Americans panicking again..................

"nobody" wrote in message
...
Peter L wrote:
You would be too if someone flew a couple of planes into tall buildings
and
killed 3000 people.

Sorry to be blunt but... GET OVER IT.

Bush has killed 3 times more Iraqis than were killed at WTC.


There were very few Iraqis killed at the World Trade Center. And, of course,
the millions of people Saddam Hussein raped, tortured, maimed and slaughtered
are to be excused with the flick of a limp wrist and should have been allowed
to continue without foreign intervention according to Leftwing Liberal
"humanitarians". KM
--
(-:alohacyberian:-) At my website there are 3000 live cameras or
visit NASA, play games, read jokes, send greeting cards & connect
to CNN news, NBA, the White House, Academy Awards or learn all
about Hawaii, Israel and mo http://keith.martin.home.att.net/

"Jenn" wrote in message
...

no but attacking Mexico for Pearl Harbor would have been -- Irag had
nothing to do with 9/11 and we have abandoned the war on terror to
scratch Bush's Saddam Hussein itch

You obviously haven't been keeping up with the news:

Case for Iraq War Stronger Than Ever

Chief weapons of mass destruction hunter David Kay's pronouncement over the
weekend that he doesn't think the U.S. will ever find Iraq's WMD stockpiles
has all but demolished the Bush administration's central justification for
the Iraq war.

But as the WMD case grew increasingly weaker over the last year, the case for
war against Saddam Hussein actually became more and more compelling - based
on the growing dossier of evidence linking the Iraqi dictator to the 9/11
attacks.

Though the Bush administration has strenuously looked the other way on one
blockbuster development after another, the 9/11 file on Baghdad has grown to
include:


A memo from Iraqi intelligence uncovered by the London Sunday Telegraph last
month stating that lead 9/11 hijacker Mohamed Atta had completed his training
regimen in Baghdad under the tutelage of notorious Palestinian terrorist Abu
Nidal. The memo was dated just two months before the World Trade Center
attacks.
In one passage, the Iraqi intelligence chief reportedly informs Saddam that
Atta had demonstrated his capability as leader of the team "responsible for
attacking the targets that we have agreed to destroy."


A Defense Department memo detailing over 50 contacts between senior officials
in Iraq and Osama bin Laden's minions going back to the 1980s. According to a
November 2003 report in the Weekly Standard, the memo cites evidence that
Ahmed al Ani, the Iraqi intelligence chief in Czechoslovakia, "ordered the
[Iraqi Intelligence Service] finance officer to issue [Mohamed] Atta funds
from IIS financial holdings in the Prague office."

A Wall Street Journal report linking Flight 93 hijacker Ziad Jarrah to Abu
Nidal, who had reportedly helped train his 9/11 partner Mohamed Atta. "A
constant figure in Jarrah's life in Germany was his great-uncle, Assem Omar
Jarrah," the Journal said. "According to the German magazine, Der Spiegel,
Assem Jarrah worked for a long time as an informer for the Stasi, the East
German secret service, while maintaining connections to [Abu] Nidal's terror
group."
Eleven months after the 9/11 attacks, Nidal was executed in Baghdad by
Saddam's secret police in what many believe was an attempted cover-up of
Iraq's 9/11 complicity.


A Nov. 11, 2001, report in the London Observer citing the accounts of two
Iraqi defectors who say they helped train radical Islamists to overcome U.S.
flight crews using only small knives - a technique never used before 9/11 -
at Iraq's Salman Pak terrorist training facility.
Sabah Khodada, one of the defectors, told PBS's "Frontline" that he believed
the 9/11 attacks had been executed "by graduates of Salman Pak."

While the defectors' accounts were widely reported at the time, the media
later dropped the story as the Bush administration built its WMD case against
Iraq.


U.S. satellite photos confirming the existence of a Boeing 707 fuselage that
Khodada and his partner say was used as a hijacking classroom. U.N. weapons
inspector Charles Duelfer, who was tapped on Friday to succeed David Kay,
corroborated their account.
"We reported [the Salman Pak hijacking drills] at the time, but they've
obviously taken on new significance" after the 9/11 attacks, Duelfer told USA
Today at the time.


A May 7, 2003, decision by Manhattan U.S. District Judge Harold Baer, who
awarded $104 million to two families of 9/11 victims based on the testimony
of Khodada, Duelfer and former CIA Director James Woolsey, as well as other
evidence presented to his court.
In his opinion Judge Baer wrote that the case was "sufficient to meet
plaintiffs' burden that Iraq collaborated in or supported bin Laden/al
Qaeda's terrorist acts of September 11."


The account of former CIA Director Woolsey, whose testimony was summarized by
Judge Baer thusly:
"Director Woolsey described the existence of a highly secure military
facility in Iraq where non-Iraqi fundamentalists [e.g., Egyptians and Saudis]
are trained in airplane hijacking and other forms of terrorism. Through
satellite imagery and the testimony of three Iraqi defectors, plaintiffs
demonstrated the existence of this facility, called Salman Pak, which has an
airplane but no runway."

