Advertisement

Archive for Monday, May 28, 2007

U.S. frees 42 kidnapped by al-Qaida

May 28, 2007

Advertisement

— American forces freed 42 kidnapped Iraqis - some of whom had been hung from ceilings and tortured for months - in a raid Sunday on an al-Qaida hideout north of Baghdad, the U.S. military said.

Military officials said the operation, launched on tips from residents, showed that Iraqis in the turbulent Diyala province were turning against Sunni insurgents and beginning to trust U.S. troops.

"The people in Diyala are speaking up against al-Qaida," said Maj. Gen. William Caldwell, the top U.S. military spokesman in Iraq.

Elsewhere in Diyala, a U.S. soldier was killed when an explosion hit his vehicle and a second soldier was killed in an explosion in Baghdad, the military said. The deaths brought the number of troops killed this month to at least 102, putting May on pace to become the deadliest month for Americans here in more than 2 1/2 years.

In other violence, a barrage of mortar rounds struck houses in a Shiite village just northeast of Baghdad, killing three women and a child and wounding seven other children, Baghdad police said.

A suicide car bomber attacked an army checkpoint in Musayyib, about 40 miles south of Baghdad, killing two Iraqi soldiers.

Gunmen also killed the renowned Baghdad calligrapher Khalil Mohammed al-Zahawi in a drive-by shooting in a Shiite dominated area in eastern Baghdad, police said. Al-Zahawi, 52, who was also a lecturer at Baghdad University, was waiting for a taxi on a main road when the gunmen sped past.

U.S. military officials have said they expected insurgents to step up attacks as U.S.-led forces worked to crack down on violence in Baghdad and the surrounding areas during their 14-week-old security operation.

As part of the crackdown, the military sent 3,000 more U.S. troops to Diyala, a turbulent province north of Baghdad that has seen heavy fighting in recent weeks. Sunday's raid, the military said, was a sign that the increase was working.

Some of the captives suffered broken bones. Some had been held for as long as four months. One said he was just 14 years old, Caldwell said.

The 42 freed Iraqis marked the largest number of captives ever found in a single al-Qaida prison, he said.

Comments

bearded_gnome 6 years, 10 months ago

GH, my initial comments have been verified by the postings of you and the other leftists. thanks for proving my points. note, this is good news in this article, and the fringies are so busy bashing bush and attacking anything about bush that they can't rejoice in our country's victory and 42 tortured iraqis freed!


p.s. MKH I didn't call you a NAZI...try rereading my posts with actual reading comprehension engaged. we learned about you guys from vietnam's experience and we won't sit idly by while you guys trash our noble troops as dupes, poor trapped saps, gun crazed nuts, or as NAZIs. never again will we be silent and allow our service men and women to be treated that way again.


replay: all true as verified by above posts: 28 May 2007 at 4:49 p.m.

Suggest removal Permalink Anonymous user bearded_gnome ( Anonymous) says:

good thing we DIDN'T withdraw as the surrender/democrats wanted. 41-42 tortured iraqis would thank us for staying and freeing them. now, before you leftists raise abu graib, I'll hit that one outa the park. abu graib was not the result of policy and was not the designed intent of those in charge; al-qaeda even has a torture manual with diagrams etc., to show how to do this, their policy as intended.

pull out and leave iraq to the tender mercies of such animals? give the terrorists a definite victory to claim? the proposals of the defeatocrats are morally depraved and would discard all the sacrifice and hard bought lives to this point for nothing. america is not against the iraqi war, america is just against the war going badly.

oh, and that 600,000+ figure of iraqi dead, in case some vacuous liberal raises it, will bat that one too. that number includes those killed by the terrorsts and thosekilled by saddam's people! it is a completely empty number inflated way beyond reality. when the mosque of the golden dome was blown up, by al-qaeda, civilians and religious leaders inside who died, they are counted in that fake number. these are the victims of the torturing al-qaeda. if they had killed some of the 41-42 released from torture these feckless liberals would have counted them in that figure too!

28 May 2007 at 9:51 p.m.

Suggest removal Permalink Anonymous user bearded_gnome ( Anonymous) says:

"discussions on stories" lists this with "3" comments, but all I see is little ol' me. two leftie flacks got removed already? the uncivil leftat it again. the blood thirsty leftists writing threats again? hmm?

0

greyheim 6 years, 10 months ago

b_g, you are indeed living in an alternate reality. i'd be embarassed for you if it wasn't so sad.

0

bearded_gnome 6 years, 10 months ago

and, the links above prove exactly what I said, that there were links, just not command/control. so, just who has the reading comprehension problems? you even post links proving my point. and boostie, anyone reading your posts will see that you are not to be trusted.

thanks...I go away for a while and come back to find that my own words are confirmed by the fringies, nice.

0

posessionannex 6 years, 10 months ago

to you too Possannex or whatever former poster your'e a re-birth of

The paranoia is just sad.

0

OZ 6 years, 10 months ago

.

the AWOL, ALCOHOLIC, COCAINE ADDICTED, HYPOCRITICAL X-TIAN, DRY DRUNK, FUNCTIONING ILLITERATE, PEDOPHILE LOVING, BAGHDAD BUSH aka the IDIOT DUBYA continues to MURDER & TORTURE & SPEND TAX MONEY .

U.S. MILITARY DEATHS IN IRAQ: 3,478 and rising .

U.S. MILITARY WOUNDED & MAIMED IN IRAQ: 82,900 and rising .

IRAQI CIVILIAN DEAD men, DEAD women and DEAD CHILDREN (MINIMUM): 696,500 and rising . (the IDIOT liar DUBYA flippantly "admits" 30,000 12-12-05) .

1,577 (plus) DEAD from KATRINA and the AWOL, ALCOHOLIC, COCAINE ADDICTED, DRY DRUNK, FUNCTIONING ILLITERATE, PEDOPHILE LOVING, IDIOT DUBYA'S incompetence and willful neglect all while on FIVE WEEK VACATION; the IDIOT DUBYA KILLS AT HOME, TOO! .

the AWOL, ALCOHOLIC, COCAINE ADDICTED, DRY DRUNK, FUNCTIONING ILLITERATE, PEDOPHILE LOVING, BAGHDAD BUSH AKA IDIOT DUBYA'S "FAMILY" members injured, maimed or dead in Iraq or even SERVING their COUNTRY in MILITARY SERVICE = N--O--N--E !!!!

. The AWOL, ALCOHOLIC, COCAINE ADDICTED, DRY DRUNK, FUNCTIONING ILLITERATE, BAGHDAD BUSH aka IDIOT DUBYA'S administration has drafted amendments (chief author was "Speedy-I Don't remember" Gonzales) to the War Crimes Act that RETROACTIVELY protects policy-makers from possible criminal charges for authorizing humiliating and degrading treatment of detainees, according to lawyers who have seen the proposal. The White House, without elaboration, said in a statement that the bill "will apply to any conduct by any U.S. personnel, whether committed before or after the law is enacted. . This amendment is NOT the action of innocent people. Innocent until TORTURED GUILTY. .

