You've heard the term "You can't prove a negative" before, right?
If not...my neighbor is communicating telepathically and spiritually with invisible men who live on Pluto. Prove she's not.

Come on Mark. This is the best you've got? I would never claim that Bush lied, but I do believe that his administration cherry picked the intelligence they presented to congress and the American people to get us to go to war. I also believe the same about Clinton, Johnson, and Regean for Bosnia, Viet Nam, and Grenada. Presidents tell us what they want us to believe. The problem isn't so much that he took us to war than his administration has screwed up that war and the occupation,

Simply amazing. Everyone knows the crap he spewed was misleading. No one is fooled. Except you and the rest of the bushbots. (and I know your not fooled, you know, yet, somehow you continue your Heavens Gate type dementia) Everyone knows Dougie doctored the results. EVERYONE. The CIA AND the DIA both say no connection. Yet you and HindeRAKER can somehow find the connection. Mark, its becoming ridiculous.

Mark, you have so much talent. Do something constructive with your God given talent other than like McCain says, "disagree with the majority of Americans".

Osama Bin Laden is a radical Islamist. He's an extremist. Islam, to him, is the ONLY way, strictly adhered to, with anyone disagreeing signing their own death warrant.

By contrast, Saddam Hussein allowed CHRISTIANS (gasp) to worship their religion in Iraq. He didn't let it be widely known, and didn't encourage it, but neither did he specifically crack down on it.

To Osama, that's the WORST kind of traitorous heretic, one who lets another religion even EXIST in their country.

In short, there is absolutely NO way Bin Laden and Hussein saw eye to eye. Saddam was a moderate, Osama an extremist. It's a bit like left and right wing in America. To right wingers, lefties are "loonies" and "bleeding heart liberals" while to left wingers right wingers are "warmongers" and "out of touch" - this blog has shown, if nothing else, that common ground is virtually impossible to find. Thus it was with Saddam and Osama.

The administration NEEDED there to be a tie with Al-Qaeda, for there to be any chance of them pursuading people an invasion was necessary. Al-Qaeda was already associated with 9/11, so drawing an association between Al-Qaeda and Saddam was a sure way to pursuade people that regime change was the only way to handle him.

But it wasn't true. It wasn't then, it isn't now. The only difference between then and now, is now it's all starting to unravel.

Whisperwolf,

So you think "Saddam was a moderate." So you think Saddam was a great guy because he "allowed" Christians to worship discretely!

I don't think everyone would agree with your revisionist history of Saddam! Perhaps you have forgotten...

Here are just a few quotes about some of the killing of Saddam, his two sadistic sons, and his regime. There are likely others we haven't learned about yet. How many more mass graves will Iraqis find in the future when they start work on some building or construction project?

The figures are a little misleading in that they don't describe how the people were killed. It doesn't describe how many were tortured, carved up or skinned alive, had their arms and limbs chopped or pulled off, had their eyes or ears poked out, had their tongues cut out, were sexually mutilated, and worse -- all while they were still alive to "appreciate" Saddam's interrogation techniques.

Saddam Hussein killed an estimated 1.3 to 1.5 million people -- maybe more -- "...a horrifying picture of between 70 and 125 civilian deaths per day for every one of Saddam's 8,000-odd days in power"
"...history may judge that the stronger case was the one that needed no inspectors to confirm: that Saddam Hussein, in his 23 years in power, plunged this country into a bloodbath of medieval proportions, and exported some of that terror to his neighbors."

"...Along with other human rights organizations, The Documental Centre for Human Rights in Iraq has compiled documentation on over 600,000 civilian executions in Iraq. Human Rights Watch reports that in one operation alone, the Anfal, Saddam killed 100,000 Kurdish Iraqis. Another 500,000 are estimated to have died in Saddam's needless war with Iran. Coldly taken as a daily average for the 24 years of Saddam's reign, these numbers give us a horrifying picture of between 70 and 125 civilian deaths per day for every one of Saddam's 8,000-odd days in power"

"...suggested that the number of those who have "disappeared" into the hands of the secret police, never to be heard from again, could be 200,000."

"Kurdish groups estimate Anfal's victims were ... up to 180,000 ... Human Rights Watch concluded that 'the Iraqi regime committed the crime of genocide.' Anfal's intense phase lasted three months in the spring of 1988. If we estimate its victims at 100,000, the regime was killing Kurds alone at a rate of around 30,000 each month, or a thousand a day.

