. But once the blogosphere, talk radio and Fox News Channel -- on which Loftus is a contributer -- got wind of the contents of Saddam's conversations with underlings, some media organizations decided to cover the story -- sort of.

Unfortunately, it appears the mainstream news media are not being honest with the American people, according to journalist Sher Zieve and former UN weapons inspector and translator Bill Tierney. For instance, ABC using their own translator is reporting that there's nothing new in the tapes and they don't provide any information on weapons of mass destruction.

The blogger-attorneys at Powerline (powerlineblog.com) -- who uncovered CBS News anchor Dan Rather's use forged documents to smear President Bush -- say the tapes reveal Iraq 's persistent efforts to hide information about weapons of mass destruction programs from U.N. inspectors well into the 1990s.

...

The tape recordings of Saddam discussing WMDs are said by Ryan Mauro of Worldthreats.com to be a "smoking cannon." If all of this information proves out, the left in the US and UK are going to face an enormous embarassment and loss of credibility. As usual, it will take some time for the new information to travel from the blogosphere to the alternative media, and finally into the so-called mainstream media. Even then, the Bush haters will not concede that Saddam was a threat to the US.





It should have been the biggest story of the week, instead the media has focused on Cheney (but I admit that was sorta bound to happen), the Conf will be going on today and also tomorrow. Some of the findings should blow the socks off of the "NO WMD" crowd......we have the smoking gun....not just good intelligence.....but rather legal court worthy evidence.

ABC did a supposed expose to tell about it, but in fact it was a premptive strike to purposely down play it.

On a lighter note...

Quote:
loss of credibility. As usual,


Related topics
What did Bush lie about?
Justification for War in Iraq
Urban Legends About the Iraq War
Oh, the evil that Bush has done to this world...
Treason?
SEARCHING FOR MR. GOOD-WAR
Why is the USA in Iraq?
Hillary playing the race card to slam bush..
Support Danish
NATO in final stages of prepping for strikes against Iran
Civil war? What civil war?
Is the US Government a Bully?
The Middle East Conflict
Iraq War Today
Reply to topic    Frihost Forum Index -> Lifestyle and News -> Discuss World News

FRIHOST HOME | FAQ | TOS | ABOUT US | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
© 2005-2011 Frihost, forums powered by phpBB.