Al Qaeda In Iraq is going to get all Sunni's slaughtered or forced to flee

Email Me When A New Comment Is Made
Show Only Poster Name and Title Sort in Reverse Order Posted

Pages: PREV 1 2 3 4 5 NEXT

Herodotus RE:Iraqi Shia are preparing to give the Sunni a dose of their own medicine 11/28/2005 1:35:57 AM

All I really care about is stability in Iraq, if the Shia can do that by keeping the Sunnis down, then more power to them. Though I doubt they can do it without some help, and as America prepares to leave someone else will take their place. "To secure the country with so few troops, Khalilzad and Casey have had to swallow their pride. They are making compromises with Sunni supporters of the insurgency that would have been unthinkable a year ago. President Bush is also doing what he has been loath to do: asking neighboring countries for help, even the rabid anti-American Islamists in Tehran. Khalilzad revealed to NEWSWEEK that he has received explicit permission from Bush to begin a diplomatic dialogue with Iran, which has meddled politically in Iraq. "I've been authorized by the president to engage the Iranians as I engaged them in Afghanistan directly," says Khalilzad. "There will be meetings, and that's also a departure and an adjustment. " link It looks like realism will trump Strassuian fantasies of democracy at the end of the day. Although we will see where this all leads.

Quote Reply

Pseudonym RE:Iraqi Shia are preparing to give the Sunni a dose of their own medicine 11/28/2005 3:29:12 AM

"All I really care about is stability in Iraq, if the Shia can do that by keeping the Sunnis down, then more power to them. Though I doubt they can do it without some help, and as America prepares to leave someone else will take their place." I'm expecting more along the lines of killing and driving most out. Not keeping them down. "It looks like realism will trump Strassuian fantasies of democracy at the end of the day. Although we will see where this all leads." Yup Middle Eastern realism will still come. The Sunni's will somewhat make some peace with us forces. We will get our window to leave. The Sunni will then find themselves hunted down like dogs, agreements aside. You act as if the Sunni, who are becoming ludicrously outnumbered, have a hope vs the Iraqi army and the Shia and Kurd militias. There will be little mercy shown.

Quote Reply

Pseudonym RE:Iraqi Shia are preparing to give the Sunni a dose of their own medicine 11/28/2005 3:45:19 AM

"It looks like realism will trump Strassuian fantasies of democracy at the end of the day. Although we will see where this all leads." The terrorists are turning even muslims against them. The eyes of the world may be on the USA, but they are also on the terrorists. Every day they list the numbers of innocent civilians killed in terrorist attacks. Broadcast daily to the world at large, this includes other muslims. They are destroying themselves quite well from what i see. Who really cares if ends up a democracy this time? Iraq was more about drawing the enemy out and exposing him, while simultaneously taking out a regime that supported terror.

Quote Reply

Herodotus RE:Iraqi Shia are preparing to give the Sunni a dose of their own medicine 11/28/2005 1:05:45 PM

"Who really cares if ends up a democracy this time? Iraq was more about drawing the enemy out and exposing him, while simultaneously taking out a regime that supported terror." Well the enemy has certianly been drawn out, About 3,000 terrorist incidents have happened in Iraq since the war started killing 8,000 people. As for the Iraq regime supporting terrorism, none of the groups that Saddam supported in terrorism launched any international attacks after 1992 except for the MEK which only killed a handful of Iranian Revoltionary Guard, not such a bad thing. Syria and Iran support terrorism much more then Iraq. The only links to Al Qaeda and the 1993 WTC bombing are Ramzi Yousef, Yasin, and Zaraqwai.

Quote Reply

Pseudonym RE:Iraqi Shia are preparing to give the Sunni a dose of their own medicine 11/28/2005 3:42:57 PM

Didn't someone already give you this lecture Hero? The whole Iraq supports terror thing. Cause I remember reading it, but it looks like you don't.

