http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=519&ncid=718&e=1&u=/ap/20040616/ap_on_re_us/sept_11_commission

yep, poor old saddam, just a misunderstood world leader, a victim really. the only right thing to do is put him back in power and apologize. maybe bush could do it on TV. seriously, another case of picking and choosing what the commision reports. please stop with the propaganda posts

Originally posted by Travh20
yep, poor old saddam, just a misunderstood world leader, a victim really. the only right thing to do is put him back in power and apologize. maybe bush could do it on TV. seriously, another case of picking and choosing what the commision reports. please stop with the propaganda posts well travh.......whats the answer then......i mean, you are closer to the situation than they are !!!! this is BIPARTISAN ! you do know what that means .........dont you ?

did you read past the first 2 paragraphs korg? because in american media you must to the end, becasue that where the real story is.

Originally posted by Travh20
did you read past the first 2 paragraphs korg? because in american media you must to the end, becasue that where the real story is.

I read the whole article Trav...I'm not sure what point you were trying to make.

I guess al qead and iraq being in contact at all is of no significance, only the headline

Originally posted by Travh20
I guess al qead and iraq being in contact at all is of no significance, only the headline

I think the point that was being made was not that they never had any contact, but that they weren't working together, which is of course somewhat contrary to what our government would like the American people to believe.

Originally posted by Travh20
I guess al qead and iraq being in contact at all is of no significance, only the headline travh.......and your sources are........? i mean man, are you more knowledgable than the 911 commision ? what gives here. ? i thought that this was a reasonable debate forum. if all of your answers consist of " all of those liberals", or "the news is liberal", or, "are you sure those werent liberals"....that leads me to believe that you cant have intelligent conversation. BV makes good points even if we dont agree, you have that tape going, and its voice activated, and everytime someone says something that sounds liberal, it kicks in with "that does not compute".....lmao

Please allow me to be sceptical of another government report. How do we know this one won't be recanted and rewritten like the CIAs report on the number of terror attacks?

korg, your own article says that there were meetings between al weada and saddams government, why dont you read it. anyway, attacking iraq and afghanistan was not done for revenge. it was partly retaliation but mainly a was to ensure it didnt happen again by erradicting the terrorists and those who would willingly support them. I dont remember anyone claiming that saddaam was directly responsible for 9-11. saying that saddam had nothing to do with 9-11 is nothing but fluff and a way to try and say we did the wrong thing. the fact is, saddam and al qeada were in contact, and we were not going to just sit back and allow them the opportunity to decide to work togehter, becasue if they could contact one another, it is only a matter of time before they do decide to work toghether. saddam was a supporter of terrorism and had the same causes as al qeada. hatred for america and israel, support of palestinian terrorists. pretending that this line in this report completly absoleves saddam of any connection to terrorism whatsoever is wishful thinking. just becasue he didnt directly back 9-11 doesnt mean he wasnt a terrorist suporter who was dangerous to us and the rest of the world. he and all the resources of his oil rich country are no longer capable of plotting agaisnt you and I. and lastley, if you cant see a danger in a crazy lunatic who hates us and has billions of dollars capable of contacting and communicatign with the same group responsible for the worst attack in american hsitory dangerous, you will never see anythig as dangerous until the mushroom cloud rises over your town.

Originally posted by The Republican
Please allow me to be sceptical of another government report. How do we know this one won't be recanted and rewritten like the CIAs report on the number of terror attacks? we dont know that, but i dont think anyone here is in a better position than that commision, to find out what the truth might be......things about this war have been coming back more in the lines of " something went wrong here" than " something went right here..

Originally posted by Travh20
korg, your own article says that there were meetings between al weada and saddams government, why dont you read it. anyway, attacking iraq and afghanistan was not done for revenge. it was partly retaliation but mainly a was to ensure it didnt happen again by erradicting the terrorists and those who would willingly support them. I dont remember anyone claiming that saddaam was directly responsible for 9-11. saying that saddam had nothing to do with 9-11 is nothing but fluff and a way to try and say we did the wrong thing. the fact is, saddam and al qeada were in contact, and we were not going to just sit back and allow them the opportunity to decide to work togehter, becasue if they could contact one another, it is only a matter of time before they do decide to work toghether. saddam was a supporter of terrorism and had the same causes as al qeada. hatred for america and israel, support of palestinian terrorists. pretending that this line in this report completly absoleves saddam of any connection to terrorism whatsoever is wishful thinking. just becasue he didnt directly back 9-11 doesnt mean he wasnt a terrorist suporter who was dangerous to us and the rest of the world. he and all the resources of his oil rich country are no longer capable of plotting agaisnt you and I. and lastley, if you cant see a danger in a crazy lunatic who hates us and has billions of dollars capable of contacting and communicatign with the same group responsible for the worst attack in american hsitory dangerous, you will never see anythig as dangerous until the mushroom cloud rises over your town. THEN, WHY ARE WE NOT IN SAUDI ARABIA........THATS WHERE MOST OF THEM ARE FROM , ESPECIALLY OSAMA .?....GIVE ME A BREAK...and, it says that saddam sent someone over, but decided not to help........DO YOU READ !??