"The number of Kurds who died in 1991--killed by Saddam's forces or fleeing them--is estimated at 50,000 to 80,000. This range would have been much higher, except that the Gulf War Allies intervened in Iraq's north in response to the massive flow of desperate Kurdish refugees escaping the regime's onslaught."

"Saddam Hussein's government may have executed 61,000 Baghdad residents, a number significantly higher than previously believed..."

"...occupation authority in Iraq has said that at least 300,000 people are buried in mass graves in Iraq. Human rights officials put the number closer to 500,000, and some Iraqi political parties estimate more than 1 million were executed."

"Another 60,000 people are believed to have been killed when Saddam violently suppressed rebellions by Shiite Muslims in the south and Kurds in the north at the close of the 1991 Gulf War."

This doesn't include the estimated 5,000 to 6,000 children who were dying each month as a direct result of the ongoing efforts to "contain" Saddam and his murderous regime.

This doesn't include the trillions of dollars damage done to the U.S. and world economies, and which would have been done in the future.

This doesn't include the effects Saddam was having on U.S. and world security -- now or in the future.

This doesn't include the fact that Saddam would have resumed his WMD programs when U.N. sanctions were finally removed.

But you... you want people to believe Saddam was an all right kind of guy because he allowed Christians to worship!

As to your statement that "it's all starting to unravel".

Democrats are the ones who have encouraged that and continue to do so. Democrats have done everything they possibly can to encourage the terrorists and provide them with reasons to continue their fighting, reasons not to give up, and reason after reason to kill our American soldiers... to provide the fodder for the Democrats propaganda!

AAR

The Herald (Glasgow, Scotland), December 28, 1999.
The world's most wanted man, Osama bin Laden, has been offered sanctuary in Iraq if his worldwide terrorist network succeeds in carrying out a campaign of high-profile attacks on the West..

U.S. Newswire, December 23, 1999.
Yossef Bodansky also reveals the relationship between bin Laden and Saddam Hussein and how the U.S. bombing of Iraq is "strengthening the hands of militant Islamists eager to translate their rage into violence and terrorism."

The Observer. December 19, 1999.
This time last year the U.S. claimed that another delegation had met Osama bin Laden, the alleged terrorist mastermind and tried to woo him to Iraq.

United Press International. November 3, 1999
WASHINGTON -- The U.S. government has tried to prevent accused terror suspect Osama bin Laden from fleeing Afghanistan to either Iraq or Chechnya, Michael Sheehan, head of counter-terrorism at the State Department, told a Senate Foreign Relations subcommittee.

Akron Beacon Journal (Ohio). October 31, 1999. Sunday 1 STAR EDITION.
The Taliban has since made it known through official channels that the likely destination (for OBL) is Iraq.

The Kansas City Star. March 2, 1999, Tuesday.
He (bin Laden) has a private fortune ranging from $250 million to $500 million and is said to be cultivating a new alliance with Iraq's Saddam Hussein, who has biological and chemical weapons bin Laden would not hesitate to use.

Los Angeles Times. February 23, 1999, Tuesday, Home Edition.
Where is Osama bin Laden? That should be the U.S.'s main priority. If as rumored he and Saddam Hussein are joining forces, it could pose a threat making Hitler and Mussolini seem like a sideshow.

National Public Radio (NPR)February 18, 1999.
According to Vincent Cannistraro, a former chief of CIA counterterrorism operations, a senior Iraqi intelligence official, Farouk Hijazi(ph), sought out bin Laden in December and invited him to come to Iraq.

Agence France Presse. February 17, 1999
Iraq's President Saddam Hussein plans to use alleged terrorist Osama bin Laden's network to carry out his threats against Kuwait and Saudi Arabia, an Iraqi opposition figure charged on Wednesday.

Deutsche Presse-Agentur. February 17, 1999, Wednesday, BC Cycle
An Iraqi opposition group claimed in a published report Wednesday that Islamic militant Osama bin Laden is in Iraq from where he plans to launch a campaign of terrorism against Baghdad's Gulf neighbours.

Associated Press Worldstream. February 14, 1999
Iraq was considered a possible destination because bin Laden had received an invitation from Iraqi President Saddam Hussein last month. And Somalia was a third possible destination because of its anarchy and violent anti-U.S. history....

San Jose Mercury News. February 14, 1999
U.S. intelligence officials are worried that a burgeoning alliance between terrorist leader Osama bin Laden and Iraqi President Saddam Hussein could make the fugitive Saudi's loose-knit organization much more dangerous ...