Quote Reply

Bob RE:Iraqi Shia are preparing to give the Sunni a dose of their own medicine 11/28/2005 4:59:59 PM

>> As for the Iraq regime supporting terrorism, none of the groups that Saddam supported in terrorism launched any international attacks after 1992 except for the MEK which only killed a handful of Iranian Revoltionary Guard, not such a bad thing. << Well, let's just ignore the fact that that sentence is absolutely wrong, and let's try it a different way. We know of nations that support terrorist groups and we know of nations that sponsor terrorist groups. You seem content to just run down the State Department's list of terrorist groups and their state sponsors and be done with it. Syria, Iran, and Saudi Arabia are well documented supporters and sponsors of terrorist groups like Hezbollah, Hamas, the PDFLP, Islamic Jihad, etc. Everybody knows it, there is a large paper trail and even public fundraisers and telethons for these groups. But what about a nation that would recruit a single terrorist or handful of terrorists to attack an enemy in a way so that the act and the actors could not be traced back to the state? Could it be done? Is this even possible in our day and age, some sort of perfect crime? Not only is it possible, but isn't it 100% necessary? Has it been going on in the middle east since the 1950s and 1960s? Has Libya ever used a terrorist to attack the U.S? Has Iraq ever used the PLO to attack Israel? Has Iran or Syria ever used Hezbollah to attack the U.S? Has Syria ever used a terrorist to attack its enemies in Lebanon? Has Iraq ever used a terrorist to attack Saudi Arabia or Iran or Kuwait or Turkey? Or the United States? What about India and Pakistan? Sudan? Yemen? Is there any reason not to believe that at least some of the heinous acts of terrorism throughout the 1990s and 2000s had some sort of origins with or backings from a middle eastern nation state?

Quote Reply

Herodotus RE:Iraqi Shia are preparing to give the Sunni a dose of their own medicine 11/29/2005 12:52:02 AM

