17-06-2004 21:35									#31
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

quote: Originally posted by Ogie Oglethorpe The commission study was regarding 9/11 links firstly and if otherwise is outside the scope fo the 9/11 comittee. The contention of whether there were links is not contended either by this study. The extent of collaborative links is in question and by this study says none existed at the point prior to or of 9/11. This is not to say that new relationships were formed subsequently or that the likelihood of collaboration in the future was not a possibility.

The problem is the admin. continues to present a lackluster case at best-specially since it claimed long stading connections, as do supproters (like that article cut& paste boy provided alledging Saddam was involved in the planning), not just ne ones after 9/11. An as of yet no one has made the case the possiblity of ties in the future was in any way a valid rationale for anything.

	17-06-2004 21:38									#32
	Support Apolyton

quote: Originally posted by GePap An as of yet no one has made the case the possiblity of ties in the future was in any way a valid rationale for anything.

I thought that was the implicit arguement for rationalizing the whole WMD thing. Potential future collaboration thereby enabling AQ or other terrorists access to WMD. 'Course I might have been in a coma during 2003.

	17-06-2004 21:45									#33
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by GePap As for Drake's assertion, one would think that the WH would have made all evidence available to this panel if it had anything to show such links-why on earth would they stiff a bipartisan commission of such evidence? Utter incompetence? Misplaced secrecy? Political cynicism? Becuase there is none? Which reason seems best?

Its unlikely that some types of very highly protected intelligence such as humint would be passed on to anyone outside of a very exclusive 'need to know' group.

	17-06-2004 21:48									#34
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

quote: Originally posted by Ogie Oglethorpe I thought that was the implicit arguement for rationalizing the whole WMD thing. Potential future collaboration thereby enabling AQ or other terrorists access to WMD. 'Course I might have been in a coma during 2003.

That was the governments position at the time and I think it was a genuinely held belief.

	17-06-2004 21:50									#35
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

quote: Originally posted by Ogie Oglethorpe I thought that was the implicit arguement for rationalizing the whole WMD thing. Potential future collaboration thereby enabling AQ or other terrorists access to WMD. 'Course I might have been in a coma during 2003.

Well, the whole WMD debacle makes this one a hard thing to sell, but even back when, part of reason to say this could happen was the claim by the admin ties were current as of invasion time.

	17-06-2004 21:51									#36
	Put an end to popups!

quote: Originally posted by SpencerH Its unlikely that some types of very highly protected intelligence such as humint would be passed on to anyone outside of a very exclusive 'need to know' group.

You mean like all the stuff about the plans for 9/11 they got from currently held AQ bigwigs?

	17-06-2004 21:51									#37
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

quote: Originally posted by GePap Well, the whole WMD debacle makes this one a hard thing to sell, but even back when, part of reason to say this could happen was the claim by the admin ties were current as of invasion time.

Which by this article says were in existance (at least as of 9/11) just not necessarily collaborative.

	17-06-2004 21:53									#38
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

You're conveniently forgetting that at the time of the invasion that there was nobody (including Hans Blix) who didnt believe that Iraq had chem- and bio-weapon stockpiles.

	17-06-2004 21:54									#39
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

quote: Originally posted by GePap You mean like all the stuff about the plans for 9/11 they got from currently held AQ bigwigs?

No. Captured terrorists are not protected sources.

	17-06-2004 21:55									#40
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by Ogie Oglethorpe Which by this article says were in existance (at least as of 9/11) just not necessarily collaborative.

Lats I heard, the copntact they mention is in '94, and then the call is not returned.

	17-06-2004 21:55									#41
	Support Apolyton

quote: Originally posted by SpencerH You're conveniently forgetting that at the time of the invasion that there was nobody (including Hans Blix) who didnt believe that Iraq had chem- and bio-weapon stockpiles.

The key word here is stockpiles. People like Scott Richter, who had actually worked in Iraq, were fairly sure that got most if not all of the stockpiles. What they felt they had missed were bits and pieces as well as plans.

	17-06-2004 21:58									#42
	Suffering from ads?

quote: Originally posted by SpencerH No. Captured terrorists are not protected sources.

The CIA and FBI both signed of on this report. I assume the CIA would know about any sources they were not willing to make public.

quote: You're conveniently forgetting that at the time of the invasion that there was nobody (including Hans Blix) who didnt believe that Iraq had chem- and bio-weapon stockpiles.

No, I am not. What you are ignoring is that in the run up to war people like me, who did believe at the time Saddam probably had something given all I was told, still argued that the threat was not real enought to excuse the adventure. THAT was the arguement, not that Iraq had nothing.

	17-06-2004 22:00									#43
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

quote: Originally posted by GePap Lats I heard, the copntact they mention is in '94, and then the call is not returned.

You got a mole within the CIA?

	17-06-2004 22:01									#44
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

That was what was reported by the Media. As I told Spence, the CIA signed off on this report.

	17-06-2004 22:18									#45
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

I agree. The WH does need to flesh out further contacts for public consumption. We shall see. I find it more than a bit incredulous to think so many others including those on the other side were adamant that such ties existed that they did not.

	17-06-2004 22:21									#46
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by GePap The CIA and FBI both signed of on this report. I assume the CIA would know about any sources they were not willing to make public.

I'm not sure what report you're refering to. I was simply making the point that some bits of especially sensitive intel are never included in any reports. So its possible that Bush et al were told something which cannot be revealed. Given the comments made by the 2 senior AQ terrorists though, it does seem unlikely that there were close ties between Iraq and AQ

quote: quote: You're conveniently forgetting that at the time of the invasion that there was nobody (including Hans Blix) who didnt believe that Iraq had chem- and bio-weapon stockpiles. No, I am not. What you are ignoring is that in the run up to war people like me, who did believe at the time Saddam probably had something given all I was told, still argued that the threat was not real enought to excuse the adventure. THAT was the arguement, not that Iraq had nothing.