More worrisome, the American officials said, are indications that there may be contacts between bin Laden's organization and Iraq's Special Security Organization (SSO), run by Saddam's son Qusay. Both the SSO and the Mukhabarat were involved in a failed 1993 plot to assassinate former President George Bush ...

Newsweek (1/11, Contreras) reported, "U.S. sources say (Saddam) is reaching out to Islamic terrorists, including some who may be linked to Osama bin Laden." ...

UPI Focus: Bin Laden 'instigated' embassy bombings
(The Taliban) government in Afghanistan says the Saudi does not have the money to finance projects in the country. Newsweek also reported that Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein has been making new overtures to bin Laden in an attempt to rebuild his intelligence network and to create his own terror network....

Perhaps whisper needs to refer back to the much vaunted 911 Commission as well;

Jim Thompson former governor of Illinois and member of the 9-11 Commission: When asked by Soledad O’Brien on CNNs Good Morning America on 18 June 2004: "So we hear from both President Bush and Dick Cheney clearly there was a relationship. Does your report contradict what the White House is saying?"

Thompson answered: Not at all. In fact, the report says that President Bush and Vice President Cheney are correct. It's a little mystifying to me why some elements of the press have tried to stir this up as a big controversy and a big point of contradiction because there is none. We said there's no evidence to support the notion that Al-Qaeda and Saddam Hussein collaborated together to produce 9/11. President Bush said that weeks ago. He said it again yesterday. The vice president said it again yesterday. I said it again yesterday in television interviews. What we did I say was there were contacts between Al-Qaeda and the Iraqi administration of Saddam Hussein, and the president has said there were contacts. The vice president has said there were contacts. They may be in possession of information about contacts beyond those that we found, I don't know. That wasn't any of our business. Our business was 9/11. So there is no controversy; there's no contradiction, and this is not an issue.

Chairman of the 9-11 Commission Kean: “Were there contacts between al-Qaeda and Iraq? Yes. Some of them are shadowy, but there’s no question they were there.”

Former Navy Secretary John Lehman, on CNN’s June 17 “Inside Politics” "The President's correct. And the commission yesterday said exactly that. What the commission also said was there was no evidence of collaboration on any of the attacks against the United States. But we had previously pointed out that, particularly in Sudan, there is very hard evidence of collaboration on the X gas and other evidence, and additional contacts between Saddam's intelligence service and al Qaeda in the assistance in training in weapons, chemical and biological weapons, anthrax manufacture, and that's what we had in our report yesterday, but unfortunately, the New York Times sort of highlighted only one half of that."

Vice Chairman of the 9/11 Commission Lee Hamilton said, "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."

I wonder what else we can't trust from 9/11 Commission Report?

In the spring of 1998, the Justice Department prepared an indictment of Osama bin Laden which contained the following paragraph;

"Al-Qaeda reached an understanding with the government of Iraq that al-Qaeda would not work against that government and that on particular projects, specifically including weapons development, al-Qaeda would work cooperatively with the government of Iraq."

On January 14, 1999, ABC News correspondent Sheila MacVicar reported, “ABC News has learned that in December, an Iraqi intelligence chief, named Farouk Hijazi, now Iraq's ambassador to Turkey, made a secret trip to Afghanistan to meet with bin Laden. Three intelligence agencies tell ABC News they cannot be certain what was discussed, but almost certainly, they say, bin Laden has been told he would be welcome in Baghdad.”

The January 11, 1999 issue of Newsweek Magazine ran an article titled "Saddam & Bin Laden?" "Here's what is known so far," which stated, “Saddam Hussein, who has a long record of supporting terrorism, is trying to rebuild his intelligence network overseas -- assets that would allow him to establish a terrorism network. U.S. sources say he is reaching out to Islamic terrorists, including some who may be linked to Osama bin Laden, the wealthy Saudi exile accused of masterminding the bombing of two U.S. embassies in Africa last summer.”

In mid-February 1999, an Associated Press dispatch in the Washington Post said, "The Iraqi President Saddam Hussein has offered asylum to bin Laden, who openly supports Iraq against Western powers."

February 23, 1999, Los Angeles Times: "Where is Osama bin Laden (Feb. 14)? That should be the U.S.'s main priority. If as rumored he and Saddam Hussein are joining forces, it could pose a threat making Hitler and Mussolini seem like a sideshow...."

