THE US, THE UN AND IRAQ, TENTH THREAD.

...
If we attack Afghanistan, and al Qaida flees Afghanistan, who's fault is that?
The USA's fault!

It's not Saddam's problem; we failed to secure the border - samo, samo with Iraq when we preemptively attacked Iraq without securing the border "after" we supposedly won the war.
It became Saddam's problem when he ignored USA requests to extradite the leadership of al-Qaeda's growing sanctuary in Iraq. All Saddam had to do was invite the USA itself to extradite/remove the al-Qaeda leadership from Iraq. Then the USA would have had no reason to remove Saddam while removing that al-Qaeda sanctuary in Iraq. Saddam's government could then have credibly offered to cooperate in resisting future growth of al-Qaeda in Iraq. Had that happened Iraq would have joined other nations like Pakistan and Saudi Arabia that offered the same thing.

But all that aside. We have since discovered from captured tapes Saddam himself made, that Saddam cooperated and did not resist al-Qaeda obtaining sanctuary in Iraq in December 2001.

Have two cups of coffee. Quit twisting the realities of what happened. We're the ones that invaded Afghanistan to catch and kill Osama.
You're the one "twisting"! Perhaps it's because you've consumed too much coffee.

We invaded Afghanistan to remove from Afghanistan al-Qaeda and the government that harbored al-Qaeda in Afghanistan.

Big surprise: after three years, he's still hiding in the mountains, because Bush diverted our war into Iraq.
Maybe bin Laden is still hiding and maybe he's long dead from his kidney desease.

You wanna blame that on Saddam too?
No! I want to blame that on those damn mountains in Pakistan!

Amigo wrote:

ican711nm wrote:

ICAN BELIEVES:

Quote:

1. People who mass murder civilians, or who abet such, or who advocate such, or who are silent witnesses to such, destroy their own humanity.

2. People who mass murder civilians, or who abet such, or who advocate such, or who are silent witnesses to such, are not civilians.

3. People who mass murder civilians, or who abet such, or who advocate such, or who are silent witnesses to such, are inhuman malignancies.

4. Civilians can be protected from inhuman malignancies without loss of their individual liberty by demanding their government murder (i.e., intentionally kill) inhuman malignancies.

5. Civilians can be protected from inhuman malignancies by surrendering their liberty to enable their government to adequately detect and prevent inhuman malignancies from murdering them.

6. Benjamin Franklin said, "Those who give up liberty for security will have neither liberty or security."

7. Because Benjamin Franklin is correct, inhuman malignancies should be murdered to protect the security of both civilian life and civilian liberty.

You must have missed my post ican inless you refuse to answer it. I ask again. Does this include the people who advocate and bear silent witness to the malignancies cicerone listed on page 158. Yes or No?
...

I re-read the article cicerone posted on page 158, specifically his post:
http://www.able2know.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=2035928#2035928

When I first read this article, I perceived it complied with the standard model for lying propaganda. That is, I perceived it to be an article based on true events with false characterizations of the causes of those events and false caracterizations of the consequences of those events. After a second reading, I continue to perceive this article the same way.

However, assuming my perceptions are wrong here and all of cicerone's post is true, then yes, ICAN BELIEVES:... would "include those people, if any, who are advocates of and/or silent witnesses to the mass murders of those civilians to which cicerone referred on page 158 of this forum.

Lawmaker: Marines killed Iraqis 'in cold blood'
Navy conducting war crimes probe into November violence in Haditha

By Jim Miklaszewski and Mike Viqueira
NBC News
Updated: 9:27 p.m. ET May 17, 2006

WASHINGTON - A Pentagon probe into the death of Iraqi civilians last November in the Iraqi city of Haditha will show that U.S. Marines "killed innocent civilians in cold blood," a U.S. lawmaker said Wednesday.

From the beginning, Iraqis in the town of Haditha said U.S. Marines deliberately killed 15 unarmed Iraqi civilians, including seven women and three children.

One young Iraqi girl said the Marines killed six members of her family, including her parents. "The Americans came into the room where my father was praying," she said, "and shot him."

On Wednesday, Rep. John Murtha, D-Pa., said the accounts are true.

Military officials told NBC News that the Marine Corps' own evidence appears to show Murtha is right.

. . . .