Originally posted by Travh20
and lastley, if you cant see a danger in a crazy lunatic who hates us and has billions of dollars capable of contacting and communicatign with the same group responsible for the worst attack in american hsitory dangerous, you will never see anythig as dangerous until the mushroom cloud rises over your town. oh, you mean the president of N. KOREA ?

Originally posted by Travh20
korg, your own article says that there were meetings between al weada and saddams government, why dont you read it. anyway, attacking iraq and afghanistan was not done for revenge. it was partly retaliation but mainly a was to ensure it didnt happen again by erradicting the terrorists and those who would willingly support them. ......aaaaannnnnnnttttt.....wrong again. thats what " bush the lying dragon " says......he's proven to be more of a liar than the king of blowjobs ! but you keep on believing him......the truth will make you free.....hey, even the reagans have nothing but good things to say about bush......nancy herself.......hey bush, just say no..........drunkin idiot

Korg is your brain short of a few connections? you complain about attacking saddam who has no connections to al qeada but advocate attacking N korea who would have even less reason to align with al qeada? whats your major malfunction? do you just blurt shit out as soon as it enters your brain? as far as saudi arabia goes, the saudi government is trying to fight terrorism, and do. they are not overt supporters of terrorism like saddam and the taliban were (yes, giving money to palestinian suicide bombers familes is activly supporting terrorism) the reason the vast majority of 9-11 hijackers were saudi is becasue saudi arabia was one of the only middle eastrn countries at the time who were able to come and go in the US. how far do you think 19 iraqis or iranians or syrians would have made it through the airport sysyem? saudis were used becasue they drew the least amount of suspicion. use your head korg, please.

Originally posted by Travh20
Korg is your brain short of a few connections? you complain about attacking saddam who has no connections to al qeada but advocate attacking N korea who would have even less reason to align with al qeada? whats your major malfunction? do you just blurt shit out as soon as it enters your brain? as far as saudi arabia goes, the saudi government is trying to fight terrorism, and do. they are not overt supporters of terrorism like saddam and the taliban were (yes, giving money to palestinian suicide bombers familes is activly supporting terrorism) the reason the vast majority of 9-11 hijackers were saudi is becasue saudi arabia was one of the only middle eastrn countries at the time who were able to come and go in the US. how far do you think 19 iraqis or iranians or syrians would have made it through the airport sysyem? saudis were used becasue they drew the least amount of suspicion. use your head korg, please. first.....you space cadet, korea threatened to have and build wmd's....and one of the reasons, according to bush, that we attacked iraq was because of wmd's. thats before he kept changing his reasons. i mean, he is republican so he has that right.....kerry doesnt....haha....thats why i said that ! second ,..doesnt it stand to reason , even in your world, {that if saudi's are the ones that can get over here, and they're the ones that did the 911,}, that we should be more concerned about the PEOPLE THAT DID IT !!? if this means im missing a few connections, your battery is DEAD !

Originally posted by Travh20
how far do you think 19 iraqis or iranians or syrians would have made it through the airport sysyem? saudis were used becasue they drew the least amount of suspicion. use your head korg, please. and so what your saying is, you can look at saudi's and iraqi's and tell which is which.....im black, and i cant tell south african blacks from north african blacks.....they're middle eastern people. that day, it wouldnt have mattered, we werent paying attention anyway !!!!

first of all, the people that did it are dead. i guess you didnt remember not seeing any parachutes coming out of the plane right before they hit the WTC. as of now anyone from any middle eastern country that tries to get on a flight here is going to get the once over, not just a smile and a wish for a nice flight. if you cant even admit that there is a logical reason why the 9-11 hijackers were saudis and not iranians or syrians you are completly out of your element. go back to smoking weed behind the gym and leave the serious debate to the big boys. dwelling on the fact that the majority of the 911 hijackers were saudis at this point in time is dumb.

Originally posted by korg
and so what your saying is, you can look at saudi's and iraqi's and tell which is which.....im black, and i cant tell south african blacks from north african blacks.....they're middle eastern people. that day, it wouldnt have mattered, we werent paying attention anyway !!!!

yuo obvioulsy have no idea what a passport is

Originally posted by Travh20
yuo obvioulsy have no idea what a passport is travh......WE WERENT WATCHING ANYONE THEN ! how hard would it have been for an iranian or iraqi to get a passport ? we cant stop drug smuggling, but we can scrutinize iraqi's and saudi's. we were not watching in that manner man !!! period......and you have no idea what a spelling bee is .....lmao