I recall your position very well. You're reading to much into my comment which was in reply to

quote: Well, the whole WMD debacle makes this one a hard thing to sell, but even back when, part of reason to say this could happen was the claim by the admin ties were current as of invasion time.

my bold

Using the presence of WMD in Iraq as a cause for war may appear a debacle in retrospect but at the time that was not true (hence my comment).

	17-06-2004 23:15									#47
	Inflate your Upload Space

no comment until the Steven Hayes book comes out. At that point this matter will be discussed in full, I expect.

	17-06-2004 23:18									#48
	Remove this text

How is this an Iraqi lie?

	17-06-2004 23:26									#49
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Bush is still saying there's a connection

	17-06-2004 23:59									#50
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

'There have been reports that contacts between Iraq and al-Qaida also occurred after bin Laden had returned to Afghanistan, but they do not appear to have resulted in a collaborative relationship," the report said. "Two senior Bin Laden associates have adamantly denied that any ties existed between al-Qaida and Iraq.'


Statement one - they do not appear to have resulted in a colloborative relationship. This largely confirms what was in the controversial DoD memo - at some point AQ reached to Iraq, but couldnt close the dea, and at other (later) points Iraq reached out to AQ, but couldnt close the deal. Lots of talk, lots of negotiations, but never quite a meeting of the minds. Not what Laura Myljoie said, but not "AQ and Iraq are natural enemies who could never cooperate" either. There continue to be reports of an individual alleged to be from Iraqi intel who was involved with mid level AQ types in southeast Asia. Not clear to me if the 9/11 commision looked at this - it doesnt seem that they did, but thats not surprising since examining every alleged Iraq AQ connection was NOT part of their charter, IIUC. But it doesnt surprise me that CIA signed off on this statement.

As for the second - it only says that senior Bin Laden associates denied any relationship. Which im not surprised CIA stood behind - that doesnt indicate if CIA thinks the assertions are credible, etc. Not clear if the commision asked - again, it seems that was beyond scope as well.

This was a commision to look into facts around 9-11 - how prepared were we, what did we do wrong in intelligence, etc. It was NOT an attempt to dissect the Saddam regime, or US foreign policy post 9/11.

	18-06-2004 00:23									#51
	Re: Yet another Iraqi lie refuted Got spare money?

quote: Originally posted by Urban Ranger Al Qaeda-Hussein Link Is Dismissed This should put another wild contention from Bush defenders to rest

Iraq is now ours. Get over it.

	18-06-2004 00:34									#52
	Re: Re: Yet another Iraqi lie refuted Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

quote: Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat Iraq is now ours. Get over it.

	18-06-2004 00:48									#53
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by lord of the mark There continue to be reports of an individual alleged to be from Iraqi intel who was involved with mid level AQ types in southeast Asia.

This can probably be said of any Arab state.

	18-06-2004 01:00									#54
	Increase Your PM Length

Lets simplify the issue- most of the claism made for this war have turned out to be bogus-that being said, the poorly run occupation is now changing its form, so will will have to see what happens after June 30th.

There.

	18-06-2004 01:10									#55
	Full PM-box? Change here!

quote: Originally posted by GePap Lets simplify the issue- most of the claism made for this war have turned out to be bogus-that being said, the poorly run occupation is now changing its form, so will will have to see what happens after June 30th. There.

No. The short answer is that the 9/11 commision addressed a large number of issues related to 9/11, as per their mandate - from traffic control, to intelligence, to emergency response. They included an ASIDE about Iraq, which included nothing we havent heard before.

If youre really interested in the Saddam AQ connection, we will undoubtedly be getting massive arguments both ways when a book on just that topic by Steven Hayes is released.


As for the Iraqi occupation, what does THAT have to do with the 9/11 commision? Is that under their purview as well?

	18-06-2004 01:19									#56
	Increase the size of your Attachments

You seem to have this strange notion that this Steve character will be the avatar of Truth who shall reveal all and know all and make the case definitive. Why on erath you think that, I can;t tell, but beyond that:

The point of this thread is not about 9/11, but Iraq, hence the title.

Lots of arguements were given before the war for the rationale for this war- many, many and usually, when the pro-side can;t even agree on its basic rationale, you know something is up.

Over a year later, few of those pro-arguements have shown any validity. Not WMD's, not AQ, not that it would spur a fix of the ME situation.

And the occupation has been run badly-maybe, MAYBE if the occupation had not been botched things would be better.

So here we are today, one year after with no cluye if even 12 months from now the country will be in a nasty civil war. So why don't the pro-war perople cimply do as anti-war MtG has done and decide to give up their past arguements and go with the you broke it its your reason?

	18-06-2004 01:48									#57
	Re: Yet another Iraqi lie refuted Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by Urban Ranger This should put another wild contention from Bush defenders to rest

Ironic, considering that I've only heard the question once or twice from people like Fez... whereas I here it almost constantly from lefties who talk about the WoT.

	18-06-2004 01:49									#58
	Re: Re: Yet another Iraqi lie refuted Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

quote: Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat Iraq is now ours. Get over it.

I thought you planned to give it back in two weeks or so?

	18-06-2004 01:49									#59
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by Urban Ranger Saddam only became bad when he was no longer an US lackey.

So?

	18-06-2004 01:51									#60
	Re: Re: Re: Yet another Iraqi lie refuted Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by Chemical Ollie I thought you planned to give it back in two weeks or so?