RE: Obama does the right thing

RE: Obama does the right thing (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

Hippiekinkster -> RE: Obama does the right thing (2/5/2009 9:44:58 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MasterShake69 also in 2004 too http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2004/aug/28/iraq.usa1 Bush admits mistake over Iraq Julian Borger in Washington guardian.co.uk, Saturday 28 August 2004 02.33 BST Wrong again. The shithead never said he made a mistake; he said he "miscalculated". As that junkie POS Lush Limbo likes to say, "words mean things."

Hippiekinkster -> RE: Obama does the right thing (2/5/2009 9:49:20 AM)
quote: MasterShake69: try 2 years ago???? http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/10/AR2007011002731.html "Where mistakes have been made, the responsibility rests with me," he told the nation." Here the shithead uses the passive voice, and never directly says he made a mistake. "Words mean things."

MasterShake69 -> RE: Obama does the right thing (2/5/2009 11:59:54 AM)
miscalculate verb 1. misjudge, get something wrong, underestimate, underrate, overestimate, overrate verb 2. calculate wrongly, blunder, make a mistake, get it wrong, err, slip uphc_thes()Collins Essential Thesaurus 2nd Edition 2006 © HarperCollins Publishers 2005, 2006 miscalculate Verb[-lating, -lated] to calculate or judge wrongly: we miscalculated the strength of the opposition miscalculation nhc_dict()Collins Essential English Dictionary 2nd Edition 2006 © HarperCollins Publishers 2004, 2006 quote: ORIGINAL: Hippiekinkster quote: ORIGINAL: MasterShake69 also in 2004 too http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2004/aug/28/iraq.usa1 Bush admits mistake over Iraq Julian Borger in Washington guardian.co.uk, Saturday 28 August 2004 02.33 BST Wrong again. The shithead never said he made a mistake; he said he "miscalculated". As that junkie POS Lush Limbo likes to say, "words mean things."

MasterShake69 -> RE: Obama does the right thing (2/5/2009 12:06:15 PM)
some how a thread about Obama has become one about Bush because all Obama supporters can do is point to bush. Why doesnt the left have the same anger towards hillary clinton? http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/01/13/hillary-clinton-defends-2_n_81261.html http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/04/21/iraq.hillary/ quote: ORIGINAL: Hippiekinkster quote: MasterShake69: try 2 years ago???? http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/10/AR2007011002731.html "Where mistakes have been made, the responsibility rests with me," he told the nation." Here the shithead uses the passive voice, and never directly says he made a mistake. "Words mean things."

