Bush and Officials Lied leading up to Iraq war

[RetiredGySgt]

my post was in response to RGS...

you: shut the fuck up.

I answered you later.

Didn't we have a conversation about language and ordering people about?

 

[maineman]

Remind us again how you deplore name calling and insults.

remind me again how you are dead wrong about my words, once again.

I get tired of schooling you.

 

[maineman]

No motive and I have proved through the previous post that the world believed that Iraq had WMDS...

no motive????

to connect AQ and Iraq was essential to tap into the anger/fear that America was feeling about 9/11. Without that, the war in Iraq would have NEVER been endorsed by the people...and therefore, never voted on by the politicians. Bush needed to make Iraq about terror and terror about 9/11... and give it a sense of urgency so that even waiting the three or four months it would have taken for Blix & Co. to tell us that Saddam did not have any WMD's was just too much time to waste. We had to invade and we had to invade NOW! Orange alert! mushroom cloud! Boo!

 

[maineman]

Think for yourself then, answer the two questions I posed??

I have.

 

[maineman]

Remind us again how you deplore name calling and insults.

Alas, I deplore stubborn fools even more!

I suggest, again, that you go back and read those posts....it was ME who stated that a majority of democrats IN CONGRESS voted against the use of force resolution. You and your moronic pals have jumped all over that statement as being in error and cited, as your "proof", the roll call from only one of the two chambers of congress. So... Am I in error, or are YOU in error for questioning it...and questioning it.... and questioning it... and then denying that you fucked up? I would suggest the latter.

 

[Alpha1]

no motive????

to connect AQ and Iraq was essential to tap into the anger/fear that America was feeling about 9/11. Without that, the war in Iraq would have NEVER been endorsed by the people...and therefore, never voted on by the politicians. Bush needed to make Iraq about terror and terror about 9/11... and give it a sense of urgency so that even waiting the three or four months it would have taken for Blix & Co. to tell us that Saddam did not have any WMD's was just too much time to waste. We had to invade and we had to invade NOW! Orange alert! mushroom cloud! Boo!

Really...so thats why the Clinton Administration tryed so hard to make these connections.....you are an ignorant fool to ignore the historical facts.....
The rumors about the AQ/Iraq connection are well documented....
WRONG...but well documented...

PAGE 128 9/11 report
Time....11/1998
....this passage led Clark, who for years had read intell reports on Iraqi-Sudanese
cooperation on chemical weapons, to specualte to Berger that a large Iraqi presence at chem
facilities in Khartoum was "probably a direct result of the Iraq-Al Qida
agreement." Clark added that VX precursor traces found near al Shifa were the
"exact formula" used by Iraq."

PAGE 61 9/11 Report
With the Sudanese regime acting as intermediary, Ben Ladin himself
met with a senior Iraqi intelligence officer in Khartoum in late 1994 or early 1995
Ben Ladin is said to have asked for space to establish training camps, as well as assistance
assistance in procuring weapons, but there in no evidence that Iraq responded to this
request...As described below, the ensuring years saw additional efforts to
establish connections....

PAGE 66 9/11 Report
There is also evidence that around this time Bin Ladin sent out a number of feelers to the Iraqi
regime, offering some cooperation. None are reported to received a response.
In mid 1998 the situation reversed; it was Iraq that reportedly took the initiative. In
March 1998, after Bin Ladin's public fatwa against the United States two al Qaeda
members reportedly went to Iraq to meet with Iraqi intelligence. In July, an Iraqi delegation
traveled to Afghanistan to meet first with the Taliban and then with Ben Ladin. Sources reported
that one, or perhaps both, of these meetings was apparently arranged through Bin Ladin's Egyptian
deputy, Zawahiri, who had ties of his own the the Iraqis.

Similar meetings between Iraqi officials and Bin Ladin or his aides may have
occured in 1999 during a period of some reported strains with the
Taliban. According to the reporting, Iraqi officials offered Bin Ladin a safe
haven in Iraq. Bin Ladin declined, etc......

 

[jillian]

I think you need to go read this instead of someone else's excerpts....

http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/sept_11/911Report.pdf

the next part of the sentence on p. 128 was that the language (which was Clarke's speculation in any event) about the "understanding" between Iraq and AQ was dropped from the indictment that paragraph is discussing.

Since your first quote was misleading, I couldn't be bothered with the others. But it's probably a good idea to do your own research since WorldNetDaily is notoriously full of garbage.

