Home | Community | Message Board
You are not signed in.
Sign In New Account
Forum Index Search Posts Trusted Vendors Highlights Galleries FAQ User List Chat Store Random Growery


This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.

General Interest > Political Discussion
Threaded Mode Threaded  Previous topic Previous  View all topics Index  Next topic Next 

Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Jump to first unread post Pages: 1 | 2 |  [ show all ]
Should we be suprised that Bush was caught in another lie?
    #2799306 -

Evidence from intelligence sources, secret communications, and statements by people now in custody reveal that Saddam Hussein aids and protects terrorists, including members of al Qaeda. George W. Bush, President
State of the Union Speech
1/28/2003  :cussing:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Should we be suprised that Bush was caught in another lie? [Re: fft2]
    #2799551 -

Should we be surprised that you can't grasp the meaning of the word lie?




Edit:
Wednesday, June 16, 2004 1:13 p.m. EDT
Media Mislead on 9/11 Commission Finding on Iraq-al Qaida Link

Reports Wednesday morning that the 9/11 Commission has determined there was no cooperation between Iraq and al-Qaida are completely false - and are undoubtedly driven by the media's determination to contradict the Bush administration's claims that such a link exists.

"9/11 Panel Says Iraq Rebuffed Bin Laden" reads the headline on the Associated Press report on today's Commission staff statement.

But that's not what the Commission staff report actually said.

The below passage, for instance, does more to confirm the Bush administration's claims of an Iraq-al Qaida link than it does to contradict them.

"The Sudanese, to protect their own ties with Iraq, reportedly persuaded Bin Ladin* to cease [support for anti-Saddam Islamists in Northern Iraq] and arranged for contacts between Iraq and al Qaeda*.

"A senior Iraqi intelligence officer reportedly made three visits to Sudan, finally meeting Bin Ladin in 1994. Bin Ladin is said to have requested space to establish training camps, as well as assistance in procuring weapons, but Iraq apparently never responded." [Staff Statement No. 15, Page 5]

Apparently never responded? How, pray tell, does the AP derive from those words the conclusive claim that Iraq "rebuffed" bin Laden?

The Commission statement continues:

"There have been reports that contacts between Iraq and al Qaeda also occurred after Bin Ladin had returned to Afghanistan, but they do not appear to have resulted in a collaborative relationship."

What's the evidence for this less-than-conclusive surmise?

"Two senior Bin Ladin associates have adamantly denied that any ties existed between al Qaeda and Iraq," says the Commission.

Such a statement begs the question: Why does the Commission, let alone the press, take the word of two senior bin Laden associates over, say, Iraq's new prime minister, Iyad Allawi.

Last December he told the London Telegraph, "We are uncovering evidence all the time of Saddam's involvement with al-Qaeda."

Reacting to the discovery of an Iraqi intelligence document placing 9/11 hijacker Mohamed Atta in Baghdad two months before the attacks, he continued:

"This is the most compelling piece of evidence that we have found so far. It shows that not only did Saddam have contacts with al-Qaeda, he had contact with those responsible for the September 11 attacks."

In fact, nowhere does the Commission make the claim that Iraq and al-Qaida never cooperated. What it does say is "We have no credible evidence that Iraq and al Qaeda cooperated on attacks against the United States." [NewsMax italics]

Apparently Dr. Allawi's asssement counts for nothing.

Even so, it's worth noting that elsewhere in today's staff statement, the 9/11 Commission asserts:

"With al Qaeda at its foundation, Bin Ladin sought to build a broader Islamic Army that included terrorist groups from Egypt, Libya, Saudi Arabia and Oman, Tunisia, Jordan, Iraq, Lebanon, Morocco, Somalia, and Eritrea. Not all [terrorist] groups from these states agreed to join, but at least one from each did." [Staff Statement No. 15, Page 3]

In other words, at least one terror group from Iraq did form an alliance with bin Laden.

Another problem: If the press is going to take today's staff statement as gospel, certain long-held media assumptions will need to be drastically revised, such as the widely accepted notion that al-Qaida was involved in the first World Trade Center bombing.

Not true, says the Commission.

"Whether Bin Ladin and his organization had roles in the 1993 attack on the World Trade Center ... remains a matter of substantial uncertainty," the staff statement says, before insisting, "We have no conclusive evidence" of a bin Laden link. [Staff Statement No. 15, Page 6]

The same goes for "Operation Bojinka," the 1995 plot to hijack 12 airliners hatched by Ramzi Yousef and Khalid Sheikh Mohammed that experts say was the blueprint for the 9/11 attacks.

"[Mohammed] was not, however, an al Qaeda member at the time of the Manilla [Bojinka] plot," Commission staffers say, even though they acknowledge that he went on to mastermind the 9/11 attacks.

