Thread: Did Iraq attack the WTC on 9/11

bin laden admitted it... anyone not knowing that lives under a rock.

It's the terrorism support that is in question.

This is a re-post but Bush already took that test

The President of the United States of America and his appointed cabinet assured me that Iraq had a hand in that evil deed so I'll have to vote yes.

Originally Posted by busyLivin

bin laden admitted it... anyone not knowing that lives under a rock.

It's the terrorism support that is in question.

Your on the ball brother!!! Bush said, if you harbor these kind of people, you will be treated like them and share their same fate!!!

Originally Posted by busyLivin

bin laden admitted it...

unfortunately he finished the job after the failed attempt in 1993...

How soon all these anti-Bush people forget, or should I say turn away, Clinton had Bin Laden offered(handed over) to him twice, both times HE dropped the ball. Maybe 9/11 doesn't happen!!! So lay off BUSH!!!

Originally Posted by busyLivin

bin laden admitted it... anyone not knowing that lives under a rock.

It's the terrorism support that is in question.

The death count of Iraqi civilians is in the tens of thousands. Is that considered terrorism, or is it not because we think it's for a just cause? Oh wait, Bin Laden thinks his attack was for a just cause too...

Originally Posted by Archangel

Your on the ball brother!!! Bush said, if you harbor these kind of people, you will be treated like them and share their same fate!!!

Uh, does this mean the US is going to break into civil war soon? Saddam,"harbored" Al quieda just as much as the US did; remember.. they trained here, were protected by law here, ect. The question is, as previously stated.. did he,"support" them. All Ive heard on that is that they had a mutual agreement.. we're here; dont fuck with us; and we wont raise Jihad on your ass.

But you know..! If we do someday prove a link betweem Iraq and Al Quieda, then you could say..
All those people who went to Iraq as human shields were protecting a country who was protecting terrorists.. therefore they are terrorists and we can finally shoot them!

Army of God, Creativity Movement, National Alliance, Aryan Nations all harbored within the borders of the United States and no less declined to extremism than the Jihad provoked Arabs.

Originally Posted by Archangel

How soon all these anti-Bush people forget, or should I say turn away, Clinton had Bin Laden offered(handed over) to him twice, both times HE dropped the ball. Maybe 9/11 doesn't happen!!! So lay off BUSH!!!

this whole post is full of ignorance....think about what u said and just think a little bit...just a little bit....





















































keyword: Bin Laden

Originally Posted by tomas101

this whole post is full of ignorance....think about what u said and just think a little bit...just a little bit....
keyword: Bin Laden

give me a break. with all you post.. even your signature.. you have the balls to tell him his post is full of ignorance?

What is scary is that 7 out of 10 Americans consitently polled believe Iraq was involved in the 9/11 attacks.

Originally Posted by maniclion

The President of the United States of America and his appointed cabinet assured me that Iraq had a hand in that evil deed so I'll have to vote yes.

That was my understanding that Iraq had a hand in the deed, but it is known that the World Trade Center attack was orchestrated by the Al Qaeda Terrorist Regime.

The question is irrelevant to anything. Saddam Hussein was a man who had a demonstrated hatred for the USA and was paying terrorists to blow up Jews in Israel and was actively taunting us on TV with pictures of technology he bought for the production of nukes. He had an established history of genocide (Kurds) and actively killed 10's of thousands of everyday common Iraqi's for political expediency. He had massive financial power from oil money. Given his character, track record, financial ability and criminal mind he was a direct threat to the region and our national interests. His mouth was a weapon of mass destruction. The USA chose to sever his head from his body to silence his mouth (this final thing comes very soon when the Islamics behead him in public) and to prevent money from being spent to fight us through proxied agents. Hussein was a mortal enemy and we rightfully preempted him before he could strike a grievously blow to the region or us.

Who here really cares that Saddam is gone?

OD

OD if you ask anyone here if they like Saddam, want to have his children, or swap spit with Saddam you will still get the same answer as you would with your original question.

I would ask if you want to be lied to and manipulated into a war on false pretenses and then be asked to accept a new set of reasons to justify it after the fact?

Originally Posted by BoneCrusher

OD if you ask anyone here if they like Saddam, want to have his children, or swap spit with Saddam you will still get the same answer as you would with your original question.

I would ask if you want to be lied to and manipulated into a war on false pretenses and then be asked to accept a new set of reasons to justify it after the fact?

If this were the case then I would concede it may be valid point. But it is an unfortunate reality that there are those in this country, mostly of the liberal persuasion, who have a false understanding of how extremely violent the world really is outside our borders and see everything like a Disney movie or some la-la land Nirvana. I can't justify in a Democracy misleading people to protect them from their own naivety or stupidity (like some childish image of Bambi walking up to hunters and asking them what they are doing in the woods) but would not overly object to keeping the fools alive dispite themselves (we all like the company and well being of fellow Americans no matter how silly or naive they are). I do not believe that the scenario you allude to is the case though. I genuinely think the President acted on the facts as those career Intelligence Agency presnted it to him (btw they represent a cross section of political parties, genders, races etc). It seems that some of the data were wrong or our enemy managed to hide the evidence long before we got there. I am still going on instincts and betting that when all is said and done we will find scary evidence confirming our worst fears and more were in motion and possibly still are. But also in this particular case, I am inclined to say we had sufficient reason to go in simply because of the UN sanctions being ignored and we also suspected (and later proved) that major elements of the UN were corrupt, evil, and playing it all for the money and for their own personal financial interests (ref. food for oil program). I still think when the war crime trials start we will find many from France, Germany and the UN going to prison and I will be cheering it right along and for the first time in years be again inclinded to buy French Champagne again to celebrate and participate in the Catharsis the French will feel when they send French President Jacques Chirac the Brigg.