 

[rayboyusmc]

So after all these posts, we are still of the consensus that Bush twisted the data, ingored information that he didn't like, cherry picked what he did like and outright lied in some cases. And that Cheney will still on occasion lie on TV and say there was a connection between Saddam and 9-11.

Glad we have finally come to this conclusion.

 

[DeadCanDance]

Here's an honest republican, with the guts to say what most everyone else already knows is true.

Senator Coburn (R-Oklahoma): ‘I Think It Was Probably A Mistake Going To Iraq’



http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?articleID=20080221_1_A1_spanc13621


At least he admist it's was a mistake invading. Something that 95% of Bush voters can't bring themselves to do.

 

[maineman]

Really...so thats why the Clinton Administration tryed so hard to make these connections.....you are an ignorant fool to ignore the historical facts

again. I really don't CARE about what the Clinton administration did. The ONLY thing concerning Clinton that has any bearing on this discussion is what he DIDN'T do: sex up the intelligence for the purpose of garnering public support for a major ground war in the middle east.

You always want to make this about some past presidents..this is about our CURRENT president...the guy who DID start that major ground war in the middle east, and the guy who is still the titular head of the administration that is still conducting that major ground war.

Take your stuff about Clinton to www.irrelevanthistorychats.com. Or let's start talking about what an asshole Nixon was...or Harding...or Grant, for that matter.

 

[Alpha1]

I think you need to go read this instead of someone else's excerpts....

Someone else's excerpts...????
Those "excerpts" are directly from the 9/11 Commission Report...and the point is not if they are true of false, the point is (a historical fact) that from 1994 forward, these connections were suspected and FIRST put forth by Clintons Admin....



http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/sept_11/911Report.pdf

the next part of the sentence on p. 128 was that the language (which was Clarke's speculation in any event) about the "understanding" between Iraq and AQ was dropped from the indictment that paragraph is discussing.

The fact that the accusation was dropped from the first indictment is irrelevant.....the fact that the speculation is ever made is whats relevant


Since your first quote was misleading, I couldn't be bothered with the others. But it's probably a good idea to do your own research since WorldNetDaily is notoriously full of garbage.

No don't bother with the rest...cherry pick one and nit-pick it to death with irrelevant BS....

 

[Alpha1]

again. I really don't CARE about what the Clinton administration did. The ONLY thing concerning Clinton that has any bearing on this discussion is what he DIDN'T do: sex up the intelligence for the purpose of garnering public support for a major ground war in the middle east.

You always want to make this about some past presidents..this is about our CURRENT president...the guy who DID start that major ground war in the middle east, and the guy who is still the titular head of the administration that is still conducting that major ground war.

Take your stuff about Clinton to www.irrelevanthistorychats.com. Or let's start talking about what an asshole Nixon was...or Harding...or Grant, for that matter.

probably a direct result of the Iraq-Al Qida agreement.???

Ben Ladin himself met with a senior Iraqi intelligence officer in Khartoum in late 1994 or early 1995????

two al Qaeda members reportedly went to Iraq to meet with Iraqi intelligence.
---------
I guess this nonsense isn't considered sexing up the intelligence for the purpose of garnering public support for demonizing Saddam and Iraq..but you know damn well thats exactly what it is.....there was NO PROOF then make these accusations and there is none now.....but the Dims made this kind of noise for 10 years.....

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Here's an honest republican, with the guts to say what most everyone else already knows is true.

Senator Coburn (R-Oklahoma): ‘I Think It Was Probably A Mistake Going To Iraq’



http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?articleID=20080221_1_A1_spanc13621


At least he admist it's was a mistake invading. Something that 95% of Bush voters can't bring themselves to do.

Your a liar and a partisan hack, a lot of supposed republicans on THIS board have agreed the invasion was not needed and was handled badly.

As for another of the liberal LIARS, Ray, there is no consensus that Bush lied, in fact the EVIDENCE is clear consistant and overwhelming he did no such thing. That would be why every investigation has eneded with a statement that in fact the Administration did NOT lie to anyone.

The only consensus we have here is retards thinking if they keep making ignorant unproven nonfactual claims eventually someone will believe them.

 

[DeadCanDance]

Your a liar and a partisan hack, a lot of supposed republicans on THIS board have agreed the invasion was not needed and was handled badly.

As for another of the liberal LIARS, Ray, there is no consensus that Bush lied, in fact the EVIDENCE is clear consistant and overwhelming he did no such thing. That would be why every investigation has eneded with a statement that in fact the Administration did NOT lie to anyone.