Of course, the incompetent, seditious and treasonous Condi Rice, DISMISSING Tenet's warnings on July 10, 2001, that OSSAMA BIN LADEN will ATTACK the UNITED STATES & the AWOL, ALCOHOLIC, COCAINE ADDICTED, DRY DRUNK, FUNCTIONING ILLITERATE, BAGHDAD BUSH aka the IDIOT DUBYA IGNORING the Presidential Daily Briefing, Dated, August 06, 2001, that OSSAMA BIN LADEN will ATTACK the UNITED STATES, is responsible for ALL the DEATHS of 9-11. .

"To initiate a war of aggression, therefore, is not only an international crime; it is the SUPREME INTERNATIONAL CRIME differing only from other war crimes in that it contains within itself the accumulated evil of the whole." -- US Supreme Court Justice Robert H. Jackson, presiding Nuremburg Trials 1946 .

$ 768 BILLION DOLLARS of American TAXPAYER MONEY Spent by the IDIOT DUBYA on IRAQ and IRAQIS, NOT on America or for Americans.Including $12 BILLION sent to Iraq IN CASH that subsequently and immediately disappeared, its weight was 340 TONS

.

These are the GOP Radical X-TIAN TERRORISTS "family values, like right_Stinker and his latent homosexual buddy "the_factor-Up" both have yet to enlist in the United State Military and head to IRAQ. Must be cowards. .

0

The_Factor 6 years, 10 months ago

right_thinker, Terrible, is what comes to mind reading what others post about you. Seriously, are the LJW moderators the following posters? Scenebooster, Agnostick, Drewdun, mkh, greyheim

I've never seen such bias, and I participate in about 5 national forums.

My experience on these forums. It won't get better. The ideologues that allow for bias, that encourage it, have an agenda. rt, you are dancing a masterful dance to stay on this forum, but your ideas, your posts are probably tempered by fear of banishment.

Recently a couple more conservative posters were banned. Terrible, is again the word that best describes the atmosphere of hate and oppression the left has fostered on this community.

0

Tom Shewmon 6 years, 10 months ago

For someone who is such an ignorant buffoon as myself around these parts, to you too Possannex or whatever former poster your'e a re-birth of, you guys write a short essay to attack me and my usual paragraph or so. And even when I'm gone for days, you're still talking about me. So one must ask, why do you bother?

0

Tom Shewmon 6 years, 10 months ago

"All you will have to do is read his ridiculous, hate-filled, flaming posts everyday, and you will see the light."- drewdun

Kidding right, drewdun? You accusing me? You must either work at or know someone at LJW to keep up with the trash you post.

Possannex-----the game you're playing is very clever.

0

scenebooster 6 years, 10 months ago

"okay, so scenie quotes an expert who does indicate that iraq is a major front in the war on terror."

beardo ignores the second part of that statement, in which said expert describes this "major front" as one created by the US and its Iraq action.

Some other gems:

"washington post has been well known as having a leftist antiwar editorial bias."

"nobody has ever claimed that saddam had a direct command/control link to 9/11"

"I have caught you in one of the most common of liberal lies, to imply that GWB et al tied saddam to 9-11. no such claims were made. "

I won't waste my time providing the sources and citations that prove B_G's statements as 100% false - why bother? Anyone with 3 minutes on their hands can do the smallest amount of research and see that this post was nothing but lies.

I'm about done with these threads. It's like speaking to a brick wall.

0

greyheim 6 years, 10 months ago

let's see how far do he wants to go .. sorry.

let's see how far he wants to go.....

0

greyheim 6 years, 10 months ago

here, I have caught you in one of the most common of liberal lies, to imply that GWB et al tied saddam to 9-11. no such claims were made. you know that, and are likely playing this for the misguidance of the less informed.

thanks temperance. bg, glutton for punishment much? let's see how far do he wants to go defending this ludicrous statement.. one among many many such statements.... this guy's reading comprehension skills are bankrupt.

0

temperance 6 years, 10 months ago

Drewdun: I laughed at the WaPo's supposed liberalism, too. Wow. Where to begin?

If you kept reading, you'd see this: "I have caught you in one of the most common of liberal lies, to imply that GWB et al tied saddam to 9-11. no such claims were made."

No Such Claims

Condi in 2002: "No one is trying to make an argument at this point that Saddam Hussein somehow had operational control of what happened on September 11, so we don't want to push this too far, but this is a story that is unfolding, and it is getting clear, and we're learning more. . . . But, yes, there clearly are contacts between al-Qaida and Iraq that can be documented. There clearly is testimony that some of these contacts have been important contacts and there's a relationship here." http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/international/july-dec02/rice_9-25.html

From USA Today: "Poll: 70% believe Saddam, 9-11 link -- Nearly seven in 10 Americans believe it is likely that ousted Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein was personally involved in the Sept. 11 attacks, says a poll out almost two years after the terrorists' strike against this country. . . .President Bush and members of his administration suggested a link between the two in the months before the war in Iraq. Claims of possible links have never been proven, however. Veteran pollsters say the persistent belief of a link between the attacks and Saddam could help explain why public support for the decision to go to war in Iraq has been so resilient despite problems establishing a peaceful country." http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2003-09-06-poll-iraq_x.htm

More recently: Feith's office 'was predisposed to finding a significant relationship between Iraq and al Qaeda,' according to portions of the report, released yesterday by Sen. Carl M. Levin (D-Mich.).'" http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/08/AR2007020802387.html

0

Mkh 6 years, 10 months ago

Gnome,

Can you read?

You compared me to someone who burned the American flag and replaced it with a Nazi symbol. So I'll tell you again. WHERE CAN I FIND YOU? I want to bring my family over to your house so you can call me a Nazi in front of them. The fact that you consider yourself a "Christian" disturbs me.

Why don't you tell me this to my face instead of being a coward. I'm serious Gnome...I will Not Tolerate this.

0

drewdun 6 years, 10 months ago

"bearded_gnome (Anonymous) says:

washington post has been well known as having a leftist antiwar editorial bias."

HHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHA.

I stopped reading there.

Thanks for the laugh though.

0

bearded_gnome 6 years, 10 months ago

"some of the bean-scooter mkh fools burnt american flags in a cemetary this weekend in washington and replaced them with nazi symbols. "

with this statement, I have apparently struck gold! MKH, who believes in a multicentury multicontinent conspiracy across much of history, protests so strongly that though I was talking about people like him and beanie, he takes it up!

fits too tightly, that shoe?

0

bearded_gnome 6 years, 10 months ago

okay, so scenie quotes an expert who does indicate that iraq is a major front in the war on terror. wow, in all his rantings and posting slanted stories, some leaks through that betrays the truth. washington post has been well known as having a leftist antiwar editorial bias. the article cited about al-qaeda in iraq: since that was written there are reports that that new leader was killed by sunni tribesmen. the article indicates that we're turning the corner with those tribesmen. apparently, the tribesmen working against al-qaeda in iraq had a hand in the original story at the top of this thread.

nobody has ever claimed that saddam had a direct command/control link to 9/11; if you liberals would take the beans outa your ears, you'd know that what GWB has said that in today's world, with the experience of 9-11, we can't wait for threats to materialize; now threats have to be stopped before they result in mass attacks. there, I have caught you in one of the most common of liberal lies, to imply that GWB et al tied saddam to 9-11. no such claims were made. you know that, and are likely playing this for the misguidance of the less informed.