Every state at one point or the other uses surrogates to further their goals. Some states use terrorists more then others; Iran and Syria. Iraq though does not seem to use a lot of terrorist groups even at the height of the Palestinian "struggle" ro whatever they call it against Israel. Saddam was too busy using his own military against Iran and later Kuwait. You could make the argument that since the Gulf War with Saddam's army weakened he had to rely more on terrorists to do his dirty work. But I don't know that it was on the scale of Al Qaeda. This is from testimony by one of the 9/11 commission experts: "The issue today, however, is not Baghdad's use of terrorism against its domestic opponents or business deals gone bad. It is about Saddam Husayn's use of and support for international terrorism." "Beginning in the early 1970s, Saddam provided safe haven, training, arms, and other forms of assistance to Palestinian and Arab extremists. Baghdad hosted the Abu Nidal Organization (ANO), the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP), the Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine (DFLP), and the Hawari faction of the PLO. In addition, Baghdad created the Arab Liberation Front (ALF) as its personal surrogate in the wars against Israel. Although the ALF conducted no terrorist operations, Saddam used it in the 1970s and resurrected it again in the current Palestinian intifada as a means to recruit Palestinians and, in 2001, to win praise for offering $25,000 to the family of each Palestinian "martyred" in an Israeli attack. Some examples of Iraqi support include: Abu Nidal. While enjoying safe haven in Iraq, the ANO conducted a number of terrorist attacks on Jewish and Israel targets in the 1970s and 1980s, including murders at synagogues and attacks on El Al airline passengers in Turkey, Austria, Belgium, and Italy, and the hijacking of a Pan Am airliner (Pan Am 73) in Karachi, in which 22 people (2 Americans) were murdered. ANO also attacked PLO representatives in Europe, murdered Jordanian diplomats, and attempted to assassinate Israel's ambassador in London. (This attack became the cause celebre for Israel's invasion of Lebanon in 1982.) When ANO leader Sabri al-Banna refused to conduct operations against the Syrian regime ordered by Iraq, he was cast out of the country, only to later be allowed back. He died in August 2002 in Baghdad from 4 gunshot wounds to the head, a suicide according to Iraqi security officials. I assume Saddam had decided to remove evidence of his links to one of the most notorious of international terrorists at a time when the United States was increasing pressure on him to reveal his WMD programs and was accusing him of sponsoring al-Qaida. Abu Abbas. Palestinian terrorist Mahmud Abbas, known as Abu Abbas, and his organization, the Palestine Liberation Front (PLF), enjoyed safe haven and support in Saddam's Iraq. Abu Abbas was responsible for the October 1985 hijacking of the Italian cruise ship Achille Lauro and the murder of Leon Klinghoffer, an elderly American confined to a wheelchair. In October 2000, following the outbreak of Israeli-Palestinian fighting, Abu Abbas announced from Baghdad that the PLF would resume attacks on Israel. Others: In the 1970s Saddam aided Palestinian radical factions that conducted terrorist operations on Israeli, Jewish, Western, and moderate Arab targets. In the 1980s, he sheltered the Kurdish anti-Turkish terrorist group, the Kurdish Workers Party (PKK) at the same time he allowed Ankara hot pursuit of PKK terrorists across its border. In the 1990s, he provided safe haven and supported attacks by the leftist anti-Iranian Mujahideen-e Khalq on targets inside Iran, including rocket attacks on government office buildings in Tehran." Like I said only the MEK was sponsored after 1991. "Ramzi Yousef, the Trade Towers and alleged control by Baghdad. Yousef was convicted for his involvement in the 1993 Trade Towers attack. The story of false identities and tampered documents belonging to a Pakistani and filched from occupied Kuwait is intriguing and rivals anything John Le Carre has written. Should we make the assumption that only Iraqi intelligence could have tampered with the files and planned far in advance to create a "legend" for an operative? Granted, Iraqi intelligence officers and operatives were trained by East German, Czech, and Soviet counterparts. To repeat a point made earlier, except for assassination hits against their own dissidents and defectors abroad, Iraq's intelligence services did not show exceptional talent or success in long-range, long-time operational planning." This seems to fit the pattern we see in Iraq's terrorism links; the attempted assassination of George Bush proved to be a disaster and half-assed, the Iraqis could not recurit a sucide bomber in Prague to bomb Radio Free Europe, could not coordiante the MEK to launch serious attacks against Iran, could not come up with viable WMD programs, etc. "Evidence includes meetings between Iraqi intelligence agents and al-Qaida operatives in Sudan, the Czech Republic, and Afghanistan. In the 1980s and 1990s every international terrorist group and state sponsor was represented in Sudan. Iraq, Iran, and most Islamist organizations were welcomed by Hassan al-Turabi, the Islamist leader of the military-dominated regime. How could they not meet in Khartoum, a small city offering many opportunities for terrorist t�te-�-t�tes. Czech and American intelligence officials say they are unable to confirm any meeting between al-Qaida operative Mohammed Atta and an Iraqi intelligence officer, identified as Ahmed Khalil Ibrahim Samir al-Ani. I would be disappointed if an Iraqi intelligence officer did not meet with al-Qaida operatives. He would have been derelict in his duty if he did not at least try to arrange a meeting. His purpose would have been to assess intent, operational capability, and recruitment potential. It would not have been sufficient for both simply to hate the U.S. Saddam always demanded total loyalty from and control over any group he supported. The evidence is fairly clear, at least in my mind, that al-Qaida would not be subordinated to any government, even if Usama had admired Saddam, which he did not. Finally, it is claimed that a senior Iraqi intelligence operative, Farouk Hijazi, who served as head of the Iraqi intelligence service as well as ambassador to Turkey, Jordan, and Tunisia, met with Usama in Afghanistan." "If these alleged facts are true, we should be able to confirm them-we have al-Ani and Hijazi in custody. If a terrorist calls Iraq, does that prove state complicity? If a terrorist meets with an Iraqi intelligence officer, does that make him a tool of the Iraqis? If a terrorist receives money from the UAE, does that make the UAE complicit? I think not on all counts." link We do have al-Ani in custody and he has denied to this day any contact with Atta. Judith Yaphe is a CIA expert on Iraq, though you might think it is conjecture I think she has a point about state sponsorship of terrorism. State sponsorship is fairly clear and obvious, Saddam's intelligence services were inept throughout the 1990s and could not engage in long term operational planning. Al Qaeda does not in my opinion need that much state sponsorship. bin Laden's network has been sustained through his own investments, his construction company in the Sudan, donations from shieks in the UAE and Saudi Arabia who like playing both sides, tribal heroin growers in Afghanistan and Pakistan, and Islamic fundmentalism which gives him plenty of volunteers. Could Saddam have supported al Qaeda and assisted in the attacks against the US? Yes of course he could have. However Iraq was the most unlikely country in the ME to support terrorism after the 1991 Gulf War, the international scrunity was intense, his army was destroyed, his intelligence capabilities were limited, his position in the Arab world was weak, his enemies abroad and at home were embolden. That he was defiant seems to be a reaction to fear, and is more proof that he was weak. He is now on trial for his life, and he is even more defiant of the process, because he is weak.