OD

It has been so long since this war has started BushCo's time to present has expired. With the sat recon they had at their disposal there is no way Saddam could have moved a donkey without the hairs on its ass being counted. Most of his country was a no fly zone and constantly carpet bombed at the slightest show of unauthorized action. If evidence were out there it would be on every TV, radio station, and forum on the planet. There will not ever be anything real, only faked or contrived deceptions to support a fabricated set of claims. BushCo has declared there were no WMD's, Tony Blair declares his country's agreement that there were no WMD's, and not one single area of Iraq has shown any evidence of WMD's being in that area since their destruction or removal in the early to mid 90's. Did Saddam have WMD's? No ... he postured himself to have WMD's so as to appear to have the means to do battle with his enemies when they came knocking, or to intimidate his weaker opponents and victims into submission at his whim.

Saddam lived in a region of terrorism. He governed by savagery and brutality. That is the manor that Israel, Pakistan, Egypt, and the entire area run their countries, get their battles fought, and deal with their neighbors and has been for all of recorded history.

These two facts combined do not justify taking over the country of Iraq anymore than they do taking over Iran. The press on Iran does not report how the same pre-war conditions exist in Iran as did in Iraq. Anyone who has family there will tell you just how beautiful the country is, yet how inhumane the leadership is. Iran is intimidated by us and it shows, yet they fund and train terrorist activities and always have.

By the chronology of events form BushCo and your rationale of excuses should we as a country just allow ourselves to be lied too again so we can then liberate Iran for its oil? You state that we as a people are not mentally evolved as much as you and our leadership and that we need to be lied to for our own good so that we will be better served by them. I disagree ...

Just a side note here OD. It is now clear to the world that Saddam was playing a game of Texas Hold-em with an empty hand ... against a Texan. Bad idea. He went all in and his hand was called. Now he awaits his end at the hands of the people he raised his sons to rape and murder. I hope his beheading is done in the same manor as the ones we have seen in the videos lately ... slowly from the side of his neck on digital video. I hope the pleas and cries for his life are heard on that video for the families of his victims to hear and feel so that they may some how get a feeling of closure. It would be the first such video I would actually watch from start to finish. Those are my feelings toward Saddam.

Originally Posted by OceanDude

Who here really cares that Saddam is gone?

I do, because it requires that nearly all of our troops be involved in this war. I do, because it requires that tens of thousands of Iraqi civilians are killed. I do, because we are going to have troops in Iraq for God knows how long, and the death and debilitating injury count (Which no one even talks about) is just going to climb. I do, because there is a huge conflict of interest when Dick Cheney is still getting paid by Haliburton and they just coincidentally get the contracts for the oil in Iraq. I do, because the entire world community didn't support us, so we went in there like a rogue nation and tarnished our foreign relations.

well, at least 17 people here do not have their heads up their asses, but apparently one person does!

Originally Posted by CowPimp

I do, because it requires that nearly all of our troops be involved in this war. I do, because it requires that tens of thousands of Iraqi civilians are killed. I do, because we are going to have troops in Iraq for God knows how long, and the death and debilitating injury count (Which no one even talks about) is just going to climb. I do, because there is a huge conflict of interest when Dick Cheney is still getting paid by Haliburton and they just coincidentally get the contracts for the oil in Iraq. I do, because the entire world community didn't support us, so we went in there like a rogue nation and tarnished our foreign relations.

Wow. A sane American. From what I've heard you are a dying breed.

BTW who trained Bin laden? Yes the CIA.

Originally Posted by Robert DiMaggio

well, at least 17 people here do not have their heads up their asses, but apparently one person does!

You brute. You are being terribly insensitive by making incendiary remarks in what was previously a rather level headed discussion. And the math is just queer too. How did you count 17 people from a discussion thread with only 22 posts that was participated in by much fewer unique individuals having ongoing dialog and replies?

IMHO website operators/administrators should be rarely seen but even more rarely heard

You should apologize to whomever you were referring to.

OD

Originally Posted by OceanDude

How did you count 17 people from a discussion thread with only 22 posts that was participated in by much fewer unique individuals having ongoing dialog and replies?

ummm...I looked at the poll results at the top of the thread.

Originally Posted by Woody_London

Wow. A sane American. From what I've heard you are a dying breed.

BTW who trained Bin laden? Yes the CIA.

It's not the Americans whom have the mad cow disease now in their national gene pool. Funny you forget about the Falkland Islands travesty and Gibraltar, N. Ireland and the dozens of other territories you still try to claim as yours.

Go suck a lime mate you sound like you have the British Disease (talking out of both sides of your mouth)...
OD

Originally Posted by OceanDude

Saddam Hussein's mouth was a weapon of mass destruction.

This was so true.

Now if we can just take down Bin Laden, the world would be a better place.

Oh, and Woody... can you please stick this finger up your (Thank You!)

Whether one attacks covertly or overtly one's enemies are apt to hold one accountable.

There is always a fine balance that needs to be maintained Hard Right for any decision that affects the country. There are many smart people in place that take all these things into consideration when making such decisions. (I sure hope they do anyway)

Speaking of attacks.... I think I better run.... I'm a Turkey! Isn't it getting close to Thanksgiving? I want to keep my feathers.