MasterShake69 -> RE: Obama does the right thing (2/5/2009 12:32:59 PM)
Oh and when has Obama admitted his mistake for supporting the Iraq war? Most people dont know he changed his position on Iraq for a short period of time. from being against the iraq war http://usliberals.about.com/od/extraordinaryspeeches/a/Obama2002War.htm When Bill Clinton pointed out how Obama changed his position about Iraq. Somehow Bill Clinton became a racist. Obama had to play the race card against Bill Clinton or risk being exposed as a fraud. Did Obama ever say sorry for playing the race card against Bill Clinton? With Bill Clinton on his knees sharpton crying that he wasnt a racist. http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=18106281 (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) WILLIAM JEFFERSON CLINTON, FMR. PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: It is wrong that Senator Obama got to go through 15 debates trumpeting his superior judgment and how he had been against the war in every year, enumerating the years, and never got asked one time, not once, well, how could you say that when you said in 2004, you didn't know how you would have voted on the resolution? Give me a break. This whole thing is the biggest fairy tale I've ever seen. (END VIDEO CLIP) KURTZ: So, does Clinton have a point about the Obama coverage? Joining us now to talk about the media and the campaign, and pundits behaving badly, in Springfield, Massachusetts, Rachel Maddow, who hosts "The Rachel Maddow Show" on Air America Radio. And in Seattle, Michael Medved, host of "The Michael Medved Show" on the Salem Radio Network. Michael Medved, what about Bill Clinton's point that the press hasn't really scrutinized Obama's record on Iraq or, some would say, on much of anything else? MICHAEL MEDVED, RADIO TALK SHOW HOST: Well, I think that's probably a valid point, because Obama has been such an "exotic new face," fresh. And I remember when Joe Biden said that he was clean and articulate. People don't really know what to make of him entirely, and then there was that whole rock star factor that you were talking about before. But frankly, I truly don't know if the Clinton campaign should welcome the idea of going back and looking at people's positions on the war in the past, because however ambiguous Obama's position has been -- and it has been -- it was not in favor of the war as Hillary Clinton's was. So, if you're going to argue about who was against the war first and how much were they against the war, this is something that actually hurts Democrats, both Obama and Clinton. KURTZ: Just to provide some context, Rachel Maddow, the former president referring to two interviews that Obama gave in 200. One, he told "The New York Times" he didn't think the case for war had been made, but he didn't know how he would have voted had he had access to classified information at the time, because he was not in the United States Senate. And one with the "Chicago Tribune" which he said there wasn't much difference between his position and George Bush's position on the war. Now, the press has covered this a bit, but, you know, about 1,000th of the attention devoted to Hillary Clinton choking up. RACHEL MADDOW, RADIO TALK SHOW HOST: It's true, they haven't covered this as much. But also consider the context that I think Barack Obama's appeal, certainly his bipartisan appeal, his sort of general election appeal that he's been making, is not necessarily fundamentally about his record. I mean, he hasn't been in public office that long. He's not necessarily running on his record. He's running on -- trying to make the case that he represents a clean break from the politics of the past. That's the contrast that he's tried to set up in terms of his campaign, that he's not Hillary Clinton, that he doesn't represent the past, he doesn't represent the battles of the '90s. And so, because he hasn't necessarily been running so much on his record, I think that in part explains why that hasn't been not the grounds on which he's been covered. KURTZ: Now, Hillary Clinton was asked about her husband's comments this morning on "Meet the Press," and Tim Russert played just the last part of the tape that I just played for you, the part where Bill Clinton talks about the whole thing being a fairy tale, but not the previous part in which he made clear that he's talking about Barack Obama's record of statements or history of statements on the war. Let's take a look at Senator Clinton's reaction. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) SEN. HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON (D-NY), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: And let me just stop you right there. TIM RUSSERT, HOST, "MEET THE PRESS": But let me... H. CLINTON: You did not. No, wait a minute. RUSSERT: No, I didn't stop you. H. CLINTON: No, but you did not give the entire quote, and so... RUSSERT: No, but you... H. CLINTON: And so the entire quote was clearly about the position on Iraq. RUSSERT: But I'm... H. CLINTON: It was not about the entire candidacy. Tim, I can't let you getting away with that mischaracterization and those snippets. (END VIDEO CLIP)

Crush -> RE: Obama does the right thing (2/5/2009 2:57:26 PM)
/ begin off topic MasterShake, One of the problems of the "MoveOn.Org" crowd is that they can't "move on" from the election of 2000. So everything is colored through those "anger glasses" at the results of that election. Another problem is that generally they think from an emotional center, rather than a logical center. Much more limbic in their responses, so to speak. And of course, the "superiority complex" and the "I could never be wrong" belief systems that many seem to have imbued....if you don't agree with them, then automatically you are an idiot and stupid. Because if they were to admit they were wrong, it would hurt their emotional and belief center too much. You see it on both sides of an issue...sort of the fringes on the "Bell Curve." It is easier to argue, misdirect, attack and complain rather than discuss and perhaps have to change their notions. /end off topic I think it is refreshing that Obama said "I screwed up." He gets major props in my book. He is naive about politics at that level. Personally, I think he could have been a great spiritual leader, with his gift of oratory and "plainfolkness." But he needs to remember that he IS under a microscope. He needs to lead by doing...keep the thermostat down...truly work with the "loyal opposition" in a visible way...show sacrifice...those Wagyu beef steaks, while delicious, and I'm sure he had to pay for out of his own pocket, were not the right image to send to Americans when asking them to sacrifice. Image is VERY important right now...perception is reality, especially in politics. Obama needs to realize that the Press are no longer his buddies...he's just the new target. And there are reasonable people who disagree with his ideas he needs to convince. Reagan did it, in large part because he could communicate so effectively. Obama needs to become "Reaganesque" in the sense of "The Great Communicator." Now, if only 536 members of Congress would start doing the same thing, we might get somewhere.