Quote Reply

Bob RE:Iraqi Shia are preparing to give the Sunni a dose of their own medicine 11/29/2005 2:09:08 AM

>> Every state at one point or the other uses surrogates to further their goals. Some states use terrorists more then others; Iran and Syria. Iraq though does not seem to use a lot of terrorist groups even at the height of the Palestinian "struggle" ro whatever they call it against Israel. << Okay. Why would you consider Syria and Iran to use terrorists more than Iraq? And, at what point would you say that Iraq would use terrorist groups at the height of the Iraqi-American "struggle", which they described as Um al-Maarik, or, The Mother of all Battles, against the U.S? In the beginning? The middle? The end? Never? That was my question. >> link << Thanks for that report. Do you want me to present to you the 6597 terabytes of information Laurie Mylroie has presented on the subject, since she was also an Iraqi expert called on by the 9/11 Commission? Or do you just want me to cite an article by someone like Peter Bergen, that calls Mylroie a "crackpot" - and then, between us, that's the end of it? At least with Yaphe, I can say that she has motivations to badmouth the neocons, AEI, the DOD, and anyone who supported the war against Iraq. Mylroie has consistently maintained her position before, during, and after 9/11, which leads me to believe she's after the truth, and not some kind of political grandstanding. But still, evidence is evidence, Hero. If Mylroie details the escape route of Ramzi Yousef after the 93 bombing, or of his family during the Iraqi occupation of Kuwait, and hints that both may have been assisted by the Iraqis, then that is evidence. And if Yaphe says that she, herself, hasn't "seen" any evidence of an Iraq / Al Qaeda connection, then that's evidence too. Thanks, I guess it's all cleared up now. >> We do have al-Ani in custody and he has denied to this day any contact with Atta. << Fascinating. We have had 94,000 terrorists, Khalid Sheik Muhammed, Ramzi Yousef, Saddam Hussein, and the likes, etc, in custody and we still haven't gotten to the bottom of anything, have we? >> Al Qaeda does not in my opinion need that much state sponsorship. bin Laden's network has been sustained through his own investments, his construction company in the Sudan, donations from shieks in the UAE and Saudi Arabia who like playing both sides, tribal heroin growers in Afghanistan and Pakistan, and Islamic fundmentalism which gives him plenty of volunteers. << I talked about this. Al Qaeda, before 1998, was not Al Qaeda as we know it now or after 9/11, but was all the fragmented groups of terrorists that had ties to and assistance from the intelligence services of Iran, Iraq, Pakistan, etc, etc. Al Qaeda formed in 1998! Who was killing us beforehand??? What was Ayman Zawahiri, of Muslim Brotherhood - whose group merged with Al Qaeda in 1998 - doing in Baghdad in 1992 or in 1995 or in 1998 anyways? Does this put him at odds with bin Laden? Do these things constitute "connections"? Do our brains work? >> However Iraq was the most unlikely country in the ME to support terrorism after the 1991 Gulf War, the international scrunity was intense, his army was destroyed, his intelligence capabilities were limited, his position in the Arab world was weak, his enemies abroad and at home were embolden. That he was defiant seems to be a reaction to fear, and is more proof that he was weak. He is now on trial for his life, and he is even more defiant of the process, because he is weak. << "The greatest trick the devil ever pulled was convincing the world he didn't exist. And like that? He's gone." - Kaiser Sosa Good analysis, Hero. Done discussing these subjects with you. It's been a pleasure.

Quote Reply

Herodotus RE:Iraqi Shia are preparing to give the Sunni a dose of their own medicine 11/29/2005 3:25:16 AM