Judge Baer continued: "The defectors also stated that these fundamentalists
were taught methods of hijacking using utensils or short knives. Plaintiffs
contend it is farfetched to believe that Iraqi agents trained fundamentalists
in a top-secret facility for any purpose other than to promote terrorism."

The failure to turn up Saddam's weapons of mass destruction is being called a
stunning intelligence failure. But the far more startling intelligence
blunder may turn out to be the Bush administration's decision not to
spotlight reams of compelling evidence tying Iraq to 9/11.
~ Carl Limbacher, et. al.
~ http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2...6/120224.shtml
--
(-:alohacyberian:-) At my website there are 3000 live cameras or
visit NASA, play games, read jokes, send greeting cards & connect
to CNN news, NBA, the White House, Academy Awards or learn all
about Hawaii, Israel and mo http://keith.martin.home.att.net/

"Kenny McCormack" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Bert Hyman wrote:
(nobody) wrote in
:
Bush has killed 3 times more Iraqis than were killed at WTC.

Hmmm... Since only about 2400 were killed in the Japanese attack on
Pearl Harbor, I guess that to you, WW-II was just a big mistake.

Yeah, really. We should have just laughed it all off (accidents will
happen, you know...). Let Europe fall to the Germans; let the Japanese
take over the Pacific Rim. Really, not our problem.

What *were* we thinking?

Well, no, the U.S. shouldn't have just laughed it off, they should have sent
an appeasement delegation to Tokyo to determine if the Americans had done
something to asault their self esteem and offer to make whatever concessions
were necessary to assuage their sensitivities while, of course, forming a
congressional committee to design and build a "Maginot Line" around Pearl
Harbor to prevent future attacks. KM
--
(-:alohacyberian:-) At my website there are 3000 live cameras or
visit NASA, play games, read jokes, send greeting cards & connect
to CNN news, NBA, the White House, Academy Awards or learn all
about Hawaii, Israel and mo http://keith.martin.home.att.net/

wrote in message
...
Peter L wrote:
You would be too if someone flew a couple of planes into tall buildings
and
killed 3000 people.

Here in the UK we've had 3000 killed over the past 30 years, some of
them financed by Noraid. We've had the centre of Manchester destroyed
by bombs, we've had soldiers and priests killed in Aldershot, we've
had Canary Wharf bombed with 100 wounded, 2 dead and £85 million worth
of damage, we've had pub bombings in Guildford and Birmingham (I was
in there the night it happened), we've had the Queen's cousin killed
by an IRA bomb, we've had buses destroyed in London by IRA bombs, we
had 29 people killed by a 500lb car bomb in Omagh. Throughout all this
we managed to carry on without getting our panties in a twist.

Give me apathy or give me something else, I really don't care. KM
--
(-:alohacyberian:-) At my website there are 3000 live cameras or
visit NASA, play games, read jokes, send greeting cards & connect
to CNN news, NBA, the White House, Academy Awards or learn all
about Hawaii, Israel and mo http://keith.martin.home.att.net/

JF M e z e i foamed at the mouth:

Peter L wrote:
You would be too if someone flew a couple of planes into tall buildings and
killed 3000 people.

Sorry to be blunt but... GET OVER IT.

Bush has killed 3 times more Iraqis than were killed at WTC.

It is much better to have one plane crash per year and the rest flying full
and airlines profitable than to put in so many fear messages that nobody
flies, airlines are going belly up, Boeing firing people left and right etc
etc.

You cannot let terrorists prevent you from living a normal life. And that
means you must prevent your government from going overboard with 1984 style
measures which, in the end, will do far more damage to your economy and
lifestyle than one very bad day in 2001.

Americans should wake up from this nightmare and realise that it has been made
far worse by the Bush regime that it really was.

Yes, 9-11 was a disaster of biblical proportions, not because of the number of
dead, not because of the plane crashes, but because of the people trapped and
the sheer size of the structures that fell down and it was all shown live to
the world.

Had the BAM earthquake been shown live, with 30k people killed, perhaps it
would have put the WTC disaster in perspective.


The intelligence community should be told to do their work behind the scenes
and their information must not be used as propaganda to exagerate the theaths
to keep the public in fear.

It is as if the United States of America was being artificially maintained in
a state of shock even since 9-11.

When Americans who would kill to prevent a government from issuing identity
cards for fear of "big brother" end up supporting the Patriot Act and stuff
like CAPPS, it means that there is something seriously changed with the
american psyche. American should realise that the real threath is their own
government who exagerates the threaths for their own political purposes.

Hmmm. . .why ruin this Mezei doozie with a comment. Speaks for itself really. .