Coldwarrior57 -> RE: Obama does the right thing (2/5/2009 3:48:16 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MasterShake69 some how a thread about Obama has become one about Bush because all Obama supporters can do is point to bush. Why doesnt the left have the same anger towards hillary clinton? http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/01/13/hillary-clinton-defends-2_n_81261.html http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/04/21/iraq.hillary/ quote: ORIGINAL: Hippiekinkster quote: MasterShake69: try 2 years ago???? http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/10/AR2007011002731.html "Where mistakes have been made, the responsibility rests with me," he told the nation." Here the shithead uses the passive voice, and never directly says he made a mistake. "Words mean things." Some people have a hard time with staying on target. Its all about team barry now. its his show , his dance, his music.

Owner59 -> RE: Obama does the right thing (2/5/2009 5:40:33 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MasterShake69 Bush has many times admited mistakes. Just his critics would want him to repeat the same words over and over again every time he went to a microphone. http://www.rollingstone.com/nationalaffairs/index.php/2006/05/26/stop-the-presses-bush-admits-mistakes/ Bush Admits Mistakes5/26/06, 3:19 pm EST Shocking: Q: Could I ask you which missteps and mistakes of your own you most regret? PRESIDENT BUSH: Saying “bring it on,” kind of tough talk, you know, that sent the wrong signal to people. I learned some lessons about expressing myself maybe in a little more sophisticated manner — you know, “wanted dead or alive,” that kind of talk. I think in certain parts of the world it was misinterpreted, and so I learned from that. And I think the biggest mistake that’s happened so far, at least from our country’s involvement in Iraq is Abu Ghraib. We’ve been paying for that for a long period of time. Tim Dickinson Yeah,how about apologizing for ordering what happened at Abu Ghraib and then making some enlisted slobs take the rap!! Then right after that pebble, he goes on to lie again,trying to connect 9/11 to Iraq. How about apologizing for mis-leading us into that war and stop blaming others?! He owns that failure lock,stock and barrel and needs to show a little contrition for it. That starts with taking responsibility instead of dodging it. Not gonna hold my breath.

OrionTheWolf -> RE: Obama does the right thing (2/5/2009 6:25:33 PM)
Whoa, whoa, whoa. Yeah he has the majority blame, but so does everyone in Congress that supported it. Sorry I do not accept the bullshit that they just believed Bush. There are members that have the security clearance, and that were on the intelligence committees, and they could have demanded to see the evidence before supporting it. Every single one that voted for it, has some responsibility. So it is Bushes majority of the lock, stock and barrel but not the entirety. As for the OP: Does everyone understand that because of things Bush has done, because Obama has such charisma, and many other things, he is going to be placed under a microscope and scrutinized more so than any President before him. This means that there will be more mistakes made public, there will be more ammo for those with extreme bias to use. There will be some that will snatch at anything, just as many Dems have done to Bush (not saying the majority is uncalled for but some things are as much as stretch as we are seeing against Obama). quote: ORIGINAL: Owner59 He owns that failure lock,stock and barrel and needs to show a little contrition for it. That starts with taking responsibility instead of dodging it. Not gonna hold my breath.