0

temperance 6 years, 10 months ago

Mkh I caught that too. It's a totally dishonest parallel in a number of respects, but it definitely shows that we're in Iraq for the long haul, regardless of what happens in September. So much machinery has been set in motion that even when the Democrats regain power it's going to be age before we're out of there in any meaningful sense, I fear. This might interest you: http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/014379.php And I know you've been following the embassy plans. Here's a good article on it: http://www.salon.com/opinion/feature/2007/05/30/embassy/

0

Mkh 6 years, 10 months ago

So I hate to say I told you so...but did anyone else see Tony Snow today explaining that the White House was going to use the "South Korea model" for US troops in Iraq? Meaning that we are NOT leaving for decades. Just like I said, we've built a dozen very large, permanent bases in Iraq and they will be occupied with US troops for generations.

"Six days, six weeks, I doubt six months" -- Donald Rumsfield

0

temperance 6 years, 10 months ago

Scenebooster: Like greyheim said @ 11:47, you're using just too many facts. Facts? Facts are so lame. Give me a story with a hero and a villain. That always makes me feel good. [RE:@11:41] Also, Pincus' participation as co-chairman of The Carter Barron Summer Free Shakespeare task force should draw suspicion. "Free" is just another word for socialist. The "Carter" reference is damning all by itself.

ihatelv: If you concede that Saddam was not involved with 9/11 and had no ties to AQ, why are you clinging to "prior to the invasion at all" as an important point to refute? Look, just admit that you were one of the 70% of Americans who wrongly thought that Saddam was involved with 911. Or maybe you were part of 22% who thought he was directly involved with the planning. But that was in the past. Since you know that Saddam wasn't involved with 911 or AQ now it's time to give up this last shred of irrationality and truth-denial.

0

posessionannex 6 years, 10 months ago

All you will have to do is read his ridiculous, hate-filled, flaming posts everyday, and you will see the light.

You still read those? The later at night they're posted, the less intelligible they become, I haven't figured out why yet.

0

OZ 6 years, 10 months ago

. . . . . 3,467 American Soldiers are DEAD due to the LIES of the IDIOT DUBYA.

. . .

This just in; "-- A U.S. CH-47 Chinook helicopter crashes in Afghanistan, killing seven people, NATO officials tell CNN, adding a rescue team was ambushed." . . .

These are the GOP Radical XXX-TIAN TERRORISTS "family values" at work.

.. . . .

0

drewdun 6 years, 10 months ago

scenebooster: I love how ihatelv wants you to prove a negative, that al-Qaeda wasn't in Iraq prior to the invasion. I believe the onus is on him/her to provide proof that AQ was in Iraq prior to the invasion and working against us. He/she might actually have to provide "facts" to prove this, so its highly unlikely you'll hear from him/her again.

Also, this:

"smurf_daddy (Anonymous) says:

How does right_thinker say it? You guys are great."

Wow. Actively quoting the person with THE LEAST credibility on this site. Its okay, smurf. You haven't been here long, so a bit understandable. After a while, a lot of the conservatives on this board see what rt is all about, and subsequently distance themselves from him - see pa. If you have any sense, you will too. All you will have to do is read his ridiculous, hate-filled, flaming posts everyday, and you will see the light.

0

scenebooster 6 years, 10 months ago

smurf and his ilk either a) cannot read, or b) will not accept what has been reported on extensively by every credible media outlet. I've provided thousands of words of corroborated reports by credible sources saying that prior to 2003, AQ had no pull, operational or otherwise, inside of Iraq.

ihatelv has provided exactly ZERO examples of factual evidence to dispute this. Was there a person or group of people in Iraq prior to 2003 that agreed with/admired/longed to join AQ?

How would anyone ever know? Do those people exist right now in the US? Probably, but until and unless they decide to state those feeling publicly and/or take some sort of action, the point is incredibly moot.

"you're the one stating it as fact. ihatelv is only stating it as not fact. "

I have provided sourcing to backup my view, ihatelv has not. Believe what you like.

This report from the Washington Post does a good job of explaining the whole AQ in Iraq situation:

"Hussein's Prewar Ties To Al-Qaeda Discounted Pentagon Report Says Contacts Were Limited"

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/04/05/AR2007040502263_pf.html

0

posessionannex 6 years, 10 months ago

A scenebooster post quoted:

''The president is right that Iraq is a main front in the war on terrorism, but this is a front we created," said Peter Bergen, a terrorism specialist at the nonpartisan New America Foundation, a Washington think tank."

I dwell on the "Iraq is a main front in the war on terrorism"

others dwell on the "but this is a front we created"

Only this part: "Iraq is a main front in the war on terrorism" is about future policy.

0

smurf_daddy 6 years, 10 months ago

scenebooster, you're the one stating it as fact. ihatelv is only stating it as not fact. Prove your facts. Otherwise you are expressing your uninformed opinion, unless you too have access to classified information.

Thanks ihatelv for providing some great reading.

0

posessionannex 6 years, 10 months ago

Who cares. Don't re-elect Bush. It doesn't inform the debate.

0

scenebooster 6 years, 10 months ago

ihatelv -

Bulls***!!! Every source I gave says, unequivocally, that there was no operational AQ in Iraq prior to the invasion. While I'm sure that you'll take exception to the "operational" qualifier, what in the name of sam hell are you call "al Qaeda" in Iraq? One guy? Ten? Your being beyond obtuse on this point. I've yet to see you post any source that says they WERE there...

You're giving me crap for asking people to back up super outrageous claims with a modicum of fact? Oh, well, pardon me.

"But for you to say they were not is a bucnh of crap, because you don't know that at all::::."

That statement would have to apply to you as well, wouldn't it? So, nobody knows if they were there, but we're sure that if they were they weren't operating???

What it is it about these statements....

"One week after the terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, White House counterterrorism director Paul Kurtz wrote in a memo to national security adviser Condoleezza Rice that no "compelling case" existed for Iraq's involvement in the attacks and that links between al Qaeda and Saddam Hussein's government were weak. "

"Still, the commission found no evidence of significant dealings between Iraq and al Qaeda. "

...that you can't seem to wrap your head around?

Please enlighten me to how al Qaeda was in Iraq prior to 2003. Any sources? Citations? Anything?

0

smurf_daddy 6 years, 10 months ago

ihatelv, Excellent!

Scenebooster, I'm laughing at you.

0

ihatelv 6 years, 10 months ago

Scenebooster, again, I'm not disputing any of your info. Just your statement. You're referencing apples to oranges. You didn't say that Iraq was not involved in 911. They weren't. Cited sources. You didn't say that Iraq didn't train AQ. They didn't. Cited sources.

You said, "AQ was not in Iraq prior to the invasion. At all." I still have not seen any sources to back that up. Not that I care, but you are just such a @?!%$# when it comes to people voicing their opinions or facts without sources. I'm just trying to give you a taste of your own crap!

If they were or weren't we'll never know. But for you to say they were not is a bucnh of crap, because you don't know that at all.............

0

greyheim 6 years, 10 months ago

thank you for giving careful consideration to my posts. you all are terrific.

0

smurf_daddy 6 years, 10 months ago

kicked off?

WOW, sometimes loons say the dumbest things.