"alohacyberian" schreef in bericht
...
"Jenn" wrote in message
...

no but attacking Mexico for Pearl Harbor would have been -- Irag had
nothing to do with 9/11 and we have abandoned the war on terror to
scratch Bush's Saddam Hussein itch

You obviously haven't been keeping up with the news:

Case for Iraq War Stronger Than Ever

delete fabricated lies

You must be quite desperate to post this crap, Aloha.

wrote in message
...

The real and undeniable "connection" between Saddam and 9/11 was the
presence of US troops on Saudi soil.

Those who preferred "containment" policy as opposed to the other
official US policy (ILA of 1988) somehow felt it better that we:

a) keep those troops in SA,

b) add a few hundred thousand more sprinkled throughout the region for
a few years as we searched the country.

c) let thousand of Iraqis die through sanctions, and continued
totalitarian tactic of murder

d) keep up the northern no-fly zone with continued consistent engagement
(hey, but it's not a *war*, it's just *bombs and guns and stuff*, right?)

e) Give Saddam fantastic PR as the strong horse, encouraging radical
aggression from Islamists

f) Have Hans Blix appear at the UN on a monthly basis to report that "at
this time, Iraq is not in compliance", until he perishes of old age (at
which time Hans Blix Jr. would take over)

g) Aid the economy of the EU as they profit while turning their backs on
gross human rights abuses.

h) Send the undeniable message that the UN is complety useless in
enforcing its "mandates"

and on and on and on....

Instead, we:

a) took the ******* out.

b) showed those who knew the UN was a inneffective joke - and mistakenly
believed the US was as well - that they were half-right. The half they
got wrong was the worst half to get wrong.

c) said "**** you" to France, and others who believed the correct moral
choice was to put profit over all else.

I think we can stop right there, I'm satisfied.
~ SteveR in a political newsgroup
--
(-:alohacyberian:-) At my website there are 3000 live cameras or
visit NASA, play games, read jokes, send greeting cards & connect
to CNN news, NBA, the White House, Academy Awards or learn all
about Hawaii, Israel and mo http://keith.martin.home.att.net/

JF M e z e i foamed at the mouth:

Peter L wrote:
You would be too if someone flew a couple of planes into tall buildings and
killed 3000 people.

Sorry to be blunt but... GET OVER IT.

Bush has killed 3 times more Iraqis than were killed at WTC.

It is much better to have one plane crash per year and the rest flying full
and airlines profitable than to put in so many fear messages that nobody
flies, airlines are going belly up, Boeing firing people left and right etc
etc.

You cannot let terrorists prevent you from living a normal life. And that
means you must prevent your government from going overboard with 1984 style
measures which, in the end, will do far more damage to your economy and
lifestyle than one very bad day in 2001.

Americans should wake up from this nightmare and realise that it has been made
far worse by the Bush regime that it really was.

Yes, 9-11 was a disaster of biblical proportions, not because of the number of
dead, not because of the plane crashes, but because of the people trapped and
the sheer size of the structures that fell down and it was all shown live to
the world.

Had the BAM earthquake been shown live, with 30k people killed, perhaps it
would have put the WTC disaster in perspective.


The intelligence community should be told to do their work behind the scenes
and their information must not be used as propaganda to exagerate the theaths
to keep the public in fear.

It is as if the United States of America was being artificially maintained in
a state of shock even since 9-11.

When Americans who would kill to prevent a government from issuing identity
cards for fear of "big brother" end up supporting the Patriot Act and stuff
like CAPPS, it means that there is something seriously changed with the
american psyche. American should realise that the real threath is their own
government who exagerates the threaths for their own political purposes.

Hmmm. . .why ruin this Mezei doozie with a comment. Speaks for itself really. .

Jenn wrote:
Bert Hyman wrote:
Hmmm... Since only about 2400 were killed in the Japanese attack on
Pearl Harbor, I guess that to you, WW-II was just a big mistake.

no but attacking Mexico for Pearl Harbor would have been -- Irag had
nothing to do with 9/11 and we have abandoned the war on terror to scratch
Bush's Saddam Hussein itch

Some Bush speechwriter guy guesting on Dennis Miller's horrid new CNBC show
made the scariest argument yet - he basically said the justification for
attacking Saddam was to strike at terrorism by showing the world what
happens to people who thumb their noses at the USA. Not sure if he's been
fired yet.

miguel
--
Hundreds of travel photos from around the world: http://travel.u.nu/

you must be either ignorant or blind to ignore facts, too. The premise may
have been in error, but the result is that one major dictator is defunct.

"Sjoerd" wrote in message
...

"alohacyberian" schreef in bericht
...
"Jenn" wrote in message
...

no but attacking Mexico for Pearl Harbor would have been -- Irag had
nothing to do with 9/11 and we have abandoned the war on terror to
scratch Bush's Saddam Hussein itch

You obviously haven't been keeping up with the news:

Case for Iraq War Stronger Than Ever

delete fabricated lies

You must be quite desperate to post this crap, Aloha.