February 18, 1999, NPRs Mike Shuster interviewing Vincent Cannistraro, former head of the CIA's counterterrorism center reported, "Iraq's contacts with bin Laden go back some years, to at least 1994, when, according to one U.S. government source, Hijazi met him when bin Laden lived in Sudan. Iraq invited bin Laden to live in Baghdad to be nearer to potential targets of terrorist attack in Saudi Arabia and Kuwait. There is a wide gap between bin Laden's fundamentalism and Saddam Hussein's secular dictatorship. But some experts believe bin Laden might be tempted to live in Iraq because of his reported desire to obtain chemical or biological weapons."

Maybe the Clinton administration never read the recent Pentagon report either?

AAR, thanks for reminding our lefty friends about the murderous monster Saddam. No one should ever forget what he did to his fellow countrymen.

Lew, great minds think alike. ;-)

Kimberly, there's still more here at Flopping Aces: Doug Feith Found INNOCENT-Pentagon Inspector General

AAR, thanks for totally missing the point of my posting.

Nobody is claiming that Saddam was "nice" remotely - but typical of most people here to jump on that supposition to try and argue things out.

The point is, Osama would NOT DEAL with someone he regarded as of a conservative because he's an extremist. He wouldn't deal with a person he regarded as a traitor to the cause, and neither would he let others in Al-Qaeda deal with someone he regarded as a traitor to the cause.

His various atrocities - proven and speculative - weren't the issue of the original posting. The original posting was about seeking to promote ties between Saddam and Osama. There were no such ties, because to Osama, Saddam was way too conservative to be an ally to the cause.

I would never claim that Bush lied, but I do believe that his administration cherry picked the intelligence they presented to congress and the American people to get us to go to war. I also believe the same about Clinton, Johnson, and Regean for Bosnia, Viet Nam, and Grenada.

Good for you, Casper. I do believe that you're an idiot. Whisperwolf, you too. Nobody attempted to make a connection between Saddam and Osama--it's propaganda that you've been spoon-fed by Chris, Keith, and the rest of the DBM kooks, as well as the far-left whackos in your party.

Once again, if you live in the alterate universe already occupied by the kooks, Al Qaeda was in every country in the world, prior to the war in Iraq...except for Iraq. Laughable...

The point is, Osama would NOT DEAL with someone he regarded as of a conservative because he's an extremist.

Bwahahahahaha!!!

Whispie, you are dancing with Mr. Brownstone, aren't you? Where do you come up with this kookery? First, you say Saddam was a moderate, and now he's "as of a conservative?"

You need help, son...

I'd say Whisper should quit while behind...ha ha Its really hard to support a tyrant who killed many thousands, and then hedge such acclimation by changing the terms. Thats the delusion of the left...the old moving goal post theory...with right thinking people they will never have the upper hand. Periodically they can win elections because of their pandering to the poor, but with their hidden agenda comes many who openly support those things which the mainstream finds abhorrent. In that case, middle America will never support them ...anti-Christian and socialism are not supported much beyond the tripes that post in here...cowards though they be.

carsick,

Telepathy doesn't exist.

QED.

keefer,

He's seemingly never heard of the Nazi-Soviet Pact...

ARR: And yet a poll conducted of Iraqis show they overwhelmingly prefer the way life was before the American invasion.

I'd say Whisper should quit while behind...ha ha Its really hard to support a tyrant who killed many thousands

Posted by: dickdee at April 8, 2007 02:01 AM

I can't find anywhere in Whisper's post that he is supporting a tyrant who killed many thousands, dickdee. Perhaps you could quote where he has given his approval of Saddam. Appreciate it.

He's seemingly never heard of the Nazi-Soviet Pact...

Exactly, Mark. But in all reality, he's just swallowing what his leaders--the far left in Congress, the far-left pundits, and the DBM--are feeding him, ala Joseph Goebbels. He's a lobotomized lemming parrot, plain and simple. He's a lost cause--we'll see him, 30 years from now, holding a protest sign, in front of the Pentagon...

"And yet a poll conducted of Iraqis show they overwhelmingly prefer the way life was before the American invasion."

Umm, no. There was a poll conducted within the past few weeks that said the exact opposite. you lefty moonbats don't care for the truth ever do you?

never thought i' d say this....but the world is not safer or better now that saddam is gone.....would have been better off leaving him there and focusing on the real problem areas.......

Keefer
"We've had no evidence that Saddam Hussein was involved with the September 11th." But Bush added: "There's no question that Saddam Hussein had al Qaeda ties."

