IgnoranceIsNotBliss Says:
March 24th, 2008 at 3:49 pm

They also couldn’t find anything in those 600,000 thousands documents, recordings, etc. any evidence of Hussein lotting to kill 41.

They found evidence. Not proof. That evidence included video of Saddam talking with Arafat about using carbombs/suicide vests to kill Bush Sr. There’s a difference between evidence and proof.

They are right that there were no “links” between Saddam and al Qaeda. As long as you don’t define funding, arming, harboring or meeting with al Qaeda as a link.

Guys, I’ve said this on this site a number of times. There are a number of very valid reasons to oppose this war. There is zero reason to overreach on this topic. Saddam’s regime supported anti American terrorism and supported anti American terrorist groups, including al Qaeda. Please read the report yourselves and stop blindly believing what people tell you is in it.

It’s linked in here. All five volumes.
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=NWQzMmY4MGFmZDZkZjZmNTAwYTMzODFhNzllOWVkNDQ=

And Matt, we’ve spoken before about this and I repeatedly attempted to contact you to discuss some of the meat and potatoes of this report. You didn’t respond to any of my queries.

williamf Says:
March 25th, 2008 at 8:40 pm

Here we go! Re-writing history to fit their sick, delusional needs. More humor is on the way.

LMAO. Could you be any more hypocritical ?
Stating that EIJ has no connection to al Qaeda is less accurate than stating Halliburton has no connection to the Bush administration.
While both organisations had their former leaders in the #2 spot, Halliburton never went as far as officially merging with the Republican party.

On Thursday, Richard Perle attempted a similar sleight-of-hand on the Charlie Rose program. He argued that Saddam’s intelligence officers had “relationships with organization affiliated with Al Qaeda.

That’s not a sleight of hand, that’s what the report says.

Clearly you would have checked whether his description of the contents of the report were accurate and therefor must be aware of this.

Little bit of sleight of hand of your own there when trying to portray this as anything other than an accurate statement.

When you look at the actual report, what it concludes is that Saddam’s intelligence had connections with terrorists all over the place.

Yeah. US intelligence NEVER has ties to terrorists.

AND: the US/Al Qaeda relationship WAS operational (in the late 80s), and is FAR better documented than any low level contacts between Al Qaeda and Saddam’s Iraq (which all went like this: Al Qaeda to Saddam: “PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE HELP US!”; Saddam to Al Qaeda: “Go F**k youselves”).