The press is furiously spinning the 9/11 Commission staff statement in a bid to discredit the Bush administration. Americans should go to the Sept. 11 Commission Web site and read the conclusions for themselves: http://www.9-11commission.gov/

* Commission spellings

web page


--------------------
You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers

Edited by luvdemshrooms (06/16/04 05:13 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Should we be suprised that Bush was caught in another lie? [Re: fft2]
    #2799839 -

Who's the liar now? A knee-jerk belief that any bag of shit you read that bashes Bush must be true bespeaks a lack of interest in the truth and a support for the politics of obfuscation. It is no surprise that this comes from a member of the left, the pole that wondered about the meaning of the word "is."


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Should we be suprised that Bush was caught in another lie? [Re: zappaisgod]
    #2799846 -

haha

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Should we be suprised that Bush was caught in another lie? [Re: Redo]
    #2799876 -

I think that this thread should be retitled. It should read "The media caught in yet another lie about the 9/11 Commision's report to discredit Bush." Remember, many people read only headlines, and often in only one newspaper. If I start a thread headed "Kerry proposes reinstating the draft" alot of people won't view it but will come away with the idea that Kerry supports a new draft or call for national service. Oh wait, that was actually in his platform. Never mind. I'll have to think of some "fictitous" horror he wants to commit to create a false headline.


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Should we be suprised that Bush was caught in another lie? [Re: zappaisgod]
    #2800008 -

When the 911 commission report is released you Bush supporters will look more a fool than you already do.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Should we be suprised that Bush was caught in another lie? [Re: fft2]
    #2800023 -

fft2, read what LDS posted. It offers a little insight into this tom foolery.


--------------------
I'm a nihilist. Lets be friends.

bang bang

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Should we be suprised that Bush was caught in another lie? [Re: fft2]
    #2800049 -

It appears the fool has spoken and is unaware of the definition of the word "lie".


--------------------
You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Should we be suprised that Bush was caught in another lie? [Re: fft2]
    #2800054 -

Is this based on some inside information that you have? It's supposed to be out before the election. We'll have time. Sounds like you've reached a conclusion without information though. Ah well, not a surprise.


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Should we be suprised that Bush was caught in another lie? [Re: zappaisgod]
    #2800415 -

What information is your conclusions based on?


--------------------
https://www.gofundme.com/f/support-for-renee-goods-wife-and-son

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Should we be suprised that Bush was caught in another lie? [Re: d33p]
    #2804707 -

All the article really says is that there was communication between Iraq and Al-qaeda,

Cheney was lying about the link using evidence that had been discredited by the FBI over a year previously.


--------------------
Always Smi2le

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Should we be suprised that Bush was caught in another li [Re: luvdemshrooms]
    #2805202 -

wow - al qaeda and iraqi intelligence agents interfaced once or twice in the early 1990s while al qaeda was shopping for a place for safe harbor. This is most certainly justifies the invasion!

Quote:
Such a statement begs the question: Why does the Commission, let alone the press, take the word of two senior bin Laden associates over, say, Iraq's new prime minister, Iyad Allawi.

Last December he told the London Telegraph, "We are uncovering evidence all the time of Saddam's involvement with al-Qaeda."

Reacting to the discovery of an Iraqi intelligence document placing 9/11 hijacker Mohamed Atta in Baghdad two months before the attacks, he continued:

"This is the most compelling piece of evidence that we have found so far. It shows that not only did Saddam have contacts with al-Qaeda, he had contact with those responsible for the September 11 attacks."


Haha bullshit - yeah, yeah just like "the specific intelligence" that the US had that said Atta met up the Iraqi intelligence agent in Prague...but then later it was shown that Atta was in Florida taking money out of an ATM on the day the meeting supposedly took place.

This is all just damage control.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Should we be suprised that Bush was caught in another li [Re: Vvellum]
    #2806103 -

Perhaps you'd be so kind as to show where I've said the invasion was justified?


Bring back the nipple! It was your best avatar yet. To be honest, it was the only decent one I've seen you use.


--------------------
You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers

Edited by luvdemshrooms (06/18/04 04:45 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Should we be suprised that Bush was caught in another li [Re: Vvellum]
    #2806143 -

Here you go happy, from the mouth of the Vice Chairman of the 9/11 commission:

Friday, June 18, 2004 9:21 a.m. EDT
9/11 Chair Hamilton Slams Media Distortions

Vice Chairman of the 9/11 Commission Lee Hamilton blasted the mainstream press yesterday for distorting the Commission's findings on links between Iraq and al-Qaida, saying those findings actually support Bush administration contentions.

"The sharp differences that the press has drawn [between the White House and the Commission] are not that apparent to me," Hamilton told the Associated Press, a day after insisting that his probe uncovered "all kinds" of connections between Osama bin Laden's terror network and Iraq.

Story Continues Below



Hamilton's comments followed a deluge of mainstream reports falsely claiming that the 9/11 Commission had discredited the Bush administration's claim of longstanding links between Baghdad and bin Laden.
But the Indiana Democrat said the press accounts were flat-out wrong.

"There are all kinds of ties," he told PBS's "The News Hour" late Wednesday, in comments that establishment journalists have refused to report.