"Along with the contention that Saddam Hussein was stockpiling weapons of mass destruction, President Bush, Vice President Cheney and other top administration officials have often asserted that there were extensive ties between Hussein's government and Osama bin Laden's terrorist network; earlier this year, Cheney said evidence of a link was "overwhelming."
Sept. 2004 Washington Post

lenny,

Yeah, because Saddam was no problem at all...just a peaceful, kite-flying nation of non-terrorism sponsors...

Casper, you're wasting your time trying to convince me of anything. It's cemented in my mind that you're a fool, a moron, a lobotomized parrot. Did you read any of the other quotes, from other newspapers, about Saddam and terrorist organizations? Noone claims Saddam had an unbreakable bond with Osama, but he was a terror supporter and a terrorist himself. Maybe you should get hold of some of the survivors of his brutal regime, and listen to what they endured, while watching their loved ones get murdered by this man. Then maybe you'd wake up. I doubt it. Stop responding to my posts, idiot--you are nothing to me.

never thought i' d say this....but the world is not safer or better now that saddam is gone.....

Never thought I'd say this, lenny, but I think you should let your boyfriend squiggy do the thinking from here on out. Moron...

Keefer, if
Nobody attempted to make a connection between Saddam and Osama--it's propaganda that you've been spoon-fed by Chris, Keith, and the rest of the DBM kooks, as well as the far-left whackos in your party.

What is Mark trying to prove with this post?

Wow Keefer your name calling is almost up to the level of the sixth graders I work with. As for trying to convince you of anything, I wouldn't even try. As you said your mind is cemented.

What is Mark trying to prove with this post?

Maybe, aztec, he's trying to prove that you, Casper, and the rest of the kooks are morons.

If so, it worked. We've reached a consensus--you, Casper, et.al., are morons...

Telepathy doesn't exist.

Neither did WMDs in Iraq when we invaded. Nor cooperation between Saddam and al Qaeda.

QED

It is worthwhile to get things like this on the record in order that future historians will know who the boneheads were in the early 21st century.

I agree--I just wonder why you're so eager to promote your carefully-maintained idiocy and refusal to acknowledge even the most basic aspects of reality.

A voice of reason from a Democrat or just some words made to sound as such...

"WASHINGTON (AP), April 8, 2007 - The Senate will not stop paying for the Iraq war or relent from insisting that President Bush keep pressing the Baghdad government for a negotiated end to the violence, a top Democrat said Sunday."

"Michigan Sen. Carl Levin, the Senate Armed Service Committee chairman, took issue with an effort by Majority Leader Harry Reid to cut off money for the war next year as a way to end U.S. involvement."

"'We're not going to vote to cut funding, period,' Levin said. 'But what we should do, and we're going to do, is continue to press this president to put some pressure on the Iraqi leaders to reach a political settlement.'"

Nothing said about Pelosi's plans though!

AAR

Deleted - obscenity

Deleted - obscenity.

oh markie mark
i figured my last post would get you to respond (or even post me up for that matter
i never said that Saddam was no problem at all...
and never said he was just a peaceful, kite-flying nation of non-terrorism sponsors.
i tried to imply that maybe with the u.s. limited energy and resources we would have prioritized our threats and chased them accordingly.
instead your neocon buddies just made a incredibly emotional decision when an incredibly logical one was needed.
isn't that the problem with most of you earthlings anyway?
hard to argue with that...

'But what we should do, and we're going to do, is continue to press this president to put some pressure on the Iraqi leaders to reach a political settlement.'"

I'm still waiting to hear from the left just what it is they are willing to have either Iraq or the U.S. give away to terrorists to bring about a 'Diplomatic Solution' to the war.

Diplomatic ends always involve give and take, compromise, giving in. So, leftists, please outline what should be given away to Islamofascists in Iraq and eventually in the U.S., since we are the "Great Satan" to the jihadists.

What is it you propose be given away to terrorists?

GDAYmate and w00tGUY
When you stoop to name calling and profanity you make anyone who might agree with you look bad and you reinforce sterotypes of leftwingers. Please go away.

have to agree with casper.....gdaymate and wootguy are goofballs.
i may drop in from time to time to give markie mark some grief and take some back....but no need for the foul mouth stuff...cmon....

Oh... how wonderful it is for Mark to allow the loooneey left kook-balls to show their true colors!