The only consensus we have here is retards thinking if they keep making ignorant unproven nonfactual claims eventually someone will believe them.

a lot of supposed republicans on THIS board have agreed the invasion was not needed


Great, so you agree now that you, Bush, Cheney, and the GOP, should have listened to me, Howard Dean, Barak Obama, Nancy Pelosi, and many others who said we shouldn't invade? Instead of ridiculing us in 2003? Well shit, we could have saved a trillion taxpayer dollars, and thousands of lives.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

a lot of supposed republicans on THIS board have agreed the invasion was not needed


Great, so you agree now that you, Bush, Cheney, and the GOP, should have listened to me, Howard Dean, Barak Obama, Nancy Pelosi, and many others who said we shouldn't invade? Instead of ridiculing us in 2003? Well shit, we could have saved a trillion taxpayer dollars, and thousands of lives.

I was not here in 2003 , I do not know if you were or not, but claiming that 5 years ago I ridiculed you or anyone else is rich, when you have nothing to back it up with except your partisan talking points and repeated partisan lies.

 

[DeadCanDance]

I was not here in 2003 , I do not know if you were or not, but claiming that 5 years ago I ridiculed you or anyone else is rich, when you have nothing to back it up with except your partisan talking points and repeated partisan lies.

LOL

Yeah, judging from your personality on this board, I'm so sure you were ever so respectful to anti-war americans in 2003. lol. I'm sure you were like almost all the rest of the Bush wingnuts. Ridiculing us, and dismissing our questions about the need to go to war. You really should be groveling and begging forgiveness. You sent thousands to the deaths, and cost us taxpayers hundreds of billions of dollars, on something that was a mistake.

 

[JimH52]

Here's an honest republican, with the guts to say what most everyone else already knows is true.

Senator Coburn (R-Oklahoma): ‘I Think It Was Probably A Mistake Going To Iraq’



http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?articleID=20080221_1_A1_spanc13621


At least he admist it's was a mistake invading. Something that 95% of Bush voters can't bring themselves to do.

The GOP will make large their contention that "the surge has worked" but in fact, the entire war was a huge mistake.

We are spending billions on a war that should never have started. The choice in the upcoming election is easy. You want to continue this monumental mistake or you want to make the Iraq government stand on its own two feet? The choice will be simple.

Remember, McCain indicated we could be in Iraq for the next 100 years.

 

[JimH52]

LOL

Yeah, judging from your personality on this board, I'm so sure you were ever so respectful to anti-war americans in 2003. lol. I'm sure you were like almost all the rest of the Bush wingnuts. Ridiculing us, and dismissing our questions about the need to go to war. You really should be groveling and begging forgiveness. You sent thousands to the deaths, and cost us taxpayers hundreds of billions of dollars, on something that was a mistake.

Remember all the French jokes that were circulating in those days because they would not go long with king george. Well, guess what? They were right! There were no WMDs and the war was a mistake.

 

[rayboyusmc]

The only consensus we have here is retards thinking if they keep making ignorant unproven nonfactual claims eventually someone will believe them.

I've noticed that Gunny, and I am not going to fall for it. I refuse to believe what you say just because you keep repeating it.

Let's jus admit it. The facts don't matter anymore. It's all about what you want to believe and not what is real.

And, Gunny, why do you have to use the retard remark? It's called a fucking difference of opinion. There are just as many retards on the right as the left.

 

[jreeves]

no motive????

to connect AQ and Iraq was essential to tap into the anger/fear that America was feeling about 9/11. Without that, the war in Iraq would have NEVER been endorsed by the people...and therefore, never voted on by the politicians. Bush needed to make Iraq about terror and terror about 9/11... and give it a sense of urgency so that even waiting the three or four months it would have taken for Blix & Co. to tell us that Saddam did not have any WMD's was just too much time to waste. We had to invade and we had to invade NOW! Orange alert! mushroom cloud! Boo!

It was George Tenet that made that connection, not Bush, as a matter of fact he stated there was no connection see.....



This letter from the DCI provided an unclassified CIA assessment of Saddam Hussein's willingness to use weapons of mass destruction. According to the letter, Iraq "for now appears to be drawing a line short of conducting terrorist attacks with conventional or ... chemical and biological weapons against the United States," but if "Saddam should conclude that a U.S.-led attack could no longer be deterred, he probably would become much less constrained in adopting terrorist actions." The letter also discusses the question of Iraqi links to Al-Qaeda and the basis for U.S. assessments of the links.

http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB80/#doc16