How does right_thinker say it? You guys are great.

0

scenebooster 6 years, 10 months ago

"shockchalk, Scenebooster engages in a lot of directed name calling."

BTW, calling shockchalk "shocktalk" was a mistake, not an insult (although I could absolutely care less what you think about this, smurfy).

0

scenebooster 6 years, 10 months ago

smurfy:

I got "pwned"?

How does that work?

0

Defender 6 years, 10 months ago

"shockchalk, Scenebooster engages in a lot of directed name calling."

smurf, care to defend your exhaulted one?

"okay beanscooter:remember" As posted by bearded_gnome. Why do you want scenebooster kicked off but not one of your own? Disgusting hypocrite.

0

Defender 6 years, 10 months ago

"Bearded_gnome is a pretty smart poster as well."

So being completely incorrect now makes one 'smart'? Sorry smurf, but that's idiotic.

0

greyheim 6 years, 10 months ago

ihatelv: what have you been reading? it's not as if any of the reports issued, intelligence gathered/released could go either way. it is quite clear that al qaeda, as an organization, was not present in iraq before 2003. if you're trying to pull a gwb, and say there were 'al qaeda-like' elements in iraq then you are correct. ansar al-islam did operate in the northern kurdish territory but Ansar al-islam's founder, Mullah Krekar, has staunchly denied any such link to al qaeda. any information stating that 'al qaeda was in iraq prior to 2003', as the vp has so shamelessly asserted in the face of mountains contrary evidence, has been debunked. you're basically making an argument along the lines of 'they say it's raining outside, i can hear the rain on the rooftop, but i'm not wet so there's nothing that definitively tells me it's raining'.

0

smurf_daddy 6 years, 10 months ago

ihatelv uber pwned scenebooster. Woohooo! Funny stuff.

0

scenebooster 6 years, 10 months ago

"Scenebooster, none of those stories says AQ was not in Iraq before we invaded. "

Let's go to the big board:

"No such stockpiles turned up after the U.S.-led invasion, and the independent commission investigating al Qaeda's 2001 attacks on New York and Washington found no evidence of a collaborative relationship between the two entities.

Al-Libi recanted in January 2004 a number of claims he made while in custody, according to the CIA document. His reversal prompted the CIA to order all prior intelligence suggesting Iraq trained al Qaeda personnel in chemical and biological warfare "recalled and re-issued" in February 2004."

"The independent commission investigating the 9/11 attacks concluded in 2004 that there was no collaborative relationship between al Qaeda and Iraq, though some contacts between the two sides dated back to the early 1990s.

And in 2002, the declassified DIA report said: "Saddam's regime is intensely secular and is wary of Islamic revolutionary movements. Moreover, Baghdad is unlikely to provide assistance to a group it cannot control."

"American intelligence officials, speaking on the condition of anonymity, and terrorism specialists paint a similar portrait of the suicide bombers wreaking havoc in Iraq: Prior to the Iraq war, they were not Islamic extremists seeking to attack the United States, as Al Qaeda did four years ago, but are part of a new generation of terrorists responding to calls to defend their fellow Muslims from ''crusaders" and ''infidels."

''The president is right that Iraq is a main front in the war on terrorism, but this is a front we created," said Peter Bergen, a terrorism specialist at the nonpartisan New America Foundation, a Washington think tank."

"''The vast majority of them had nothing to do with Al Qaeda before Sept. 11th and have nothing to do with Al Qaeda today," said Reuven Paz, author of the Israeli study. ''I am not sure the American public is really aware of the enormous influence of the war in Iraq, not just on Islamists but the entire Arab world.""

"One week after the terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, White House counterterrorism director Paul Kurtz wrote in a memo to national security adviser Condoleezza Rice that no "compelling case" existed for Iraq's involvement in the attacks and that links between al Qaeda and Saddam Hussein's government were weak. "

"Still, the commission found no evidence of significant dealings between Iraq and al Qaeda. "

Now, slick: Let's see some sources or citations that say AQ was in Iraq before the war (Don Rumsfeld, Doug Feith and Paul Wolfowitz's statements don't count).

0

smurf_daddy 6 years, 10 months ago

shockchalk (Anonymous) says:

It's shockchalk, not shocktalk, scenebooster.

shockchalk, Scenebooster engages in a lot of directed name calling.

read about banned accounts and harassing comments. http://www2.ljworld.com/contact/comments/

0

scenebooster 6 years, 10 months ago

shockchalk, shocktalk, factcheck, whatever. You get the point (I think).

0

ihatelv 6 years, 10 months ago

Scenebooster, none of those stories says AQ was not in Iraq before we invaded. They do state a lot of things, but not they they wern't there before. Was Iraq involved in 911, no. Is it worse now than when we went in, yes. Etc.... Nothing about AQ not being there before the war......

0

greyheim 6 years, 10 months ago

you farleft secular progressive babyeating satan worshipping surrender monkey americanhating terroristloving moonbats hiding behind all your facts disgust me.

0

greyheim 6 years, 10 months ago

i'm telling you guys, stop posting facts. they obviously don't read them, or if they do, they cannot comprehend them. if they did their heads would explode due to their world crashing down around them.

0

greyheim 6 years, 10 months ago

smurf_daddy (Anonymous) says:

The_Factor, Kudos on your 6:39 post. I agree with about 95% of your posts. Bearded_gnome is a pretty smart poster as well. I find it interesting that so many Americans are posting on this forum with the likes of unAmerican 'secular progressives' (liberals

oh gawd. ridiculosity at it's finest.

0

scenebooster 6 years, 10 months ago

Yes, Temperance, but did you see who wrote that Washington Post piece? Some guy by the name of Pincus (http://www.wws.princeton.edu/events/pressreleases/pincus.html)...

That's pretty close to "Pinko", so he's obviously a secular, liberal, commie, faith hating, baby eating, satan worshipper.

Never let facts get in the way of your gut.

0

shockchalk 6 years, 10 months ago

It's shockchalk, not shocktalk, scenebooster.

0

temperance 6 years, 10 months ago

Drewdun: "I've said it before, and I'll keep saying it: this website provides a great public service in that one can see exactly how deranged and utterly detached from reality those on the far-right truly are." Yes, keep saying it. I think it's immensely valuable in answering the question "Twenty-eight percent? Why is GWB's approval rating so darn high?"

Curious: "Do you realize how many prisoners we held 'illegally' by your definition inside the U.S. during WWII?" That's an awesome invocation of internment there George. There's nothing like defending one atrocity by pointing to another.

Hey scenebooster, while you're finding "sources" for the wacky notion that AQ was not in Iraq prior to our invasion, where's your hard evidence that Saddam wasn't at all involved with 9/11? After all, doesn't it make perfect sense that a Ba'athist secularist with a track record of repression against Muslims would collude with a religious fanatic? You must be reading the propaganda from the 911 Commission: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A47812-2004Jun16.html Or perhaps the very words of our Leader have led you astray? http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A47812-2004Jun16.html moonbat . . .

0

smurf_daddy 6 years, 10 months ago

The_Factor, Kudos on your 6:39 post. I agree with about 95% of your posts. Bearded_gnome is a pretty smart poster as well. I find it interesting that so many Americans are posting on this forum with the likes of unAmerican 'secular progressives' (liberals).