MasterShake69 -> RE: Obama does the right thing (2/5/2009 6:46:05 PM)
Please tell me the specific day and time that bush said Iraq was behind the 9-11 attacks. Bush was worried that iraq and Bin Laden might work together for a future operation. There was some flimsy evidence that Iraq helped with the first WTC attack in 93. But I never recall Bush ever saying that Iraq was behind 9-11. Please prove me wrong witha SPECIFIC EXAMPLE where Bush says Iraq was behind the 9-11 attacks or assisted with 9-11. quote: ORIGINAL: Owner59 quote: ORIGINAL: MasterShake69 Bush has many times admited mistakes. Just his critics would want him to repeat the same words over and over again every time he went to a microphone. http://www.rollingstone.com/nationalaffairs/index.php/2006/05/26/stop-the-presses-bush-admits-mistakes/ Bush Admits Mistakes5/26/06, 3:19 pm EST Shocking: Q: Could I ask you which missteps and mistakes of your own you most regret? PRESIDENT BUSH: Saying “bring it on,” kind of tough talk, you know, that sent the wrong signal to people. I learned some lessons about expressing myself maybe in a little more sophisticated manner — you know, “wanted dead or alive,” that kind of talk. I think in certain parts of the world it was misinterpreted, and so I learned from that. And I think the biggest mistake that’s happened so far, at least from our country’s involvement in Iraq is Abu Ghraib. We’ve been paying for that for a long period of time. Tim Dickinson Yeah,how about apologizing for ordering what happened at Abu Ghraib and then making some enlisted slobs take the rap!! Then right after that pebble, he goes on to lie again,trying to connect 9/11 to Iraq. How about apologizing for mis-leading us into that war and stop blaming others?! He owns that failure lock,stock and barrel and needs to show a little contrition for it. That starts with taking responsibility instead of dodging it. Not gonna hold my breath.

OrionTheWolf -> RE: Obama does the right thing (2/5/2009 8:15:42 PM)
Read what he wrote again, he said " trying to connect 9/11 to Iraq". Based upon exactly what O59 said: "On October 7, 2002, President Bush asserted that “Iraq has trained al Qaeda members in bomb-making and poisons and deadly gases.” " On December 9, 2001, Vice President Cheney said that the Prague meeting had been “pretty well confirmed,” and on September 8, 2002, he said, “Mohamed Atta, who was the lead hijacker, did apparently travel to Prague on a number of occasions. And on at least one occasion, we have reporting that places him in Prague with a senior Iraqi intelligence official a few months before the attack on the World Trade Center.” When asked if the CIA thought the report of the meeting was credible, he said, “it’s credible.” On January 9, 2004, Cheney further said, “We did have reporting that was public, that came out shortly after the 9/11 attack, provided by the Czech government, suggesting there had been a meeting in Prague between Mohamed Atta, the lead hijacker, and a man named al-Ani, who was an Iraqi intelligence official in Prague, at the embassy there, in April of '01, prior to the 9/11 attacks… That was the one that possibly tied the two together to 9/11.” I can plaster pages of the comments that try to link Iraq to al Qaeda, and thus to cast a huge image in the American people's mind that Iraq was somehow involved in 9/11. There is even analysis of this propoganda campaign by a few experts. You knew all of this already though and tried to catch 059 in a technical mistake. You are correct that Bush never said Iraq was involved or behind the 9/11 attacks, but that does not remove the fact that his admin tried to draw an assumptive link there. quote: ORIGINAL: MasterShake69 Please tell me the specific day and time that bush said Iraq was behind the 9-11 attacks. Bush was worried that iraq and Bin Laden might work together for a future operation. There was some flimsy evidence that Iraq helped with the first WTC attack in 93. But I never recall Bush ever saying that Iraq was behind 9-11. Please prove me wrong witha SPECIFIC EXAMPLE where Bush says Iraq was behind the 9-11 attacks or assisted with 9-11.