I don't expect a response, but I want to just respond to your post. I respect your research and convictions Bob, I just think your conclusions are wrong. "And, at what point would you say that Iraq would use terrorist groups at the height of the Iraqi-American "struggle", which they described as Um al-Maarik, or, The Mother of all Battles, against the U.S? In the beginning? The middle? The end? Never? That was my question" Well over 20 countries attacked Iraq, including Saudi Arabia and Syria, but Iraq wasn't agitating to get them, which could have been a lot easier. Yes I know the US lead the coalition and it was Bush's war against Saddam and Saddam blamed Bush, but still I think he would have been angrier at the Saudis for their "betryal" of Arabs. It seems odd to me that every academic, every terrorist analyst, every al Qaeda expert, every Iraq expert does not believe that there was a significant Iraq connection to the 1993 WTC bombing except Laurie Mylroie. So Occam's Razor is applied, which is the easiest explanation, Laurie Mylroie, who does not hold an academic position now, has an unhelathy obssession with Saddam Hussein (which does net her a lot of money and fame, but no she does not have an agenda), or Saddam Hussein despite the inherent risks involved in any attack on the mightest power in the world, was determined to blow up WTC towers despite the fact he could not tell anyone about it. "Fascinating. We have had 94,000 terrorists, Khalid Sheik Muhammed, Ramzi Yousef, Saddam Hussein, and the likes, etc, in custody and we still haven't gotten to the bottom of anything, have we?" Well they all say the same thing don't they: there was No connection. So either Saddam Hussein inspires fanatical loyalty, so much so that his own family wouldn't even give him up (well I guess no on that account) or guess what there was no connection. "Al Qaeda formed in 1998! Who was killing us beforehand???" Here is a list of signifcant terrorist attacks againtst the US: link "February 26 World Trade Center in New York, USA, attacked by a massive bomb planted by Islamic terrorists. April 14 Iraqi intelligence service attempt to assassinate former US President, George Bush, during a visit to Kuwait. Islamic radical terrorists opposed to the western military presence in the Gulf region, explode a truck bomb next to a USAF housing area at Dhahran, Saudi Arabia, killing 19 American servicemen and 385 injuring more." So that is all the terrorist attacks by Islamists between 1990 and 1998 against the US. The 1996 attack in Saudi was the work of Hizbollah which is sponsored by Iran, clearly Iraq tried to kill former president Bush in 1993, and the WTC bombing was by a loose knit group of Islamic terrorists funded by Sheik Rahaman, and bin Laden. If Saddam was behind the 1993 WTC bombing that was executed so well, then why did his attempt to kill Bush in April come off so badly if all things being equal? "What was Ayman Zawahiri, of Muslim Brotherhood - whose group merged with Al Qaeda in 1998 - doing in Baghdad in 1992 or in 1995 or in 1998 anyways? Does this put him at odds with bin Laden? Do these things constitute "connections"? Do our brains work?" Zawahiri was in and out of a lot of countires during that time, Egypt, Russia, Pakistan, etc. Was there any evidence that he met with Saddam, or his agents? Saddam seems to be a good record keeper as he keeps videos from 20 years ago of himself interrogating prisoners. Certianly something else would have been uncovered by now. ""The greatest trick the devil ever pulled was convincing the world he didn't exist. And like that? He's gone." - Kaiser Sosa" I think you give Saddam too much credit. He is not a smart man having lost three wars, and his country to a foreign invader, he isn't smart enough to keep up a global conspiracy for years on end. If the oil for food scandal could be uncovered so easily so too would Saddam's ties to al Qaeda. They haven't because they are not there.

Quote Reply

Pseudonym RE:Iraqi Shia are preparing to give the Sunni a dose of their own medicine 11/29/2005 4:42:45 AM

Hero. Please think about this. Saddam had clear ties to terror pre GW1. He got routed, badly. He was an angry man with no way to fight back. Soon thereafter men his country had ties with tried to have Bush killed and attacked the WTC in 93. Even at the least he supported these men and ignored calls for him to turn some terrorists over. At worst he not only supported these operations but helped with the plan to take out he WTC, you know the plan that finally worked. 9/11. It's not like these people leave us a roadmap of how to commit a terrorist act. Saddam knows and had supported the people who first attacked the WTC, low and behold 10 years later what do i wake up to and watch collapse?

Quote Reply

Pseudonym RE:Iraqi Shia are preparing to give the Sunni a dose of their own medicine 11/29/2005 4:44:12 AM

Quote Reply

Pseudonym RE:Iraqi Shia are preparing to give the Sunni a dose of their own medicine 11/29/2005 4:49:39 AM

"I think you give Saddam too much credit. He is not a smart man having lost three wars, and his country to a foreign invader, he isn't smart enough to keep up a global conspiracy for years on end. If the oil for food scandal could be uncovered so easily so too would Saddam's ties to al Qaeda. They haven't because they are not there." I gotta hit this point again. The UN was not a terrorist group, it does not operate as such, which means they left a paper trail. Now Saddam and however many terrorists he met with went out of their way not to leave a paper trail. There is a big big difference here that I hope you can see. It is late and i cannot fully articulate the error of the assumption that tracing Al Qaeda activities is as easy as tracing the activites of the UN. The UN is watched by all the governments on the planet and operates openly, they are scrutinized by Media day in and day out. And you are saying that Al Qaeda who has no public presence whatsoever, and goes far far out of its way not to leave a trail is just as easy a nut to crack.