It does my heart good to see that even Casper understands how we conservatives feel when attacked with profane statements filled with falsehoods and talking points that are, as most here will agree I'm sure.....quite meaningless.

Thanks tots....we appreciate the words of encouragement. (Sarcasm off)

w00tguy,

Do not speak this way towards people. Mark had rejected the words of his Pope to instead follow a man who isn't a Christian, in my belief, that being Bush. He also follows Cheney, not a man of God. He also talks all about Christianity but refuses to acknowledge that his partner Matt rejects the divinity of Christ.

Mark is lost and has no humility where politics is concerned to allow himself to be open to the possibility of being found.

Navydad,
I don't have a lot of tolerence for profanity and name calling from anyone, left, right, or in the middle and believe me I've seen it from all sides. One can disagree without being disagreeable.

Romanesstra: Do you have any proof President Bush and VP Cheney are not Christians?

Also, I have many Jewish and Muslim friends. Am I not to be friends with them because I am a Christian? That's pure nonsense.

This might throw a huge bucket of cold water into the face of you Bushies. I am interested in seeing how you will trash this guy. Google around for Ali Allawis' new book. You all know who he is, don't you? Well look what he has to say now. (I won't bother quoting, you can read for yourselves.)
Happy Easter!

tomjeffairplane: Yes, there were major mistakes made. Can you name one war where no mistakes were made?

kimberly4bush,
If it were just a few mistakes I wouldn't have a problem. The Bush administration did about everything wrong. Frankly, I think if we would have used our best and brightest people instead of those that were loyal to Bush first and experts in their areas second, we could have been out of Iraq in a year, instead of stuck in the middle of a civil war after four years.

Keefer,
GDAYmate and w00tGUY are examples of eight grade insulters. Hope you don't feel you have to go there.

GDAYmate and w00tGUY are examples of eight grade insulters. Hope you don't feel you have to go there.

Also, they're one and the same. Romanesstra is a spoof, and can be ignored.

No, Casper, I don't use the same language as them; it's frowned upon here. I will, however, continue to do what I do, with impugnity, to you, and to others whom I feel deserve it. And for the record, I agree that many mistakes were made in regards to the war. We should've gone in there, guns a-blazin', and this thing would've been over long ago.

keefer

What is this obsession you have with the word 'moron'? In almost every comment you post, you refer to someone as being a 'moron'. Surely with your extensive knowledge of the english language, of which you never cease to remind us, you could come up with other expressions of derision.
You are becoming what you accuse others of being;- repetitive. I have every hope that you can dig deep into your dictionary of abusive nouns and produce some new material.

Keefer,
Please feel free to continue your insults and name calling (not that you need my permission), and I will continue to not respond in kind.

However, I will report you if you use profanity.

There was NO relationship between Saddam and Al Queda. Saddam was a SECULAR leader, jealous of ANY religious power, and refused to allow any relationship.
Al Queda, along with other terrorist groups are in Iraq NOW, but they weren't there before we invaded.
And there is EVERY reason to draw comparisons between this war and Viet Nam.
What's the matter with you?

Kimberly:
I am not talking about other wars. I am talking about the invasion of Iraq that was sold to the US based upon false pretenses and then managed so horribly that there is no practical way out. Reasonable people correct mistakes and think about consequences of their actions. These are not mistakes, this is a pattern. And it is not just Iraq, it is everything about this administration from illegal wiretaps to Lewis Libby to the AG to Katrina to Walter Reed to the EPA. It is just not plausable for reasonable people to find any good within this administration whatsoever. Their judgement does not only stink, it is non existent. It is almost as if they are screwing things up intentionally. The same words used to describe them are repeated over and over from far ranging sources, including their own! Mathew Dodd for example just this past week. They all can't be wrong. For gosh sakes, we have members of the judiciary making decisions based on bible verses! What scares me is that a few people still support his decidedly un American policies. Subverting the constitution and the will of the people does not add to credibility, of which he has none. His administration has done more damage to our country and our countries standing in the world than any other in our history. The problem is, he is not god but he thinks he is fulfilling some lame prophesy. 70% of America cannot wait for him to exit back to Texas. Far be it from me to tell you to wake up and realize what a dead cinch looser he is...for all of us...but I know that you worship him so I won't.
Good luck saving face. If that is what you deem important.

70% of America cannot wait for him to exit back to Texas.

CORRECTION: 70% of those SURVEYED cannot wait for him to exit back to Texas.

Now, can you fill us in on how many were sampled? 900? 1500? 2000? Out of well over 300,000,000?