Vendaval -> RE: Obama does the right thing (2/5/2009 9:31:51 PM)
In addition to the information posted here by Orion, there is an entire PBS Frontline documentary about the Bush Admin and the Iraq War that is highly recommended. http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/bushswar/

MasterShake69 -> RE: Obama does the right thing (2/5/2009 10:35:33 PM)
If you looked at the situation from AL Quedas point of view. Al queda grew because Bin Laden stopped and changed the traditional way terror organizations were run. In the past all members had a specific goal with everyone believing the exact samething. The change Bin Laden made was simple. As long as the broad outlines were the same you could join AL queda. Once you understand that then..... If it were to occur an Al-queda-Iraq alliance would be an extremely dangerous thing for the west to deal with. There was some low level contact between the two. I don't think it ever reached high level people. The US being fearful about this and there being already an active operational AL Queda base in Iraq in 2001 didn't help things either. Since the group was coincidentally created a few days prior to the 9-11 attacks. Saddams fearfulness over Iran and desire to pretend to have an active WMD program to counter there threat caused US to believe they were an active threat to the US. http://www.cfr.org/publication/9237/ Origins of Ansar al-Islam The roots of Ansar al-Islam extend back to the mid-1990s. The group consists of Islamist groups that splintered from the Islamic Movement of Kurdistan (IMK) in northern Iraq. Michael Rubin, a resident scholar in foreign and defense policy studies at the American Enterprise Institute, said the Islamist splinter organizations included various groups (MEIB) called Hamas, Tawhid, and the Second Soran Unit, along with others. Ansar al-Islam announced its official inception a few days before the September 11 attacks. http://www.csmonitor.com/2003/1016/p12s01-woiq.htm The rise and fall of Ansar al-Islam [font="arial, verdana, geneva, helvetica, san-serif;"] Former members of Ansar al-Islam talk to the Monitor about the militant group's ties to Al Qaeda, the foreign fighters that joined its ranks, and its eventual destruction. [font="arial, verdana, geneva, helvetica, san-serif;"] By Scott Peterson \| Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor [font="arial, verdana, geneva, helvetica, san-serif;"] SARGAT AND SULAYMANIYAH, NORTHERN IRAQ - As the American air attack pulverized the mountain base of Ansar al-Islam last March, Mohamed Gharib let his video camera roll - just as he had done during countless operations of the northern Iraq-based militant group. "I filmed the missiles falling," says Mr. Gharib, a Kurdish militant and the Ansar media chief. Gharib's footage had for years recorded the violent history of the Al Qaeda-linked fighters, and served as a fundraising tool. "You wouldn't believe if I told you we were happy [to be attacked]. They gave us the sense that we were so true, so right, that even America had to come fight us."Washington fingered Ansar as a terrorist group experimenting with poisons, and used its tenuous links to Saddam Hussein and Al Qaeda to help justify the war against Iraq.US officials were triumphant last spring, even as the broader Iraq invasion was still underway, after a three-day assault. Gen. Tommy Franks declared that a "massive terrorist facility in northern Iraq" had been "attacked and destroyed" by a joint US-Kurdish operation.But today US officials assert that Ansar not only survived - like Gharib, who barely escaped after a four-hour bout with a US sniper - but that it is regrouping. They say Ansar is reinfiltrating Iraq with Kurdish and Arab militants from Iran, and, along with Saddam loyalists, is behind an increasing number of anti-US attacks across Iraq. quote: ORIGINAL: OrionTheWolf Read what he wrote again, he said " trying to connect 9/11 to Iraq". Based upon exactly what O59 said: "On October 7, 2002, President Bush asserted that “Iraq has trained al Qaeda members in bomb-making and poisons and deadly gases.” " On December 9, 2001, Vice President Cheney said that the Prague meeting had been “pretty well confirmed,” and on September 8, 2002, he said, “Mohamed Atta, who was the lead hijacker, did apparently travel to Prague on a number of occasions. And on at least one occasion, we have reporting that places him in Prague with a senior Iraqi intelligence official a few months before the attack on the World Trade Center.” When asked if the CIA thought the report of the meeting was credible, he said, “it’s credible.” On January 9, 2004, Cheney further said, “We did have reporting that was public, that came out shortly after the 9/11 attack, provided by the Czech government, suggesting there had been a meeting in Prague between Mohamed Atta, the lead hijacker, and a man named al-Ani, who was an Iraqi intelligence official in Prague, at the embassy there, in April of '01, prior to the 9/11 attacks… That was the one that possibly tied the two together to 9/11.” I can plaster pages of the comments that try to link Iraq to al Qaeda, and thus to cast a huge image in the American people's mind that Iraq was somehow involved in 9/11. There is even analysis of this propoganda campaign by a few experts. You knew all of this already though and tried to catch 059 in a technical mistake. You are correct that Bush never said Iraq was involved or behind the 9/11 attacks, but that does not remove the fact that his admin tried to draw an assumptive link there. quote: ORIGINAL: MasterShake69 Please tell me the specific day and time that bush said Iraq was behind the 9-11 attacks. Bush was worried that iraq and Bin Laden might work together for a future operation. There was some flimsy evidence that Iraq helped with the first WTC attack in 93. But I never recall Bush ever saying that Iraq was behind 9-11. Please prove me wrong witha SPECIFIC EXAMPLE where Bush says Iraq was behind the 9-11 attacks or assisted with 9-11.

