Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

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 : Foreign Policy Discussion Thread -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: DayTraderKidd who wrote (7674)	12/1/2006 9:33:56 AM
From: Chas.	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 15991

I am greatly relieved that we have 2 more years of GWBush and his administration to combat the Islamic cancer, how about you... with a little luck we can have a McCain or Gingrich follow up with 4 more years after GW departs.... regards from a Realist...

To: DayTraderKidd who wrote (7674)	12/1/2006 9:38:23 AM
From: Chas.	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 15991

DayTrader, I would like to respond to your comments on Sioux Nation but I was banned yesterday for telling the truth on that board...sorry regards

To: DayTraderKidd who wrote (7674)	12/1/2006 11:02:46 AM
From: Hawkmoon	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 15991

Let me know what you think No links between Saddam and Al Qai'da?? There were DIRECT links as far back as 1993 between the IIS (Iraq's intelligence service) and Ayman Zawahiri, head of (then) Egytian Islamic Jihad and now #2 of Al Qai'da: cnsnews.com cnsnews.com\SpecialReports\archive\200410\SPE20041004a.html (there's a better link to this, but it's on bookmarked on my other computer) This document was ONLY DISCOVERED AFTER Saddam was overthrown. But it CLEARLY REVEALS that Saddam ordered his IIS directors to cooperate with Zawahiri's group to target Americans in Somalia (remember Blackhawk Down?) I personally saw receipts for the purchase of car bomb materials to be used against Saudi Arabia, as well as IIS agent application forms recruiting Al Qai'da members, including one who claimed to have been involved in 9/11 (probably logistically). Furthermore, we captured Abu Ayman, a REALLY BAD Al Qai'da insurgent cell leader in Baghdad. And guess what his CV revealed: formerly the chief of staff of intelligence under the regime of Saddam Hussein jamestown.org So I have a few problems with both the MSM reporting, as well as this administrations seeming incompetence in displaying, the ties of Saddam's regime to Al Qai'da. You don't just have the former COS of the Iraqi Intelligence Service become a Jihadist. There has to be some history there. And this is a scenario that is played out over and and over again with Al Qai'da in Iraq. The majority of the cell leaders with close ties to AMZ were former IIS officers. Now ask yourself why members of an agency tasked with preserving the Ba'thist ideology in Iraq would take up arms with Islamo-Fascists who were purportedly their sworn enemies in the past? Ask yourself why, in 1998, Bin Laden published a statement denouncing American aggression against Iraq? If some people have in the past argued about the fact of the occupation, all the people of the Peninsula have now acknowledged it. The best proof of this is the Americans' continuing aggression against the Iraqi people using the Peninsula as a staging post, even though all its rulers are against their territories being used to that end, but they are helpless. fas.org One would think that Bin Laden would want Saddam out of the way so that he could use Iraq as a launching pad to threaten the Saudi regime he so despises. Stephen Hayes has also been accumulating information tying Saddam to Al Qai'da, albeit at a very secret level never publicly disclosed at the time (for obvious reasons on the part of Saddam): weeklystandard.com weeklystandard.com There are other apparent ties between Saddam's IIS and Jihadist groups in other countries: insightmag.com rayrobison.typepad.com Now DTK.. Saddam was not only required to destroy all stockpiles of WMDs, but he was FORBIDDEN to have any ties to terrorist groups. Any violation of such a prohibition would constitute a material breach of the ceasefire that ended hostilities in 1991. Violate the ceasefire and hostilities resume at the whim of the other party to that ceasefire (the coalition and UNSC). I can't tell you why Powell and Rice said what they said in 2001. But neither can I tell why they aren't making the case for Saddam's involvement with Al Qai'da, especially with regard to ordering IIS support to attack Americans as far back as 1993. IMO, that a smoking gun in and of itself. But this administration has, for whatever reason, opted not to present it. Hawk