"There are all kinds of connections. And it may very well have been that Osama bin Laden or some of his lieutenants met at some time with Saddam Hussein's lieutenants."

Hamilton said that while his probe had failed to uncover any direct operational link between Baghdad and Osama bin Laden's terror network in attacks on the U.S., there's no question that "they had contacts."


But I suppose it won't matter since you've made up your mind.


Bring back the nipple! It was your best avatar yet. To be honest, it was the only decent one I've seen you use.


--------------------
You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers

Edited by luvdemshrooms (06/18/04 04:54 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Should we be suprised that Bush was caught in another li [Re: Vvellum]
    #2806405 -

And let's not forget this....

Iraq, al-Qaida and the 9/11 panel
Panel shortchanged topic in its report

June 18, 2004

The Sept. 11 commission isn't the first authority to say there is "no credible evidence" that Iraq cooperated with al-Qaida on terrorist attacks on the United States. "We've had no evidence that Saddam Hussein was involved with Sept. 11th," said President Bush almost a year ago, earning fewer headlines than the commission's recent report has.


Of course, that doesn't matter, does it.

Bring back the nipple! It was your best avatar yet. To be honest, it was the only decent one I've seen you use.


--------------------
You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Should we be suprised that Bush was caught in another li [Re: Vvellum]
    #2806412 -

And how about this?

Commission confirms links
By Stephen J. Hadley
A 9/11 commission staff report is being cited to argue that the administration was wrong about there being suspicious ties and contacts between Iraq and al-Qaeda. In fact, just the opposite is true. The staff report documents such links.
The staff report concludes that:

? Al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden "explored possible cooperation with Iraq during his time in Sudan."

? "A senior Iraqi intelligence officer reportedly made three visits to Sudan, finally meeting bin Laden in 1994."

? "Contacts between Iraq and al-Qaeda also occurred after bin Laden had returned to Afghanistan."

Chairman Thomas Kean has confirmed: "There were contacts between Iraq and al-Qaeda, a number of them, some of them a little shadowy. They were definitely there."

Following news stories, Vice Chairman Lee Hamilton said he did not understand the media flap over this issue and that the commission does not disagree with the administration's assertion that there were connections between al-Qaeda and Saddam Hussein's government.


But I'm sure that doesn't matter either.


Bring back the nipple! It was your best avatar yet. To be honest, it was the only decent one I've seen you use.


--------------------
You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Should we be suprised that Bush was caught in another li [Re: luvdemshrooms]
    #2806470 -

Wow - three posts and you still were not able to demonstrate shit.

again: al qaeda and iraqi intelligence agents interfaced once or twice in the early 1990s while al qaeda was shopping for a place for safe harbor. Big deal!

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Should we be suprised that Bush was caught in another li [Re: Vvellum]
    #2806479 -

Ah, so you did have your mind made up and it doesn't matter what the Chair and the Vice Chais say.

Interesting. But not surprising.


--------------------
You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Should we be suprised that Bush was caught in another li [Re: luvdemshrooms]
    #2806498 -

all they said was al qaeda met with iraqi officials in the early 1990s when al qaeda was looking for safe harbor. So what? Nothing fruited from these meetings.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Should we be suprised that Bush was caught in another li [Re: luvdemshrooms]
    #2806520 -

luvd, you're basically just re-posting the same thing said by different people. Yes al-qaeda and iraq met a few times to consider some sort of collaboration. Nothing has come of it and there is no proof or evidence that it has. You have to understand that bin laden and hussein are absolutely diametrically opposed in their beliefs. What part of "religious fundamentalists vs despotic secular dictator" don't you get?


--------------------
Happiness is a warm gun...

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: 1 | 2 |  [ show all ]

General Interest > Political Discussion
Threaded Mode Threaded  Previous topic Previous  View all topics Index  Next topic Next 

Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* Blair and Bush caught lying Xlea321 1,736 15 03/29/03 01:00 PM
by silversoul7
* How to tell when Bush is lying Xlea321 1,031 7 02/22/04 02:02 PM
by luvdemshrooms
* Parents Tell Bush: 'You Lied and Our Sons Died' Zahid 639 4 09/28/03 07:55 AM
by Edame
* more Bush/Cheney lies whiterasta 506 3 05/02/04 12:41 PM
by whiterasta
* The U.S. Government Lied to You SquattingMarmot 580 2 11/01/03 04:26 AM
by Baby_Hitler
* Lies about sex.... lies about the budget
( 1 2 all )		 isis 3,047 23 02/18/02 12:10 AM
by nugsarenice
* The Bush 9/11 Scandal for Dummies
( 1 2 3 all )		 RonoS 5,444 49 06/12/02 09:15 PM
by Jammer
* Bowling For Columbine - Lying with the help of the Media
( 1 2 3 4 ... 10 11 all )		 lysergic 11,545 211 09/16/03 11:01 AM
by Zildjian

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Enlil, ballsalsa
1,888 topic views. 2 members, 8 guests and 15 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2026 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.026 seconds spending 0.005 seconds on 18 queries.