0

ihatelv 6 years, 10 months ago

scenebooster (Anonymous) says:

PA, while I take your point, you ignore the fact of what Defender is saying:

AQ was not in Iraq prior to the invasion. At all.

Scenebooster, where's your source for that one??

0

greyheim 6 years, 10 months ago

Eride - welcome to the 'looney left'. Your blind nonsupport has exposed you for the fraud you really are, you anti-american terrorist lover. How dare you speak against Bush-daddy.

0

Eride 6 years, 10 months ago

"There is nothing anyone can say to the detractors of Americas freedom and safety. The seething hatred for George W. Bush has driven the far-left to the brink of incapacitation:..there is no reasoning."

For starters I am a Republican and not a member of the "far-left" and secondly I supported the war until it was obvious that it wasn't our war anymore. It is a CIVIL war. We need to get out while we still can before more people die and billions of more dollars are spent on someone else's civil war that we cannot possibly win. We can't trust the civilian population of Iraq, we can't even trust the Iraqi Security forces that we trained and supplied. It is time to leave.

0

Defender 6 years, 10 months ago

"now, again, beanscooter, zarqawie was in iraq before we attacked, his medical care was approved personally by saddam, and his sanctuary was personally approved by saddam."

"Zarqawi, whom Cheney depicted yesterday as an agent of al-Qaeda in Iraq before the war, was not then an al-Qaeda member but was the leader of an unaffiliated terrorist group who occasionally associated with al-Qaeda adherents, according to several intelligence analysts. He publicly allied himself with al-Qaeda in early 2004, after the U.S. invasion."

These really don't work out well for you, do they bearded_gnome?

0

greyheim 6 years, 10 months ago

Can someone please explain how this blatantly obvious disconnect has gained such favor on the right?

drewdun, it can't be explained. facts have no bearing on their rhetoric, therefore, to try to refute their senselessness using facts is a waste of time.

0

greyheim 6 years, 10 months ago

gnome: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/17/AR2007031701373.html

care to read? probably not. it would make your puny head and the tiny worldview contained within explode.

The_Factor (Anonymous) says:

The anti-war (anti-america) protestors don't want this kind of good news story. If Iraqi's gain hope, if the media were to share that hope with the public, well, then GWB and PM Blair would be vindicated. Better to have 40 million people suffer than to give Bush a victory.

you disgust me. wake up.

0

The_Factor 6 years, 10 months ago

gnome, I don't know if the lawrence secular progressives actually set fire to the flags and painted swastikas. But I wouldn't be surprised if the lawrence secular progressives were involved, or any number of open minded, tolerant, state loving socialists on this media community.

Cindy Sheehan you might recall didn't have the time to put a gravestone at her sons grave. She was so busy with the anti-America campaign, with her new found celebrity and her new celebrity friends. Against the wishes of hundreds of families that had also lost their loved ones she used their names, their sacrafices in a sick and twisted campaign to garner herself attention. These families repeatedly asked her to not use the names of their loved ones. Sheehan and her handlers ignored their requests.

The secular progressive has no patriotism to speak of, no system of shared values, no appreciation of our history, our liberty.

The secular progressives are just like their poster whale: Rosie O'Donnell.

May God have mercy on their souls.

0

drewdun 6 years, 10 months ago

"The fight will be fought by the right, from sensible citizens and from our brave military overseas" - rt

Keyboard kommandos, to the RESCUE!

I've said it before, and I'll keep saying it: this website provides a great public service in that one can see exactly how deranged and utterly detached from reality those on the far-right truly are. Its sad that in this era of instant information and readily available facts that those on the right are so far removed from objective reality. Using this news as an excuse to attack Democrats and trot out their tired 'liberals hate America and the troops' shtick is deplorable, but not surprising. No mention, of course, of the troops that died over the weekend, just more mindless cheerleading and partisan hatred. Just sick, sick individuals (I think bearded-gnome (con-man?) is slowly taking over 'most despicable poster' from rt, btw). Bottom line: I love the schizophrenia from the right in terms of the Iraq war - in their bizarre world those that want to keep the troops in the hellhole, dying for a completely undefined goal, are somehow "supporting" the troops, while those that realize that the Iraqis don't want us there and WHO WANT TO BRING OUR SOLDIERS HOME TO THEIR FAMILIES AND NOT DIE IN THE HELLHOLE are "anti-troops/anti-American." Can someone please explain how this blatantly obvious disconnect has gained such favor on the right?

0

Tom Shewmon 6 years, 10 months ago

There is nothing anyone can say to the detractors of Americas freedom and safety. The seething hatred for George W. Bush has driven the far-left to the brink of incapacitation.....there is no reasoning.

The fight will be fought by the right, from sensible citizens and from our brave military overseas. Not by Soros, O'Donnell, Penn, Franken, Moore, John Edwards ("It's a bumper sticker"), Murtha, Pelosi, Dean, Reid, Feingold, Kennedy, Kerry, moveon.org, mediamatters.com , democracynow.org, Paul Krugman, the NYT, the LAT and lackey reporters for our small town newspapers.

0

Curious 6 years, 10 months ago

"Why don't we free the several hundred held illegally at Gitmo by W in his king George persona? I understand he doesn't understand human rights, why don't we?"

Okay, this one got me. Do you realize how many prisoners we held "illegally" by your definition inside the U.S. during WWII? We had POW camps all over the U.S. including Kansas. Prisoners of war are held until the war is over. Can you understand why? Do you care as much about the thousands we are probably holding in Iraq?

And Abu Graib, have you read reports of what happened there during Hussein's rule? Underwear on the head and dogs getting close and being naked in front of a woman are a cake walk compared to what had happened in that prison. And who did we suspect we were holding? People who had DONE what used to happen all across Iraq. They don't need to learn it from an Al Qaida training manual - they were pros at it before Al Quaida even existed.

And while we sit at our computers, they are still doing it. Right now, people are hanging from the ceiling by their arms, innocent people most of them, people in the wrong place at the wrong time, there for the enjoyment of their captors. There for the fear it instills in the rest of the population. You want to know why the people of Iraq aren't "snitching" more than they are? Are they safe? Will they be safe? They listen to the news from America and Europe. They can't take the chance that we will leave. Their lives depend on being as inconspicuous as possible.

But it is a false hope. When people capable of such atrocities take control again in Iraq, no one is safe. In the middle of the street in broad daylight, you might be told to kneel and your head is separated from your body with the stroke of a sword. In the wrong place . . . at the wrong time.

Oh . . . but we can santimoniously say, we aren't responsible for any more deaths in Iraq. And . . . we will never be told. So, by our warped world view that "there is no such thing as truth". it won't be happening because we won't know.

0

Mkh 6 years, 10 months ago

"some of the bean-scooter mkh fools burnt american flags in a cemetary this weekend in washington and replaced them with nazi symbols"

Gnome:

Next time you accuse me of burning American flags in a cemetary and replacing them with Nazi symbols you better say it to my face. Not as an anonymous coward on a public forum. In fact let me know where to find you so I can discuss your charge in person. After all, I believe I have the right to face my accuser, no matter how much of a coward he may be.