Where was the sampling taken?

pm,

Yeah, completely secular...that having a Koran written in his own blood and naming a Mosque after himself...just a dodge to convince Chimpy McSmirk-BusHitler that he was in league with al-Qaeda because, of course, Saddam was actually on the Halliburton payroll and was put into power not by the USSR, but by Dick Cheney...

Casper,

How about reporting GDay and W0t? Geesh...just found them!

I apologise to all our readers that such filth stayed up so long before I noticed it.

Nice leftwing talking points, TJA.

First, of all, I only worship one and that is my Lord and savior. Also, I could care less what other people think of the US. I know she is a GREAT country and I am damn proud to be an American and to live in this wonderful country. If they don't like it or us, then stop moving here.

Iraq: Despite the war's past problems, Gen. David Petraeus's new strategy is working, and more and more Iraqis are standing up to fight for their freedom. Maybe I always see a half-full glass and you see a half-empty glass. I'd like to give our troops the chance to succeed. At least give them the timeframe your leaders have given them. But remember, if we deploy and leave Iraq unstable, it will come back and bite us in the a$$.

Wiretapping: Personally, I was never concerned about government-conducted wiretapping unless something illegal or unethical was done with the information gathered this way. And, I have not seen any evidence of such. Have you?

Firing of US Attorneys: Give me a break. I hope President Bush stands by AG Gonzales.

Katrina: Jack Harrison, a spokesman for the National Guard Bureau in Arlington, Virginia, cited "10,244 sorties flown, 88,181 passengers moved, 18,834 cargo tons hauled, 17,411 saves" by air. Unlike the politicians, they had a working chain of command that commandeered more relief aid from other Guard units outside the state. From day one.

There were problems, of course. But you can't blame ALL of the problems on President Bush. Both the governor and mayor should take most of the blame ... not federalizing the National Guard; not using hundreds of school buses or trains to transport those who could not get out, etc.

A good report you might want to read:
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2006/05/katrina_what_the_media_missed.html

Walter Reed: This is ALL the fault of President Bush, too? How long has Walter Reed been in need of repairs and overhaul? Democrat and Republican politicians visited Walter Reed many, many times and not one word was said. I am glad the issue has come to the forefront, however, and the problems will be addressed ... but to place the blame solely on President Bush is ridiculous.

How about the economy? Unemployment? The Jump Start Program? More $$ than any other President budgeted for innercity education? And NO ATTACKS ON US SOIL SINCE 2001? The list goes on and on.

His various atrocities - proven and speculative - weren't the issue of the original posting. The original posting was about seeking to promote ties between Saddam and Osama. There were no such ties, because to Osama, Saddam was way too conservative to be an ally to the cause.
Posted by: Whisperwolf [TypeKey Profile Page] at April 8, 2007 01:32

WHisp..

These neocons KNOW very well that Saddam and OSama were like oil and water. But to argue that point would make their cause comical. They have to keep desperately trying to distract us with nis-guided information that is irrelevant.

Thye know they cannot defend this war morally, ethically or legally, so they have to come up with some far-fetched distraction so we forget about the original reasons peddled to us in the first place.

It's like punching a 101-year old lady in the face to steal her pocketbook, then when you get caught, you argue that she cheated on her taxes in 1957 and thus, you were punishing her for it.

Mark Noonan,
You say:
Telepathy doesn't exist.

I say: Prove it doesn't exist.

And realize that if you show me over 900 studies that say it doesn't exist, I will find at least one crank who says otherwise. And then proclaim, "Well, the jury's still out on whether telepathy exists so let's not jump to any conclusions."

Just like carsick to try to spin the non-existent into reality.

With science, MR. Brainiac, the burden of proof is on he who prescibes theory, not denounces theory.

I guess we should all be completely convinced of GW, since you say it's so...eh..moron?

Mark,

Maybe carsick means "telephony"?

mark: Still, it is worthwhile to get things like this on the record in order that future historians will know who the boneheads were in the early 21st century.

Mark, you've probably noticed that we're still fighting in Iraq. We did the same ineffective things over and over, watching violence become entrenched. Then Bush got a wake-up call in Nov. 2006 and Rumsfeld was "allowed" to resign. Now, with a depleted and weary army, and fed up American citizenry, we're getting serious about getting control of Baghdad for an Iraqi government that has very little credibility with its citizens.

Are you counting on divine intervention to prevent future historians from putting the Bush administration into the bonehead category?