OrionTheWolf -> RE: Obama does the right thing (2/5/2009 10:43:36 PM)
That long post had not a thing to do with you misreading O59. It is a good attempt of avoiding saying "oops I read that wrong". quote: ORIGINAL: MasterShake69 If you looked at the situation from AL Quedas point of view. Al queda grew because Bin Laden stopped and changed the traditional way terror organizations were run. In the past all members had a specific goal with everyone believing the exact samething. The change Bin Laden made was simple. As long as the broad outlines were the same you could join AL queda.

ThatDamnedPanda -> RE: Obama does the right thing (2/5/2009 10:43:37 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MasterShake69 some how a thread about Obama has become one about Bush because all Obama supporters can do is point to bush. Why doesnt the left have the same anger towards hillary clinton? Here's one who does. She makes me vomit every time I see her weaselly face on my television.

MasterShake69 -> RE: Obama does the right thing (2/5/2009 11:08:50 PM)
http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/06/18/saddam.terror/index.html Putin: Russia warned U.S. of Iraq terror Leader says intelligence did not change Moscow's opposition to war Friday, June 18, 2004 Posted: 1:20 PM EDT (1720 GMT) (CNN) -- Russian President Vladimir Putin said his country warned the United States several times that Saddam Hussein's regime was planning terror attacks on the United States and its overseas interests.Putin's comments in Kazakhstan came amid a new debate in the United States about the extent of ties between Saddam and the al Qaeda terrorist network triggered by a preliminary report from the commission investigating the September 11 attacks."I can confirm that after the events of September 11, 2001, and up to the military operation in Iraq, Russian special services and Russian intelligence several times received ... information that official organs of Saddam's regime were preparing terrorist acts on the territory of the United States and beyond its borders, at U.S. military and civilian locations," Putin said. The Russian leader did not elaborate on any details of the warnings of terror plots or mention whether they were tied to the al Qaeda terror network. http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/europe/06/18/russia.warning/Russia 'warned U.S. about Saddam' Friday, June 18, 2004 Posted: 12:46 PM EDT (1646 GMT) MOSCOW, Russia (CNN) -- Russian intelligence services warned Washington several times that Saddam Hussein's regime planned terrorist attacks against the United States, President Vladimir Putin has said.The warnings were provided after September 11, 2001 and before the start of the Iraqi war, Putin said Friday.The planned attacks were targeted both inside and outside the United States, said Putin, who made the remarks during a visit to Kazakhstan.However, Putin said there was no evidence that Saddam's regime was involved in any terrorist attacks."I can confirm that after the events of September 11, 2001, and up to the military operation in Iraq, Russian special services and Russian intelligence several times received ... information that official organs of Saddam's regime were preparing terrorist acts on the territory of the United States and beyond its borders, at U.S. military and civilian locations," Putin said.He said the information was given to U.S. intelligence officers and that U.S. President George W. Bush expressed his gratitude to a top Russian intelligence official."This information was indeed passed on through our partner channels to our American colleagues and, moreover, President Bush had an opportunity and used this opportunity to personally thank the leader of one of the Russian special services for this information, which he considered to be very important," Putin said.Putin made his comments in response to a question from reporters seeking clarification on similar statements leaked by an unnamed intelligence officer in a dispatch by the Interfax news agency.Russia opposed the invasion of Iraq and Putin said Friday the information did not effect its stance on the war.He said there were international norms and procedures that weren't observed regarding "the use of force in international actions."Regarding how the information might have been related to the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq, Putin said, "Whether or not this was sufficient basis to state the United States was acting within the boundaries of self-defense, well, I don't know. This is a separate issue."The United States, meanwhile, never mentioned the Russian intelligence in its arguments for going to war.Hours after Putin spoke, Bush addressed troops at Fort Lewis in the U.S. state of Washington, but he didn't react to the Russian leader's remarks. He repeated his position that Saddam's regime was a threat to the world and that dangers it posed were the grounds for the invasion last year. "This is a regime which gave cash rewards to families of suicide bombers. This is a regime that sheltered terrorist groups," Bush said. He also cited Musab Abu al-Zarqawi, the wanted insurgent in Iraq suspected of many terrorist bombings in Iraq, as an "al Qaeda associate." Asked about Putin's remarks, U.S. National Security Council spokesman Sean McCormack said, "We don't typically comment on intelligence matters. We do have an excellent record of cooperation in the war on terror with the Russian government. And a big part of the cooperation is information and intelligence sharing." Putin's comments come two days after members of a U.S. commission looking into the September 11 attacks found there was "no collaborative" relationship between Iraq and al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden.The panel also found "no credible evidence" that Iraq was involved in the September 11 terrorist attacks carried out by al Qaeda hijackers.Bush and his vice president, Dick Cheney, have strongly disputed suggestions that the commission's conclusions contradict statements they made in the run-up to the Iraq war about links between Iraq and al Qaeda.Cheney said Thursday the evidence is "overwhelming" that al Qaeda had a relationship with Saddam's regime. He said media reports suggesting that the 9/11 commission has reached a contradictory conclusion were "irresponsible." (Full story)Bush, who has said himself that there is no evidence Iraq was involved in 9/11, sought to explain the distinction Thursday. The president said that while the administration never "said that the 9/11 attacks were orchestrated" with Iraqi help, "we did say there were numerous contacts between Saddam Hussein and al Qaeda." "The reason I keep insisting that there was a relationship between Iraq and Saddam and al Qaeda [is] because there was a relationship between Iraq and al Qaeda," Bush said. (Full story) In the lead-up to the Iraq war, Bush made stronger statements alleging cooperation between Iraq and al Qaeda. In a October 2002 speech he said, "Iraq has trained al Qaeda members in bomb-making and poisons and deadly gases." The 9/11 commission's report said bin Laden "explored possible cooperation with Iraq during his time in Sudan, despite his opposition to (Saddam) Hussein's secular regime." It says the contact was pushed by the Sudanese, "to protect their own ties with Iraq," but after bin Laden asked for space in Iraq for training camps, "Iraq apparently never responded." The report also said, "There have been reports that contacts between Iraq and al Qaeda also occurred after bin Laden had returned to Afghanistan, but they do not appear to have resulted in a collaborative relationship." CNN Moscow Bureau Chief Jill Dougherty contributed to this report. quote: ORIGINAL: OrionTheWolf That long post had not a thing to do with you misreading O59. It is a good attempt of avoiding saying "oops I read that wrong". quote: ORIGINAL: MasterShake69 If you looked at the situation from AL Quedas point of view. Al queda grew because Bin Laden stopped and changed the traditional way terror organizations were run. In the past all members had a specific goal with everyone believing the exact samething. The change Bin Laden made was simple. As long as the broad outlines were the same you could join AL queda.

OrionTheWolf -> RE: Obama does the right thing (2/6/2009 6:47:01 AM)
Hope that avoiding responsibility thing works for you. Love the hide function.

Page: << < prev 1 2 3 [4]

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.0625