You disgust me Gnome, you and everyone of you pro-war "Christians"...you are a disgrace, and this even for you, is an all time low.

0

bearded_gnome 6 years, 10 months ago

okay beanscooter...remember georgeT the clinton appointed cia chief who said "we believed he [saddam] had weapons of mass distruction?" well, he has stated repeatedly that al-qaeda was in iraq before 2003, just not putting iraq into a command/control role RE 9/11 attack. he said there were "dozens" of links, ties, and human connections. he was in charge of cia, and he probably was right about wmd's, as they seem to have been shipped off to syria in fall '02.

now, again, beanscooter, zarqawie was in iraq before we attacked, his medical care was approved personally by saddam, and his sanctuary was personally approved by saddam.

on another thread, one of your ilk, "Merrill" calls the homicide bombers in iraq "patriots," celebrating those who blow up our troops. indeed, you are heavily invested in defeat in iraq, and the thought of any other outcome gives you sweaty palms and heart skipping pain.

we learned from viet nam too. we saw how our troops were treated by people like you when they came home, spat upon, cursed, called babykiller, and made out to be generally war criminals [i.e. kerry]. some of you are treating troops today the same way. we have learned from the vietnam experience and won't give you the kind of respect you got in the '60s and '70s. its too dangerous.

0

The_Factor 6 years, 10 months ago

The anti-war (anti-america) protestors don't want this kind of good news story. If Iraqi's gain hope, if the media were to share that hope with the public, well, then GWB and PM Blair would be vindicated. Better to have 40 million people suffer than to give Bush a victory.

0

Tom Shewmon 6 years, 10 months ago

This is good news, and that's all that needs to be said. It doesn't turn this hellhole around by no means, but it is good news. I'm tired of this like anyone else, and I'm tired of all the negativity.

0

nutcase 6 years, 10 months ago

Damn, chungasrevenge, and Eride, why do you insist on being anti-american and supporting the terrorists? Of course you understand that means not blindly and mindlessly supporting W and uncle Dick.

0

Eride 6 years, 10 months ago

Now if only the Iraqi Security Forces we train would stop using our equipment and training to turn around and attack our troops.

Winning the war in Iraq indeed!

0

chungasrevenge 6 years, 10 months ago

While our leaders constantly use the mess we created to further justify the erosion of our constitutional rights here at home, we forget about our own borders and support the inexorable move toward global government-hardly a good plan for America.

0

nutcase 6 years, 10 months ago

Why don't we free the several hundred held illegally at Gitmo by W in his king George persona? I understand he doesn't understand human rights, why don't we?

0

greyheim 6 years, 10 months ago

btw, as far as alqaeda in iraq before 2003, here's the link again. maybe if it's posted enough, it'll be accidentally clicked on, whole article read, and comprehended. that's probably too much to ask for

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/17/AR2007031701373.html

0

greyheim 6 years, 10 months ago

holy sh. it amazes me how fu&&g ignorant these twits are by repeating 'surrender' and thinking that's what is actually wanted. it must be too hard for them to actually think critically enough to realize that iraq is not the end all be all of fighting the war against extremism. too bad for all their zeal, they won't suit up. we could use it over there. tragic.

0

Linda Endicott 6 years, 10 months ago

Unfortunately, Posessionannex, it's not only Americans who "blame ALL civilian deaths, even the ones you cause with your car bombs, on America."

0

scenebooster 6 years, 10 months ago

"some of the bean-scooter mkh fools burnt american flags in a cemetary this weekend in washington and replaced them with nazi symbols."

Yeah, that's right a$$h***, anybody who doesn't agree with you would certainly do something so vile.

"no, rescuing 41-42 is a pretty darn good reason for our troops to be there, saving lives from al-qaeda torture/death. "

AQ wouldn't have kidnapped them if we hadn't invaded, because they WERE NOT IN IRAQ before we invade!!! Are you this dense?

Even if they had been, you think if W had used that rationale for invading Iraq that you red staters would have been on board? No fricking way.

0

bearded_gnome 6 years, 10 months ago

ORCAS ISLAND, Wash. (AP) - Vandals burned dozens of small American flags that decorated veterans' graves for Memorial Day and replaced many of them with hand-drawn swastikas, authorities said Monday.

Forty-six flags were burned completely and another 33 were found in charred tatters Sunday in the cemetery, authorities said. Swastikas drawn on paper appeared where 14 of the flags had been.

Members of the American Legion on this island off Washington's northwest coast replaced the burned flags with new ones Sunday afternoon.

The vandals repeated the stunt on Memorial Day after a guard left at dawn, the San Juan County sheriff's office said. This time, the vandals left 33 of the hand-drawn swastikas.

"This is not an act of free speech. This is a crime," Sheriff Bill Cumming said in a statement released Monday afternoon.

Sheriff's department officials declined to comment further on Monday.

Copyright 2007 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

0

Pilgrim 6 years, 10 months ago

It sure is fun watching the looney left squeal like stuck pigs over this horrible news. How dare the media report anything positive out of Iraq?! We've got to keep the steady stream of negative spin going unabated if we are ever going to achieve the surrender we so desperately want.

ROFLMAOPIMP!!!!!!!!

0

bearded_gnome 6 years, 10 months ago

yes, the tragedy of this, Factor, is that the 41-42 survived and the fringies can't add them to the body count they blame GWB/U.S.A. for. lost rhetorical opportunity!

worth noting that the celebration on this thread from the leftists is only pro forma, and obviously not heartfelt. they panic at every good news from the war, and try to turn it into bad, fearing that GWB might actually win this war, making them look as fools. so what does that make them: cheerleaders for DEFEAT! note the comments above and my case is made.

congrats to the soldiers, good job and nice working with the locals. do more and free more iraqis.

again worth noting, the torture of the al-qaeda was the policy intended. and the fools that want to tie our hands, or pull most of our troops out, etc., want to empower these torturers. again, whatever happened to all that gooshy feeling about civil rights??? oh, yea, these are little brown people, who can't do democracy, and their civil rights don't count in the liberal universe.

0

bearded_gnome 6 years, 10 months ago

no, rescuing 41-42 is a pretty darn good reason for our troops to be there, saving lives from al-qaeda torture/death. as PA noted above, you fringies blame all of the deaths on u.s.a even those killed by al-qaeda. btw, zarqawie was in iraq befor we invaded, his medical care and his sanctuary were, repeat WERE approved by saddam.

nice job PA on the i insane logic of the antiwar folks. and despite the hot air of mister conspiracy wacko MKH, murtha et al were pushing for a very rapid withdrawl, they called it "redeployment" as in redeployment to Japan [smirk]; yes, Murtha proposed redeploying our iraqi troops to Japan.

some of the bean-scooter mkh fools burnt american flags in a cemetary this weekend in washington and replaced them with nazi symbols.

also deadender is just plain wrong and completely without substance in his/her comment and that's all needs be said.

0

posessionannex 6 years, 10 months ago

Hey, alright!!! At this rate, we'll only stay through 2012-13, at a cost of 7,000-8,000 US lives.

You're infinitely more optimistic than I.

0

greyheim 6 years, 10 months ago

you hit that one right outta da park mkh.

