The Fallacy of the War on Terror

... the claims of an Atta trip to Iraq in the months before the September 11 attacks were highly implausible—and contradicted by a wealth of information that has been collected about Atta's movements during the period he was plotting the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon.

... The paper described a "handwritten memo" that was supposedly sent to Saddam Hussein by Tahir Jalil Habbush al-Tikriti, chief of Iraqi intelligence at the time. It describes a three-day "work program" that Atta had undertaken in Baghdad under the tutelage of notorious Palestinian terrorist Abu Nidal, who lived in the Iraqi capital until his death under suspicious circumstances in August 2002.

"Mohammed Atta, an Egyptian national, came with Abu Ammer [who is unidentified] and we hosted him in Abu Nidal's house at Al-Dora under our direct supervision," the document states. "We arranged a work program for him for three days with a team dedicated to working with him ... He displayed extraordinary effort and showed a firm commitment to lead the team which will be responsible for attacking the targets that we have agreed to destroy."

The document, [allegedly] supplied by Iraq's interim government, doesn't say exactly when Atta was supposed to have actually flown to Baghdad. But the memo is dated July 1, 2001, and Coughlin himself places the trip as the summer of 2001.

... While all of Atta's movements cannot be accounted for, enough is known to make it "highly unlikely" that the September 11 ringleader could have flown off to Baghdad for a three-day work program with Iraqi intelligence, a FBI official told NEWSWEEK.

... While acknowledging that a few days are unaccounted for, the FBI has found no evidence that Atta departed the country overseas during this period, an official said.

ican711nm wrote:

I have several times described a short term solution that has worked many times in the past...

root for people: to lend support to people to live long, healthfully, honorably and prosperously.

What?

You are either a fool or a fraud. I have several times described a short term solution that has worked many times in the past plus a concurrent long term solution that has worked a couple of times in the past. I have repeatedly said in several different ways that the short term solution is necessary to buy the necessary time and opportunity for the development of the long term solution.

root for [ALL] people: to lend support to people to live long, healthfully, honorably and prosperously.

ICAN has nothing constructive to offer. His solutions are the same ones that the Nazi's had and that Dubya and his gang of thieves are following.

Is ICAN either in massive denial, or quite insane?

I am guessing delusional.

The long term solution is to rectify and reconstruct the middle east, including Palestine, to self-supporting status, in a manner analogous to the US reconstructions of Japan, Germany and Italy after WWII.

Bomb the sh*t out of all of them miscreants to bring them the kind of democracy we have in the US. A few innocent deads will be worth it - so the argument goes!

3 pages in and you finally state what your solution is?

... how do you reconcile this with your reccomendations for genocide, which will likely make the problem of terrorism worse?

Main Entry: geno·cide
Pronunciation: 'je-n&-"sId
Function: noun
Date: 1944
: the deliberate and systematic destruction of a racial, political, or cultural group

In addition, most of the Middle East is already self supporting. The only bits that are not are Palestine, Israel, and now Iraq.

A third point: How does your "plan" apply to terrorism in other parts of the world? Would you destroy Catholic or Protestant culture in Ireland in order to end the strife there? The same question holds for Chechnya and Quebec? Which group would you destroy?

You aren't helping your own case. How do you determine which bits of the population are the terrorists?

You aren't helping your own case. How do you determine which bits of the population are the terrorists?

Golly, that's a tough one.

1. They are the ones we have evidence beyond a reasonable doubt (EBYARD) that they attempted to murder you!

2. They are the ones we have EBYARD that they murdered other innocents.

3. They are the ones we have EBYARD that they attempted to murder more innocents.

4. They are the ones we have EBYARD that they are planning to murder more innocents.

Ain't I nice? I'm willing to guess you are innocent.

5. They are the ones we have EBYARD that they aided and abetted others to murder innocents.
6. They are the ones we have EBYARD that they aided and abetted others to attempt to murder more innocents.
7. They are the ones we have EBYARD that they are aiding and abetting others who are planning to murder more innocents.

I apologize if I left any out.

It is a horrible fact that some innocents will be killed when terrorists are killed. Rather they be me than any of my grandchildren--rather it be few innocents killed now than many killed later.

ican, If Israel and the US's targeting of terrorists is any indication of how accurate their killing targets, I wouldn't put my bank account on it.

And how would this have caought the hijackerson 11th September 2001?

And other than US and UK military personnell, these would be...?

The word you were looking for is "aren't" .

Your list appears to be the product of wishful thinking. It would not describe the majority of terrorists. It ascribes too much importance to motivation, something no one other than the actor may be able to ascertain.

Which then puts the act firmly in your definition of terrorism. Perhaps you should give this more thought.