Quote Reply

Herodotus RE:Iraqi Shia are preparing to give the Sunni a dose of their own medicine 11/29/2005 1:26:51 PM

"Now Saddam and however many terrorists he met with went out of their way not to leave a paper trail." They don't leave a paper trail? So how can we follow every move made by Atta when he was in the US? Of course terrorists leave a paper trail, Abu Nidal lived openly in Baghdad, and his movements were well documented. Even if there was no paper trail though it is still improbable that Iraq had a link to the 1993 bombing. The 1993 WTC bombing did not take a lot of know-how or money to pull off, only about six hundred dollars to rent the truck, and buy the bomb materials (wired by KSM), the urea and nitric acid were ordered from chemical comapnies in the US, the instructions for mixing the chemicals was found in a pamphlet produced by former mujhadeen in Afghanistan, the fuses were lit by a cigarette lighter. As for Yousef's passport; the crux of Mylroie's argument that Iraq was behind the attack; she states that there was a notation in Abdul Basit's file that his family left Kuwait for Iraq on Aug. 26, 1990 while Kuwait was occupied by Iraq. But if Iraqi intel. presumably had access to this file and wanted to use Abdul Basit's identity--why not just lie about the date? It was a handwritten notation, so it would have been easy to do. Iraqi forces "only" killed about 600 Kuwaitis during the occupation, while 300,000 Kuwaitis fled (and yes some went through Iraq, bribery is very useful in that part of the world). It seems likely that Abdul Basit Karim's family left Kuwait through Iraq, by paying a bribe, and fled to Pakistan. Abdul Basit Karim stayed in Kuwait, and may or may not have collaborated some with the regime. After the 1991 Gulf War he left Kuwait for Pakistan, and met up with the Afghan Arabs, became trained in explosives, and CI ops, and given some backing by them. He was angry at the US for various reasons, but probably more motivated by money and fame. He bought a fake Iraqi passport in Karachi on the black market, went to the US with his partner (who had the bomb making instructions), claimed politcal asylum, was fingerprinted and detained briefly. He contacted Shiek Rahman, got his bomb-making instrcutions back, met up with Rahaman's men who hated the US and Israel and Jews,et al, decided to blow up the WTC to punish the US, had his uncle wire him 600 dollars, bought some chemicals from a local chemical company, spent several months working on making a simple bomb, rented a big truck, bought a plane ticket, ditched his old fake passport, got his real passport through the Pakistani consualte, set off the bomb, and flew to Pakistan. That's it, that's the timeline. Here is another link on the Iraqi lnks to 1993 WTC: link The intel. that Cheney cites on Yasin is unspecified and undocumented and nothing else has been made of it. Abdul Basit Karim's fingerprints from England in 1989 match Ramzi Yousef's fingerprints from 1993 and from the time he was arrested. "The Justice Department provided staffers and resources to a secret mission ordered by Wolfowitz, which showed that Yousef and Basit are the same person, which is the conclusion reached by virtually every other credible investigation. The secret mission, led by former CIA director James Woolsey, compared Yousef's fingerprints (taken in prison) with prints on file for Abdul Basit in England, where he attended college in the late 1980s ? prior to the date Mylroie claims "Basit" was replaced by an Iraqi agent." I think that is definitive.

Quote Reply

Pseudonym RE:Iraqi Shia are preparing to give the Sunni a dose of their own medicine 11/29/2005 2:24:42 PM

I was referring to the fact they left no paper trail between them and Iraq. As in the fact there were no signed contracts between the two as was the case in the UN oil as bribe scam.

Quote Reply

Pseudonym RE:Iraqi Shia are preparing to give the Sunni a dose of their own medicine 11/29/2005 2:33:37 PM

Let me hit this point one last time. While you are correct that you can follow the movements of these people once you have names and passports, for those IDENTIFIED, no one knows what they said. Now my mind is open to the fact that it is possible they had no ties to terrorism, however improbable. But you are acting as if you have incontrovertibale proof. You do not. You have some doucuments saying they went here and there, with no mention of who they saw and what they did. There is a big difference between moving, which leaves a paper trail, and terrorist activities which are not written down and are usually disscussed, not memoed.

Quote Reply

Pages: PREV 1 2 3 4 5 NEXT

	News As History - March 19, 2010
	Home News How to Make War Wars Around the World Austin Bay's On Point Dirty Little Secrets Features Al Nofi's CIC Prediction Market Wargames Measure of Respect On War and Warfare Videos Photos Jokes Community Military Discussion Boards Military Jokes Military Photos Military Book Reviews Military Movie Reviews Military Links Wargame Store StrategyPage Subscribe Login Feedback About Us Search Account Manager Advertise With Us