0

Mkh 6 years, 10 months ago

First of all, let's STOP lying to ourselves and others about this "withdrawl" aka "surrender" that is Not even happening. No One has introduced legislation to completely remove US forces from Iraq, nor will they, probably EVER. Got it?

Everybody say it together: "We are NOT leaving Iraq"

We have built over 12 Permanent military bases, the US military will be stationed there for the majority of our lives, the only debate is how many troops.

Secondly, if these 40 some rescued prisoners are your catalyst for why it was a good idea to keep troop levels the same you are Nuts and disrespecting the lives lost by the US military in Iraq (yea you gnome). I'm sure those widows here in the States who have lost loved ones recently are just estatic for you to use this "victory" as a political talking point of why troops should not return to their families. Shamefull display, and the day after Memorial Day too. Shameful.

0

greyheim 6 years, 10 months ago

Course he will scene, but who cares about that? Killing him won't end the war. He is insignificant now, convienent at the time but no longer a useful rallying cry. Even though you have this http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/17/AR2007031701373.html, Al-qaida in Iraq is now responsible for 9/11, not Osama.

0

scenebooster 6 years, 10 months ago

"Military officials said the operation, launched on tips from residents, showed that Iraqis in the turbulent Diyala province were turning against Sunni insurgents and beginning to trust U.S. troops."

Hey, alright!!! At this rate, we'll only stay through 2012-13, at a cost of 7,000-8,000 US lives.

That's exactly what we were told would happen, right?

I wonder if Osama will still be out walking around...

0

bobberboy 6 years, 10 months ago

Hey Poisonannex that's exactly why al queda (or however the hell you spell their name) is in iraq - because we are there - AND WE PLANNED IT THAT WAY. Use your drug fogged head for something other than a hat rack. DAAAA!

0

posessionannex 6 years, 10 months ago

Hey, that's actually in the article! How'd that get past me!:

"Military officials said the operation, launched on tips from residents, showed that Iraqis in the turbulent Diyala province were turning against Sunni insurgents and beginning to trust U.S. troops.

"The people in Diyala are speaking up against al-Qaida," said Maj. Gen. William Caldwell, the top U.S. military spokesman in Iraq."

0

posessionannex 6 years, 10 months ago

...We've won many "hearts and minds" in al-Anbar and Diyala, as well as sheiks and guns, which is what starts to count.

0

posessionannex 6 years, 10 months ago

If your kids were killed mistakenly at a checkpoint, would you be out celebrating the 42 we saved, or would you be polishing your AK?

I would be polishing my AK, to use against AQ, just like the Sons of al-Anbar. People understand that when AQ does the following... (from an older post, my personal best)

Never follow the rules. Don't put on a uniform. Don't form an army. Hide with civilians. Hide in mosques. Don't target the American bases, target the civilian marketplaces. Americans will blame ALL civilian deaths, even the ones you cause with your car bombs, on America. Torture your prisoners, and their families. Execute them. Film yourself doing it. Kidnap to raise funds. The more you can do to endanger the civilians in the conflict, the more likely the Americans will not shoot.

...they endanger the civilian population. The sons of al-Anbar have had enough, and they're backing the Americans and killing AQ.

0

scenebooster 6 years, 10 months ago

"Some Iraqis can still understand that we saved 42 people and Al-Quaeda killed 150."

And some (most) can understand that we're responsible for bringing AQ to their country, as well as (accidently) killing around 30,000-60,000 civilians.

If your kids were killed mistakenly at a checkpoint, would you be out celebrating the 42 we saved, or would you be polishing your AK?

0

scenebooster 6 years, 10 months ago

Boy, but that is some circumspect logic...What about the 30,000 civilians ("more or less" - George W. Bush) who have died? You sorta forgot them...

"At least 10 U.S. forces killed on Memorial Day 112 slain in May; 5 Britons kidnapped; 40 die in Baghdad bomb blasts"

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18916846/

0

posessionannex 6 years, 10 months ago

So, considering that there had never been a suicide bombing in Iraq prior to the invasion, and given the fact that 150 civilians died in a suicide bombing on Friday alone, do you really think that this rescue (which was fantastic, good job soldiers) is going to garner "hearts & minds"?

Some Iraqis can still understand that we saved 42 people and Al-Quaeda killed 150.

Some people like Rosie would rather just do your math (America indirectly kills 108) than consider the 3000 people who weren't killed Friday because we didn't leave Iraq in 2005 at the behest of John F. Kerry.

0

posessionannex 6 years, 10 months ago

AQ was not in Iraq prior to the invasion. At all.

I know that. Defender is drawing up a point of history without following through with a premise or even argument. The suppressed argument I (dont) see most often is:

  1. We must fight Al-Quaeda.
  2. Al-Quaeda is in Iraq.
  3. They wouldn't be there if it weren't for us.
  4. We must leave Iraq because we shouldn't have gone there in the first place.

Because of number 2, Numbers 4 and 1 are at opposition.. Number 3 is rendered inconsequential by number 2. They all suppress #5 which somehow explains how leaving Iraq will change #2.

So I poke fun at the #3 crowd, because I think #1 is #1. discuss.

Off topic:

Scroll through the tedious 17 pages of my comments and find where I support the invasion of Iraq (crappy sentence structure, but that about sums it up best). I'm like Hillary Clinton, I supported it at the time, but acknowledge that my view was flawed or tainted. Unlike John Murtha, I think we have a promise to keep.

0

scenebooster 6 years, 10 months ago

So, considering that there had never been a suicide bombing in Iraq prior to the invasion, and given the fact that 150 civilians died in a suicide bombing on Friday alone, do you really think that this rescue (which was fantastic, good job soldiers) is going to garner "hearts & minds"?

0

scenebooster 6 years, 10 months ago

PA, while I take your point, you ignore the fact of what Defender is saying:

AQ was not in Iraq prior to the invasion. At all.

0

OZ 6 years, 10 months ago

. . . . .

"I believe demolishing Hussein's military power and liberating Iraq would be a cakewalk." --Ken Adelman, 2/13/03

"It is not knowable how long that conflict would last, it could last, you know, six days, six weeks. I doubt six months." - Donald Rumsfeld, 2/7/03

"My belief is we will, in fact, be greeted as liberators." --Dead Eye "DICK" Cheney 3/16/03

"Major combat operations have ended." --The IDIOT DUBYA, 5/1/03

"We're dealing with a country that can really finance its own reconstruction, and relatively soon." --Paul Wolfowitz, 3/27/03

"Iraq will not require sustained aid." --Mitch Daniels, 3/28/03

"A year from now, I'd be surprised if there's not some grand square in Baghdad that is named after President Bush." --Richard Perle, 9/22/03

"The most important thing is for us to find Osama bin Laden. It is our number one priority and we will not rest until we find him." the AWOL, ALCOHOLIC, COCAINE ADDICTED, DRY DRUNK, BAGHDAD BUSH aka the IDIOT DUBYA- -Washington, D.C., Sept. 13, 2001

"I don't know where bin Laden is. I have no idea and really don't care. It's not that important. It's not our priority." the AWOL, ALCOHOLIC, COCAINE ADDICTED, DRY DRUNK, BAGHDAD BUSH aka the IDIOT DUBYA --Washington, D.C., March 13, 2002

. . . . . . . . .

This morning on CBS News, May 28, 2007, Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Peter Pace FALSELY claimed that the number of U.S. casualties in Iraq is just "approaching" the number of Americans killed on 9/11 -- 3,000 As of this Memorial Day, May 28, 2007, "at least 3,455 members of the U.S. military have died since the beginning of the Iraq war in March 2003." . . . . . . . . . . .

0

posessionannex 6 years, 10 months ago

By the way, Al Qaida wouldn't have been in Iraq if we weren't there.

Would they be in Waziristan?

0

Defender 6 years, 10 months ago

Congrats soldiers, you did a great job!! Now if someone would do something about idiot rightwingers that are using the great job our soldiers did to further advance thier ignorant political rants. Yes, that mean you, bearded_gnome, and your idiot friend The Factor.

By the way, Al Qaida wouldn't have been in Iraq if we weren't there.

0

posessionannex 6 years, 10 months ago

I got one "U.S. frees 42 kidnapped by al-Qaida, Promptly Enslaved by Corporate America"

0

The_Factor 6 years, 10 months ago

Bearded_gnome, The surrender crowd is probably getting their talking points straight with the terrorists so they can condemn the soldiers for something ridiculous.

0

bearded_gnome 6 years, 10 months ago

"discussions on stories" lists this with "3" comments, but all I see is little ol' me. two leftie flacks got removed already? the uncivil leftat it again. the blood thirsty leftists writing threats again? hmm?

0

OZ 6 years, 10 months ago

.

the AWOL, ALCOHOLIC, COCAINE ADDICTED, HYPOCRITICAL X-TIAN, DRY DRUNK, FUNCTIONING ILLITERATE, PEDOPHILE LOVING, BAGHDAD BUSH aka the IDIOT DUBYA continues to MURDER & TORTURE & SPEND TAX MONEY .

U.S. MILITARY DEATHS** IN IRAQ: 3,455 and rising .

U.S. MILITARY WOUNDED & MAIMED** IN IRAQ: 82,900 and rising .

IRAQI CIVILIAN DEAD men, DEAD women and DEAD CHILDREN (MINIMUM): 696,500 and rising . (the IDIOT liar DUBYA flippantly "admits" 30,000 12-12-05) .

1,577 (plus) DEAD from KATRINA and the AWOL, ALCOHOLIC, COCAINE ADDICTED, DRY DRUNK, FUNCTIONING ILLITERATE, PEDOPHILE LOVING, IDIOT DUBYA'S incompetence and willful neglect all while on FIVE WEEK VACATION; the IDIOT DUBYA KILLS AT HOME, TOO! .

the AWOL, ALCOHOLIC, COCAINE ADDICTED, DRY DRUNK, FUNCTIONING ILLITERATE, PEDOPHILE LOVING, BAGHDAD BUSH AKA IDIOT DUBYA'S "FAMILY" members injured, maimed or dead in Iraq or even SERVING their COUNTRY in MILITARY SERVICE = N--O--N--E !!!! .

The AWOL, ALCOHOLIC, COCAINE ADDICTED, DRY DRUNK, FUNCTIONING ILLITERATE, BAGHDAD BUSH aka IDIOT DUBYA'S administration has drafted amendments (chief author was "Speedy-I Don't remember" Gonzales) to the War Crimes Act that RETROACTIVELY protects policy-makers from possible criminal charges for authorizing humiliating and degrading treatment of detainees, according to lawyers who have seen the proposal. The White House, without elaboration, said in a statement that the bill "will apply to any conduct by any U.S. personnel, whether committed before or after the law is enacted. . This amendment is NOT the action of innocent people. Innocent until TORTURED GUILTY. .

Of course, the incompetent, seditious and treasonous Condi Rice, DISMISSING Tenet's warnings on July 10, 2001, that OSSAMA BIN LADEN will ATTACK the UNITED STATES & the AWOL, ALCOHOLIC, COCAINE ADDICTED, DRY DRUNK, FUNCTIONING ILLITERATE, BAGHDAD BUSH aka the IDIOT DUBYA IGNORING the Presidential Daily Briefing, Dated, August 06, 2001, that OSSAMA BIN LADEN will ATTACK the UNITED STATES, is responsible for ALL the DEATHS of 9-11. .

"To initiate a war of aggression, therefore, is not only an international crime; it is the SUPREME INTERNATIONAL CRIME differing only from other war crimes in that it contains within itself the accumulated evil of the whole." -- US Supreme Court Justice Robert H. Jackson, presiding Nuremburg Trials 1946 . $ 768 BILLION DOLLARS of American TAXPAYER MONEY Spent by the IDIOT DUBYA on IRAQ and IRAQIS, NOT on America or for Americans.Including $12 BILLION sent to Iraq IN CASH that subsequently and immediately disappeared, its weight was 340 TONS .

These are the GOP Radical X-TIAN TERRORISTS "family values" .

Praise CHEESES and TAX ALL CULTS ! ! ! .

bearded_gnome you're as "smart" as any inanimate gnome I've encountered. .

0

OZ 6 years, 10 months ago

. . . . The HYPOCRISY of the IDIOT DUBYA'S administration knows no bounds; How many HOSTAGES is the IDIOT DUBYA holding and TORTURING in Guantanamo? . . . .

. . The AWOL, ALCOHOLIC, COCAINE ADDICTED, DRY DRUNK, FUNCTIONING ILLITERATE, BAGHDAD BUSH aka IDIOT DUBYA'S administration has drafted amendments (chief author was "Speedy-I Don't remember" Gonzales) to the War Crimes Act that RETROACTIVELY protects policy-makers from possible criminal charges for authorizing humiliating and degrading treatment of detainees, according to lawyers who have seen the proposal. The White House, without elaboration, said in a statement that the bill "will apply to any conduct by any U.S. personnel, whether committed before or after the law is enacted. . This amendment is NOT the action of innocent people. Innocent until TORTURED GUILTY. . . . . . 3,455 American Soldiers are DEAD due to the LIES of the IDIOT DUBYA. . . . . . .

0

bearded_gnome 6 years, 10 months ago

good thing we DIDN'T withdraw as the surrender/democrats wanted. 41-42 tortured iraqis would thank us for staying and freeing them. now, before you leftists raise abu graib, I'll hit that one outa the park. abu graib was not the result of policy and was not the designed intent of those in charge; al-qaeda even has a torture manual with diagrams etc., to show how to do this, their policy as intended.

pull out and leave iraq to the tender mercies of such animals? give the terrorists a definite victory to claim? the proposals of the defeatocrats are morally depraved and would discard all the sacrifice and hard bought lives to this point for nothing. america is not against the iraqi war, america is just against the war going badly.

oh, and that 600,000+ figure of iraqi dead, in case some vacuous liberal raises it, will bat that one too. that number includes those KILLED BY THE TERRORSTS and thoseKILLED BY SADDAM'S PEOPLE! it is a completely empty number inflated way beyond reality. when the mosque of the golden dome was blown up, by al-qaeda, civilians and religious leaders inside who died, they are counted in that fake number. these are the victims of the torturing al-qaeda. if they had killed some of the 41-42 released from torture these feckless liberals would have counted them in that figure too!

0

Commenting has been disabled for this item.