Originally posted by Travh20
first of all, the people that did it are dead. i guess you didnt remember not seeing any parachutes coming out of the plane right before they hit the WTC. as of now anyone from any middle eastern country that tries to get on a flight here is going to get the once over, not just a smile and a wish for a nice flight. if you cant even admit that there is a logical reason why the 9-11 hijackers were saudis and not iranians or syrians you are completly out of your element. go back to smoking weed behind the gym and leave the serious debate to the big boys. dwelling on the fact that the majority of the 911 hijackers were saudis at this point in time is dumb. see, now your going back to what i was saying before. WE DID NOT DO THIS FOR THE IRAQI PEOPLE.! your right, they cant take a plane without being prejudiced against....i dont blame us, but dont make it seem to be other reasons than what the real reason is.....money and control ! if we were REALLY concerned, as bad as this sounds, we would get every middle eastern person out of here. we dont know who is or is not against us. the problem is not in other countries, they were right here for years ! and i know the LOGICAL; reason saudi's did it, because alot of them dont like americans either, but we are so busy watching the wrong people, they outsmarted us......could that be it ?

we were watching people then korg. jsut as we now have a list of countries to keep on eye on, we had the same thing back then, but saudi arabia wasnt on it becasue we were supposedly allies. al qeada used that trust agaisnt us and used saudis as the hijackers. Also, political correctness played a big part as well. Then the airlines ahd a list of things to look for that should raise alarm. things like middle eastern men with no baggage, one way tickets, paying in cash, things like that. the airlines delibratly decided to ignore these for fear of law suits. the 9-11 hijackers set off everyone of these alarms, but were allowed to walk on the planes. so, first the government allows them into the country no questions asked based on where they were from, secondly fear ofracialbased lawsuits lets tehm get on the planes no questions asked. there were break downs all along the path.

Originally posted by Travh20
first of all, the people that did it are dead. i guess you didnt remember not seeing any parachutes coming out of the plane right before they hit the WTC. ...lmao, i know they're dead...moron....hey man, leave this forum and go str8 to comedy central. but if they can get 8 saudi's, they can get hundreds, maybe thousands more. and they wont have a problem getting here. because travh will be at the gate and say ; "oh, saudi, go right in, we're looking for iraqi's"...and they'll say........".suckerrrrr.......jihad !! "....lmao

Originally posted by Travh20
we were watching people then korg. jsut as we now have a list of countries to keep on eye on, we had the same thing back then, but saudi arabia wasnt on it becasue we were supposedly allies. al qeada used that trust agaisnt us and used saudis as the hijackers. Also, political correctness played a big part as well. Then the airlines ahd a list of things to look for that should raise alarm. things like middle eastern men with no baggage, one way tickets, paying in cash, things like that. the airlines delibratly decided to ignore these for fear of law suits. the 9-11 hijackers set off everyone of these alarms, but were allowed to walk on the planes. so, first the government allows them into the country no questions asked based on where they were from, secondly fear ofracialbased lawsuits lets tehm get on the planes no questions asked. there were break downs all along the path. ....THEY FOUND THE KNIVES ON THEM...!...LOOKING FOR WHAT ? travh, even after 911, security was very poor....a poor list of countries. hey look, dont come telling me how prepared we were.....WE WEREN"T !! and another thing, because alqaida isnt a country, we should have been watching all middle eastern people if there was a concern.......if the govt was basing who they were watching out for based on what country, then the jokes on us !

LMAO!! You guys effen kill me!! I totally lost it at the "smoking weed behind the gym" and then Korg hits with "spelling bee" and "comedy central". LMAO!

WTF are you arguing for anyway? Everyone knows there were no Iraq/Al-Qaida connections to justify the war! Besides, even if there were, there would be a report to say that there weren't. :D

Uh, anyway, it seems to me that the conspiracy theory aside, isn't Al-Qaida the group that claimed responsibility for Nick Berg's beheading? Wasn't the man purportedly responsible for the actual act supposed to be a close lieutenant or something of Bin Laden?

Bush said the connection didn’t exist.
But now Cheney says there is a connection.
Flip flopping? In the Bush Administration??? NO!

I’ve yet to see the evidence…that is actually from a reliable news source.

Rumsfield, Bush and others don’t see connection between Saddam and 9/11

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0%2C2933%2C97527%2C00.html
http://www.nydailynews.com/front/st...5p-106678c.html
http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/...-iraq-911_x.htm
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/natio...bushiraq18.html:confused:

Originally posted by saycricket
LMAO!! You guys effen kill me!! I totally lost it at the "smoking weed behind the gym" and then Korg hits with "spelling bee" and "comedy central". LMAO!

WTF are you arguing for anyway? Everyone knows there were no Iraq/Al-Qaida connections to justify the war! Besides, even if there were, there would be a report to say that there weren't. :D say....travh just cracks me up........just a lil fun between arguments

huh?

Originally posted by Beirut_Veteran
Did you watch the news tonight? Lee Hamilton Vice Chair of the commission said that the commission never said there was no connection between Iraq and Al Qaeda, he said we said there was no connection between 9/11 and Iraq.
So I guess this takes the lie out of Bushs mouth as you have quoted him saying there was no connection also.
Hmmmmmm maybe the press should pay attention to what they are saying.
Hamilton the democratic vice chair made these comments after a reporter asked him if these findings proved deciet on the part of Cheney and he said we agree with Cheney, there is a connection between Iraq and Al Qaeda.

Well damn, another point shot down by the very people quoted.


No connections???? The commission never said that... and here is the Vice Chair saying that... I guess the media needs to look before leaping.


:slap: