POLITICS: Sheehan Attacks Israel, Refuses to Pay Taxes

Originally posted by Odium
Was?

Could you show me a report displaying Iraq as a heaven for terrorism (proven) prior to the invasion?

And you don't think more people are murdered in America than killed by terrorists?

Salman Pak was not the only terrorist camp in Iraq, there were at least two more that we know about.

This information has been given before, and it is freely available in these forums.

Here is some of the evidence again.

The Associated Press reports that Coalition forces shut down at least three terrorist training camps in Iraq. The most notorious of these was the base at Salman Pak, about 15 miles southeast of Baghdad. Before the war, numerous Iraqi defectors said the camp featured a passenger jet on which terrorists sharpened their air piracy skills. This satellite photo shows an urban assault training site, a three-car train for railway-attack instruction, and a commercial airliner sitting all by itself in the middle of the desert.16

Excerpted from.
www.husseinandterror.com...

Here is a picture of Salman Pak taken in 2000. (before the war.)


This picture can be enlarged, where you can see the airliner that was used for training as well as other terrorist training facilities, at the following link.
www.husseinandterror.com...

If you don't want to accept the evidence from those terrorist camps there is more evidence that Saddam was funding and aiding terrorists who attacked Israelis and Americans.

Here is a list of some of the terrorist organizations that Saddam gave funds t and aided.



Here is a picture of an American that was killed by one of the terrorist organizations that Saddam funded and aided.



More information and pictures about those terrorist organizations Saddam funded and aided can be found at.
www.husseinandterror.com...

Saddam gave a haven to several terrorists, including terrorists that had attacked the US before the war, such as one of the terrorist involved in the bombing of WTC in 1993.



[edit on 16-8-2005 by Muaddib]

Odium - Your arguments against DJ appear sound -- except for two of them. You state that just because Saddam Hussein wasn't giving as much money to support terrorists as some others that he can't use the argument that Saddam Hussein was supporting terrorists. Can you not see the fault in that reasoning?

Also, is not your comment taking issue with Colin Powell's statement concerning terrorist training not self-contradictory? The original argument was purportedly to show that Iraq was indeed training terrorists and the argument offered looked good. Your counter argument was twofold; first you stated that you didn't believe the evidence presented and then you presented evidence of a letter from Sudan's Al Qaeda groups asking OBL to get involved in order to protect their ties with Iraq. What kind of ties do you think were being discussed in that letter?

Finally, you change the argument altogether by bringing up crime in America and equating it to terrorism or something. I'm not sure what you are attempting to show with those comments.

[edit on 16-8-2005 by Astronomer68]

I'd like to see how rational you would be if they sent your child home in a body bag.

Originally posted by FallenFromTheTree

I'd like to see how rational you would be if they sent your child home in a body bag.

Considering all the time that has elapsed since that tragic event, I believe most "normal" people could be rational.

[edit on 16-8-2005 by Astronomer68]

.
Lies about aluminum rocket tubes.

Which of you deluded souls still think those aluminum tubes were for centifuges?

Before Ms. Rice made those remarks, though, she was aware that . . . Months before . . . the Energy Department, believed the tubes were probably intended for small artillery rockets.

www.truthout.org...

They were the exact dimensions of rocket tubes and totally unsuited for use in centrifuges.

"the vast majority of scientists and nuclear experts" in the Energy Department . . . disagreed with the agency. But on Sept. 13, the day the article appeared, the Energy Department sent a directive forbidding employees from discussing the subject with reporters.

The Whitehouse knew this before they announced it and banned the DOE employees from telling the truth.

You have two verbal sources one of which won't even allow themselves to be named saying there was an installation at Salmon Park.

Are they as reliable as Ahmad Chalabi? Who was paid 340,000.00 per MONTH as he pumped out lie after lie after lie that the administration wanted to hear?

The Sales job for war lacks credibility then as well as now.

Curious: Do all US military installations get counted as terrorist training grounds if we get invaded?
.

If you believe so strongly that our involvement in Iraq is justified, then I suggest you quit your job
here and go to Iraq to help the agenda any way you can.

.
Bush supports every war,
But he will never fight in one.

He deserted on domestic soil when he didn't even have to fight.

He's a NeoConArtist,
In otherwords a snake.
.

The lack of compassion posted by some of you is breath taking...you ought to be ashamed...The basic right we have have in this nation is the right to speak our individiual minds whether anyone else likes it or not. It is the hard right that discredits itself with every smear campagin it launches and this one against this woman is a new low. No less than Lincoln, said when faced with protesters that "It is a sin to be silent when it is your duty to protest." He did not say it was treasonous, he said it was a duty. We on the left protest bushes splendid little war because we feel it is wrong, it is a moral decision and no matter how hard you right wing kooks claim it as your own, you have no monopoly on morality...I repeat the right has no monopoly on morality, or patriotism or love of GOD or country and to claim so is ignorant, self-righteous, arrogant and stupid. That this woman is speaking her heart is obvious and it is obscene that you disrespect that by attacking her or claiming she is a pawn.

Originally posted by FallenFromTheTree

If you believe so strongly that our involvement in Iraq is justified, then I suggest you quit your job
here and go to Iraq to help the agenda any way you can.

If that is your argument how about you go to Iraq and talk to the insugents/terrorist if you want peace with them?...... You think perhaps they will listen to you?......

PS: oh and bring them some flowers.......

[edit on 16-8-2005 by Muaddib]

[edit on 16-8-2005 by Muaddib]

Nah, Muaddib. The arguement was;
"Don't go to Iraq because it'll only cause more terrorism."

:O It happened...

Guess what. 1 year now of trying to kill them off.
Doesn't seem to be going well now does it?

How 'bout 2-1/2 years???

Muaddib, that's our view of the place.

That it is a terrorist training camp.

In fact the Iraqi Government gave a different view.

None of us know as fact which is the correct one. You just assume. I find it highly unlike it would be a terrorist training cell that was not dismantled prior to the invasion to make the U.S. look bad.

As for the site; well the Official 9/11 Commission (I posted a link earlier) could see no link between Saddam, the Iraqi Government and al-Qaida. The meeting that was meant to take place - between a 9/11 hi-jacker and a member of the Iraqi Government. Never happened.

Report says so.

Official American Government report - says so.

These stereotypes and labels bug the heck out of me.

What if you simply detest all manner of political corruption?

Why must we always fit some category when we simply want
honest and worthy leadership?

I consider myself extremely conservative when I see our entire electoral process
has fallen to the corruption of corporate interests.

I am neither Republican nor Democrat, but simply an American disgusted
when I see what is happening to our country

Any truly honest and worthy individual wouldn't stand a chance in the current political
arena.

I strongly believe that our voting system has been completely corrupted and needs
a complete and verifiable overhaul.
The voting machines and the software running them must be able to withstand
the closest scrutiny by independant inspectors.
The fact that no one is permitted to even inspect the source code casts enough reasonable
doubt for me to question any voting results.

... Stalin; "It's not who votes that counts, It's who counts the votes"

Originally posted by Seekerof

In a letter she wrote to ABC's Nightline:

Am I emotional? Yes, my first born was murdered. Am I angry? Yes, he was killed for lies and for a PNAC Neo-Con agenda to benefit Israel. My son joined the Army to protect America, not Israel. Am I stupid? No, I know full-well that my son, my family, this nation, and this world were betrayed by a George Bush who was influenced by the neo-con PNAC agenda after 9/11. We were told that we were attacked on 9/11 because the terrorists hate our freedoms and democracy...not for the real reason, becuase the Arab-Muslims who attacked us hate our middle-eastern foreign policy. That hasn't changed since America invaded and occupied Iraq...in fact it has gotten worse.

All typical radical left wing nonsense. She's flipped her lid.

I don't know if it's worth anything... here's an article with pictures of her
hugging and being kissed by G.W. at Fort Lewis Washington. She seems
to be getting along just fine with him there. If she really thought as
the above quote says .... I doubt she'd lower herself to touch the man
who she blames for the death of her son.

www.worldnetdaily.com...

Quote by her telling the Reporter of Vacaville, Calif., - "I now know
he's sincere about wanting freedom for the Iraqis. I know he's sorry and
feels some pain for our loss. And I know he's a man of faith."

Link to quote - www.thereporter.com...



[edit on 8/16/2005 by FlyersFan]

Originally posted by Odium
Muaddib, that's our view of the place.

That it is a terrorist training camp.

In fact the Iraqi Government gave a different view.

Our view of the place? We know for certain that Saddam funded, aided, and protected terrorists because many of them would run to Iraq to hide from western authorities. We also can trace the funds that Saddam gave to many terrorist organizations and we also have Saddam statements of him condoning and congratulating families o suicide bombers for killing Americans and Israelis.

The evidence against your statement that it was not a terrorist training facility shows it is very unlikely i was used for anything else. What would terrorists be doing training in a camp that has an aircraft? I doubt they were merely playing hide and seek.

Originally posted by Odium
None of us know as fact which is the correct one. You just assume. I find it highly unlike it would be a terrorist training cell that was not dismantled prior to the invasion to make the U.S. look bad.

Who is assuming in this issue it is you. What evidence do you have to support our assesment that it was not a terrorist facility?

Originally posted by Odium
As for the site; well the Official 9/11 Commission (I posted a link earlier) could see no link between Saddam, the Iraqi Government and al-Qaida. The meeting that was meant to take place - between a 9/11 hi-jacker and a member of the Iraqi Government. Never happened.

Report says so.

Official American Government report - says so.

You might want to check what te 9/11 commission said about this, along with some other people. The one thing they said was that there was "no definite proof that Saddam helped Al Qaeda in the 9/11 attack, but there were links between Iraq and Al Qaeda. The 9/11 commission actually gave evidence that Iraqi military officers had met with Al Qaeda operatives, that in itself is a link between them.

This is what the 9/11 commision said.

"We have no credible evidence that Iraq and al-Qaeda cooperated on attacks against the United States." (9-11 Commission Staff Statement 15, June 16, 2004)

Originally posted by djohnsto77
Nor can you give aid and comfort to an enemy of the United States, because that is treason.

How is expressing oneself freely helping the enemy?

Originally posted by djohnsto77
Please don't forget what the constitution and our body of law really says just fit your own peacenik agendas...

I'm curious about your experience with the constitution and your interpretation. The desire for peace is a noble one, and a great deal of history's finest warrior leaders advised against warfare and for diplomacy... but certainly, diplomacy tempered with strength.

You've swallowed the divisive us-versus-them ditto-head duality of western politics hook, line, and sinker. As have an unfortunate majority of the population.

There have been, and will continue to be, wars that must be fought. History will likely remember this current conflict as very likely a war that should have been. However, this doesn't forgive the increasing list of indications that not only might this war be fought improperly, but our leaders have not completely disclosed a forthright rationale for sounding the battle cry.

As citizens of a free and open culture, founded by countless bloody sacrifices, it is our duty to question our leaders and demand answers. If you review the totality of the constitution and the intent of our inspired founding fathers, this is the single most important element of this nation. The original "right to bear arms" is rooted in their belief that the citizenry must regularly and openly question the government and ensure it is of the people, by the people and for the people.

Too bad both political parties care little for one of history's most inspiring documents.

Originally posted by grover
That this woman is speaking her heart is obvious and it is obscene that you disrespect that by attacking her or claiming she is a pawn.

No, that she's speaking from her heart isn't obvious at all.

I have no doubt that she is sad her son is dead. However, the source
of the rest of her gibberish is highly questionable. It comes from an
unstable mind, or from outright payoffs, as the MANY posted links
attest to.

She started out this path with an adult son who died for a cause he
believed in. She praised G.W. for being a man of faith and of believing
in freedom for the Iraqis ( Link to quote )
www.thereporter.com...
and she even was photographed hugging and kissing G.W. at Fort Lewis
which is something no mother would do .. hug and kiss a man that
she blamed for the death of her child.

Now she's spouting typical Michael Moorisms about Israel and
neo-cons.

Nope. Something or someone got to her. Either a mental disorder
due to stress or a payoff. There is ample evidence of both.



[edit on 8/16/2005 by FlyersFan]

Source
Meeting between hijacker, Iraqi agent discounted
In a second staff report released Wednesday, the commission staff said that Mohamed Atta, the pilot of one of the planes that struck the World Trade Center and leader of the 19 hijackers, never met with Iraqi agents in Prague, Czech Republic. That purported meeting also has been cited as evidence of a possible al-Qaida connection to Iraq.

“We do not believe that such a meeting occurred,” the report said.

The release of the reports came as the 10-member commission opened its final public hearing on the attacks. The hearing, being held Wednesday and Thursday, will cover the Sept. 11 plot and the emergency response by the Federal Aviation Administration and U.S. air defenses. Commissioners say they will delve into the actions of the nation’s top leaders during critical moments of the attacks.

No in fact you might want to check.
The sources you use might also want to check.
The site and court case have been brought into question (which is why you need to check all of what your source said) by what they have found.
Al Qaeda and Bin Laden had already tried to remove Saddam from power.
Saddam in return did not help them.
The Palestinian Terrorist groups do not attack America (Nation) they attack Israel.
Bombing Israel is an external problem and not Americas to deal with but the U.Ns, the Islamic World's and Israel's problem.
The evidence is the records itself and the sources used. Look at the link posted earlier on and spot the use of language. It's clear that it's not a fact it was a base to train terrorists.
If the other people they trained are terrorists, then the C.I.A. have been involved in training terrorists as well. No moral high-ground = no ability to invade.

We had already rendered Saddam's regime harmless once our troops sat on Iraq's border.

There was no imminent threat to American soil!

We had more power sitting at Iraq's border than we do now in the midst of a civil war.

The weapons inspectors had crippled his ability to gather any meaningful retaliation.

Unfortunately, our wise leaders chose poorly.

Saddam's regime would have fallen internally in due time and the people of Iraq
would have retained their pride.

We did it wrong.

Originally posted by Odium
He did nothing illegal on the WMD front and the Nuclear front.

It kills me that people keep bringing up the fact that no WMD's were found in Iraq. Think about how long our warships sat in the oceans near Iraq. Ya think he knew we were coming. The whole world knew we were come a month before it went down. If the cops sit outside in your driveway for an hour w/ their blue lights on, ya think you might not try and flush your stash?

I don't know for sure that he had WMD's, but if he did, he had ample time to get them out of the country. He was a slick dude, he probably had a tunnel somewhere that goes all the way to Saudi Arabia. We don't have the manpower to search every nook & cranny. If such a tunnel exists we could be there 20 years and never find it. He probably would have collapsed the tunnel after the stuff got moved anyway.

The point I'm trying to make is that we cannot prove if he had WMD's one way or the other. It was time for regime change. I don't really agree w/ the way we handled things, but Saddam is no longer in power, and that's a good thing. Just wish we had accomplished that without throwing our boys and girls into the meat grinder.