I stated at the beginning, that it is hard to prove a negative, yet you folks want to deny every group that has looked for a relationship between Hussein and al Queda and come back with a "none we can find".
Guilty until proven innocent doesn't work because, as I said, it is hard to prove a negative.
You guys are struggling to debunk what the vast majority of scientists have agreed upon and now you are trying to debunk what every governmental agency and study group has looked at concluded.
It's a linguistic trick. "Yeah, but they didn't say it definitely didn't happen and that's our proof that it did." It's a child's trick.

navydad,
Not to be obvious but I'm not the one claiming Global Warming, hundreds and thousands of scientists are.
And I'm not the one claiming a relationship that no one has found any substantive evidence to show it existed.

If you clap your hands and promise you believe does not an argument make.

Oh really, carsick? There is more than enough proof Saddam and AQ were linked.

Here's some more:
http://www.defenddemocracy.org/in_the_media/in_the_media_show.htm?doc_id=338854

And how about WMD?
http://iraqdocs.blogspot.com/

You spin so much ... no wonder you're carsick!

Kimberly,
I think this says it all “Chemical Materials for Very Special Usage”. That's you proof of WMDs?!

And yet, you question thousands of scientists who actually study the environment.
Ha ha ha.

Good for you for reading the first translated document! I'm impressed! Now, use the scrolling bar to the right and read the rest.

BTW, when have I questioned scientists who study the environment? Feel free to do a search and you won't find any posts from me regarding your assumption. :-P

You're relying on a blog for proof. What, is there a big government conspiracy to hide the evidence of the purported reason for the invasion?
Get real.

Shame on you, carsick. That "blog" has hired arabic translators to translate Saddam's documents. I think they deserve a medal for their efforts.

And, bloggers are quite intelligent, more so than the MSM you base your facts on. They exposed the fake documents CBS was trying to use to as factual. They exposed Clinton for his extramarital activities. Etc.

Please feel free to continue your insults and name calling (not that you need my permission), and I will continue to not respond in kind.

Okay then, nitwit, so stop responding already. I'm bored with your stupid arse...

kimberly
Are you assuming the administration and our intelligence apparatus don't have Arab translators?
Also, are you assuming that every chemical weapon is a WMD as defined by our own government?
By the way, look under you kitchen sink, if you have some bleach and some ammonia...mix 'em together.

Just a word of caution, if you do mix 'em together stand far far away and definitely not down wind.

Our troops found stacks and stacks and stack of documents and translators have not made a dent in them. So, why do you find it so wrong that others are helping to translate some of them? Wouldn't you like to know what Saddam was up to or are you so full of hatred for Bush and Republicans that you just don't care?

You might ask the Kurdish victims what they think of the chemical weapons Saddam used against them. If they hear how you put it, they may think, "Gee, I guess it wasn't so bad after all."

kimberly
You have an interesting way of looking at our government's processes but I can assure you that they do not release discovered documents to the general public until after they have translated them and made sure they do not contain operational messages that could hinder our efforts against our enemies.

Just wanted to see if you were paying attention. LOL.

All of the documents have been released by our government.

You can also find them here:
http://70.169.163.24/ (long download time)

This is one of the problems I have with this administration. They should be trumpeting this information on a daily basis.

What we need to remember is that whisperwolf and his kind depend on the infamous Crystal Ball of the LLL. This is how they just "know" things, particularly what is hidden in the secret hearts of others.

So to him and his ilk, they are perfectly comfortable informing us of the deepest thoughts and motivations of Sadaam, for instance, and their commitment to the preposterous concept that he would never associate with fundamental Muslims even though they were doing work that he wanted done (attacking America) because he was not also a fundamentalist Muslim.

Yeah, right...

Isn't the famous quote "The enemy of my enemy is my friend" of Arabic origin?

But no, to the LLL such as the wolf, Sadaam was a man of such strong ethics and moral consistency that once he determined that another was of a different religious leaning, he would never stoop to treaty with him.

This Crystal Ball is really an inherent component of what the Left uses instead of rational thought. It is the only thing that allowed them to assign the motive of REVENGE to Libby, for example, or to determine that the White House was so panicked by the rantings of a known liar and Bush-hater that they would drop everything to DISCREDIT him. It's silly, it always was and always will be, but the LLL passionately believes in the oracles that peer into the hearts and minds of others to ascertain their deepest secret thoughts. It seems to be a more desireable approach than actually thinking.