No Proof Links Iraq, Al-Qaeda, Powell says

[Natoma]

Straight from the horses mouth.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3909150/

As I said in that other thread, I'll wait until the administration puts out its official word on the matter. If they do find proof of WMD or Al-Qaeda ties, the two major reasons we went to Iraq (WMD and terrorist ties), you know they will be the first to put out a press release on it.

Just gets deeper and deeper.

 

[Clashman]

Surely you're not suggesting that the Weekly Standard, that pinnacle of journalistic integrity, may have put out information that was less than 110% true, are you? Blasphemy!!!

 

[K.I.L.E.R]

I never believe anything until I have undeniable evidence.
The administration and the media talk equal amounts of crap.
I simply don't have trust for either side on this matter.

 

[horvendile]

I never believe anything until I have undeniable evidence.

Wouldn't that make the word "believe" meaningless?
Do you believe that e.g. your mother loves you?

 

[Natoma]

Surely you're not suggesting that the Weekly Standard, that pinnacle of journalistic integrity, may have put out information that was less than 110% true, are you? Blasphemy!!!

I'm just waiting for vince to say something.

 

[Silent_One]

Powell, speaking at a news conference at the State Department, stressed that he was still certain that Iraq had dangerous weapons and needed to be disarmed by force, and he sharply disagreed with a private think tank report that maintained that Iraq was not an imminent threat to the United States

“I have not seen smoking gun, concrete evidence about the connection, but I do believe the connections existed,â€￾ he said.

(emphasis mine)
As you say Natoma "Straight from the horses mouth"

 

[Natoma]

Believing the connections existed and having no proof is one thing Silent_One. Saying for months and months and months that you have undeniable proof and you even know where that proof is, in order to take this country to war, is another.

What do you think the White House did a year ago?

 

[Vince]

Believing the connections existed and having no proof is one thing Silent_One. Saying for months and months and months that you have undeniable proof and you even know where that proof is, in order to take this country to war, is another.

Natoma, this is getting old. Not only did you misquote him (which borders on unethical) but you're playing these semantics games.

He stated that no concrete proof exists - which it doesn't as yet. Nobody is doubting this, atleast untill someone like Saddam opens his mouth and confesses.

Yet, there is a growing body of evidense that a solid connection did exist. As I posted here which is a summation of a memo, dated October 27, 2003, was sent from Undersecretary of Defense for Policy Douglas J. Feith to Senators Pat Roberts and Jay Rockefeller

So, lets not be premature.

 

[diarrhea_splatter]

Straight from the horses mouth.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3909150/

As I said in that other thread, I'll wait until the administration puts out its official word on the matter. If they do find proof of WMD or Al-Qaeda ties, the two major reasons we went to Iraq (WMD and terrorist ties), you know they will be the first to put out a press release on it.

Just gets deeper and deeper.

Here's an article to sink your teeth into on the WMD situation:

http://news.ft.com/servlet/ContentS...y&c=StoryFT&cid=1073280860558&p=1012571727088

Here's a quote: "Bush administration officials "systematically misrepresented" the threat from Iraq's weapons of mass destruction in the run-up to war, according to a new report to be published on Thursday by a respected Washington think-tank."

Is it just me or is it when they say systematically misrepresented, that means they thoughtfully planned out their lies?

And here's another one:
http://news.ft.com/servlet/ContentS...y&c=StoryFT&cid=1073280874955&p=1012571727102

Small Quote: "The Bush administration has quietly withdrawn from Iraq a 400-member military team whose job was to scour the country for military equipment, according to senior government officials."

 

[Natoma]

Vince,

Uh, where did I misquote Powell, or play semantic games?

 

[Vince]

Uh, where did I misquote Powell, or play semantic games?

Natoma,

You didn't furnish the entire statement, which arguably has a different tone and puts his credibility, as a senior administration official and eminent statesmen, out there by stating that a link exists. Which falls in line with what I posted from the Weeklystandard.

Also, the semnatics are based around your use of "Concrete Facts" as if NO links exist or are suspected to have. Hell, the Clinton Administration believed they existed... why don't you?

 

[Natoma]

Are you talking about the headline of this thread?

I just put the headline of the article itself. That's how I start off threads when linking to other articles. And, uh, I don't think I ever said anything about concrete facts?

Btw, I've said on quite a few occassions that I believed Iraq had WMD. But unlike the administration, and like the majority of the american public and the world, I was willing to let the inspectors get their shot one last time to try and avert a war. Since we haven't found them and the administration was so bullheaded in taking us to war and alienating practically every country in the world, I'm asking very pertinent questions. Where the f*ck are the weapons they were so sure existed and even knew where they were, but couldn't share that information with the weapons inspectors?

Sarcasm is a quite natural state for me. Probably why you think I never believed Iraq had WMD, hehe.

 

[L233]

Let's see. Not a smidgeon of proof for al-Queda links turned up in the months since the US took control over Iraq... but you just gotta believe there is a link.

And WMD? No trace to be found of all those tons upon tons of biological and chemical agents, much less of those damn hidden facilities to produce and store them. Seems like questioning scientists did not provide any results, eh? And all those nuclear facilities... probably cleverly hidden somewhere... because, you know, Saddam... he was SO close to build the bomb. You just have to believe it. He probably would have magicked nukes outta his ass since there are no facilities. Anything... as long as all you little armchair hawks don't have to admit that your precious "president" and all the other crooks are lying [-insert random insult here-].

Just have faith like you did in those funny satellite fotos of buildings with trucks in front of them. The caption said WMD, so it must be WMD. Proof. Woohoo... because the guy who promised to restore honour to the White House would never, ever, lie.

It's that sort of belief that something is existent or truth simply and unapologetically because you wish or want it to be true, like a child who wishes so very much for a pony for christmas, he convinces himself he will get the pony, if only he follows santa's rules and wishes very, very hard - a sort of "create your own reality" phenomenon.

 

[L233]

But unlike the administration, and like the majority of the american public and the world, I was willing to let the inspectors get their shot one last time to try and avert a war.

The problem really was that the fact that the inspectors did not find anything was quoted as proof by Dubya, Rummy and Colin that there must be something hidden!

 

[diarrhea_splatter]

But unlike the administration, and like the majority of the american public and the world, I was willing to let the inspectors get their shot one last time to try and avert a war.

The problem really was that the fact that the inspectors did not find anything was quoted as proof by Dubya, Rummy and Colin that there must be something hidden!

If I could find the article, Once Saddam found out that we were serious about bombing him he wanted to negotiate, 48 hours prior.

 

[L233]

If I could find the article, Once Saddam found out that we were serious about bombing him he wanted to negotiate, 48 hours prior.

Last attempt to safe his ass? Tell them anything they want as long as they spare you? What exactly is that supposed to prove?