Military officials say Marine Corp photos taken immediately after the incident show many of the victims were shot at close range, in the head and chest, execution-style. One photo shows a mother and young child bent over on the floor as if in prayer, shot dead, said the officials, who spoke to NBC News on condition of anonymity because the investigation hasn't been completed.

One military official says it appears the civilians were deliberately killed by the Marines, who were outraged at the death of their fellow Marine.

"This one is ugly," one official told NBC News.

Have you noticed how the more thoughtful right-wing contributors have faded into the background of this thread? Silently tiptoed away from the liars Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rove.
Why? Because the whole "war", which they called this ignominious invasion, was a crime.

McTag wrote:

Have you noticed how the more thoughtful right-wing contributors have faded into the background of this thread? Silently tiptoed away from the liars Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rove.
Why? Because the whole "war", which they called this ignominious invasion, was a crime.

I know I am bored repeating the same thing over and over. Most likely others are as well.

Why should I waste my time?

Former NY Times reporter Judith Miller to assert she was warned of large scale attack before 9/11
RAW STORY
Published: Thursday May 18, 2006


Print This | Email This


In AN ALTERNET EXCLUSIVE THURSDAY, former New York Times reporter Judy Miller tells Rory O'Connor and William Scott Malone about the story she'll regret for the rest of her life -- the fact that an anonymous White House source told her in July 2001 that an NSA intelligence report predicted a large al Qaeda attack, possibly on the continental United States, RAW STORY has learned.

"I think everybody knew that an attack was coming -- everyone who followed this. But you know you can only 'cry wolf' within a newspaper... before people start saying there he goes -- or there she goes -- again!" Miller says in an interview.

"I remember the weekend before July 4, 2001 in particular, because for some reason the people who were worried about Al Qaeda believed that was the weekend that there was going to be an attack on the US or on major American target somewhere," Miller recounts. "It was going to be a large, well-coordinated attack."

Two months later -- on September 11 -- ALTERNET.ORG says Miller and her editor at the Times, Stephen Engelberg, both remembered and regretted the story they "didn't do."

"There was always a lot going on at the White House, so to a certain extent, there was that kind of 'Cry wolf' problem," Miller says. "But I got the sense that part of the reason that I was being told of what was going on was that the people in counter terrorism were trying to get the word to the President or the senior officials through the press, because they were not able to get listened to themselves."

But I got the sense that part of the reason that I was being told of what was going on was that the people in counter terrorism were trying to get the word to the President or the senior officials through the press, because they were not able to get listened to themselves."

McGentrix wrote:

McTag wrote:

Have you noticed how the more thoughtful right-wing contributors have faded into the background of this thread? Silently tiptoed away from the liars Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rove.
Why? Because the whole "war", which they called this ignominious invasion, was a crime.

I know I am bored repeating the same thing over and over. Most likely others are as well.

Why should I waste my time?

Why indeed.

Ticomaya wrote:

McGentrix wrote:

McTag wrote:

Have you noticed how the more thoughtful right-wing contributors have faded into the background of this thread? Silently tiptoed away from the liars Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rove.
Why? Because the whole "war", which they called this ignominious invasion, was a crime.

I know I am bored repeating the same thing over and over. Most likely others are as well.

Why should I waste my time?

Why indeed.

I understand your reluctance and embarassment. These men have wrought more damage to your country and its reputation than any figures in history. And you voted for them.

ican wrote:
It became Saddam's problem when he ignored USA requests to extradite the leadership of al-Qaeda's growing sanctuary in Iraq.

Where does all this come from? It's not logical or practical. The US government cannot control another government. If that were true, think about all the other allies that ignored US requests.

...
[10]Whereas members of al Qaida, an organization bearing responsibility for attacks on the United States, its citizens, and interests, including the attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, are known to be in Iraq;

[11]Whereas Iraq continues to aid and harbor other international terrorist organizations, including organizations that threaten the lives and safety of United States citizens;
...

...
You say my accusations applys to me? Ok.

1. what truths am I calling lying propaganda?

2. Where do my beliefs fail imminent critique?

These are my accusations to you for avoiding a question I say you refuse to answer.
...

You have no choice but to call the truth lying propaganda because you can't stand the failure in the imminent critique of what you beleive. Your not alone it's called you call it "Terrorist Malignancy" ...

I think this accusation of yours applies to you not me. You continually behave like you are trapped in your own excuses for your own failures and are looking desperately to find others than yourself to blame and/or relieve you of responsibility for the consequences of your own behavior.