SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Just the Facts, Ma'am: A Compendium of Liberal Fiction -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Orcastraiter who wrote (11823)7/19/2004 11:20:20 PM
From: DavesM  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 90947
 
Yes, it is true that bin Laden quotes that I posted, did not indicate a collaboration between bin Laden and Iraq. But it does show that U.S. policy regarding Iraq, was the main reason for the 9.11 attack.

Here is the link indicating a collaboration between al Qaeda and Iraq:

"That the plant itself had been constructed under the security measures, that the plant had been funded, in part, by the so-called military industrial corporation, that bin Laden had been living there, that he had in fact money that he had put into this military industrial corporation, that the owner of the plant had traveled to Baghdad to meet with the father of the VX program, and that the CIA had found traces of EMTA nearby the facility itself.

According to all the intelligence, there was no other known use for EMTA at that time other than as a precursor to VX...

... put myself in the position of coming before you and having someone like you say to me, "Let me get this straight, Mr. Secretary, we've just had a chemical weapons attack upon our cities or our troops and we've lost several hundred or several thousand. And this is the information which you had at your fingertips. You had a plant that was built under the following circumstances, had you manager that went to Baghdad, you had Osama bin Laden who had funded at least the corporation, and you had traces of EMTA and did you what? You did nothing? Is that a responsible activity on the part of the Secretary of Defense?"

And the answer is pretty clear." - William Cohen, Testimony to the 9.11 Commission

globalresearch.ca



To: Orcastraiter who wrote (11823)7/20/2004 9:13:15 AM
From: jlallen  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 90947
 
If Bush knew that Saddam was not involved with 9-11, but that he felt that he should attack Saddam anyway, he should have explicitly stated such.

He did. GWB made it clear this was part of the war on terror.....

J.