Rumsfeld - Pre-9/11 Thinking

1 view
Skip to first unread message

Sanders Kaufman

unread,
Mar 27, 2006, 7:01:53 PM3/27/06
to
Don Rumsfeld is finally coming around.
This week at the War College he announced that he thinks al Quaeda "may be"
our "most brutal" enemy.

But no sooner did those wise words roll off his lips than he stuck his foot
back in his mouth.
Doing his best impersonation of the notorious Baghdad Bob, Rumsfeld said
progress is being made in the global war on terror, particularly in making
it more difficult for the terrorist groups to recruit, train, raise money,
establish sanctuaries and acquire weapons.

This, of course, is Pre-9/11 thinking.
That's where he, and those like him, failed to recognize the GROWING threat
posed by al Quaeda.

In fact, by ignoring al Quaeda's growth, and expanding the war on terror to
a Crusade against Islam, Herr Rumsefeld has actually retreated in the global
war, making it far easeir for terrorist groups to train, recruit, raise
money, extablish sanctuaries and acquire weapons.

--
"Stop throwing the Constitution in my face. It's just a GOD-DAMNED piece of
paper." - George W. Bush


NCR

unread,
Mar 27, 2006, 7:08:44 PM3/27/06
to

"Sanders Kaufman" <bu...@kaufman.net> wrote in message
news:R1%Vf.51819$F_3....@newssvr29.news.prodigy.net...

> In fact, by ignoring al Quaeda's growth, and expanding the war on terror
> to a Crusade against Islam, Herr Rumsefeld has actually retreated in the
> global war, making it far easeir for terrorist groups to train, recruit,
> raise money, extablish sanctuaries and acquire weapons.

We know you support Islam above all else. Nothing new here Traitor!
>
> --
>
>


Don W. McCollough

unread,
Mar 27, 2006, 7:24:47 PM3/27/06
to

"NCR" <libex...@revelations.com> wrote in message
news:g8%Vf.48894$2O6....@newssvr12.news.prodigy.com...

Isn't Kaufman a Jewish name?

You neo-con idiotness is only proving Kaufman's point.

Don Homuth

unread,
Mar 27, 2006, 7:39:20 PM3/27/06
to
On Tue, 28 Mar 2006 00:24:47 GMT, "Don W. McCollough"
<let...@softhome.net> wrote:

>Isn't Kaufman a Jewish name?

German surely.

All who have it are not Jewish.

NCR

unread,
Mar 27, 2006, 8:22:30 PM3/27/06
to

"Don Homuth" <dhom...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:lc1h22hdlnb00rdf0...@4ax.com...

He always supports Islamic Terrorists before his own Country regardless of
any religious belief he might have.


Yosemite Sam

unread,
Mar 27, 2006, 9:23:26 PM3/27/06
to
On Tue, 28 Mar 2006 01:22:30 GMT, "NCR" <libex...@revelations.com>
wrote:

Bucky's only religion is hatred.

Chip Anderson

unread,
Mar 27, 2006, 9:27:32 PM3/27/06
to
"Sanders Kaufman" <bu...@kaufman.net> wrote in
news:R1%Vf.51819$F_3....@newssvr29.news.prodigy.net:

> Don Rumsfeld is finally coming around.
> This week at the War College he announced that he thinks al Quaeda
> "may be" our "most brutal" enemy.

-->snip<--

Yep, those Muhammadans who join or support al Quaeda are worth every bullet
we pump into their useless hides. As are the far too many other Islamists
who commit or support terrorists acts.


--
---
Chip

Oderint dum metuant
-Lucius Accius

Grande Mal

unread,
Mar 27, 2006, 9:30:58 PM3/27/06
to

"Don W. McCollough" <let...@softhome.net> wrote in message
news:jn%Vf.14195$W75.1331@trnddc07...

'Idiotness'
You gotta love it.

Message has been deleted

Yosemite Sam

unread,
Mar 28, 2006, 12:22:20 PM3/28/06
to
On 28 Mar 2006 06:28:41 -0000, Thrasher Remailer
<thra...@reece.net.au> wrote:

>>Bucky's only religion is hatred.
>

>Talking to yourself

Fuck off poxie.

Sanders Kaufman

unread,
Mar 28, 2006, 1:01:10 PM3/28/06
to
"Chip Anderson" <b_anders*NOSPAM*@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:Xns9793D0A7D2BDBb...@216.77.188.18...

> Yep, those Muhammadans who join or support al Quaeda are worth every
> bullet
> we pump into their useless hides. As are the far too many other Islamists
> who commit or support terrorists acts.

It's common to see trash like you lie like this - pretending to have served
your country.
Of course, you didn't.
You're waaaay too chicken to fight your own fight.
--
It's no wonder you post anonymously.
You're a coward and would never say this crap under your own name.

Sanders Kaufman

unread,
Mar 28, 2006, 1:01:09 PM3/28/06
to
"Don W. McCollough" <let...@softhome.net> wrote in message
news:jn%Vf.14195$W75.1331@trnddc07...
> "NCR" <libex...@revelations.com> wrote in message

>> We know you support Islam above all else. Nothing new here Traitor!


>
> Isn't Kaufman a Jewish name?

German - our Jewish Family was originally Chelemsky, but during the
Holocaust we were helped by a family named "Kaufman".


Yosemite Sam

unread,
Mar 28, 2006, 1:10:44 PM3/28/06
to
On Tue, 28 Mar 2006 18:01:10 GMT, "Sanders Kaufman"
<bu...@kaufman.net> wrote:

>"Chip Anderson" <b_anders*NOSPAM*@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
>news:Xns9793D0A7D2BDBb...@216.77.188.18...
>
>> Yep, those Muhammadans who join or support al Quaeda are worth every
>> bullet
>> we pump into their useless hides. As are the far too many other Islamists
>> who commit or support terrorists acts.
>
>It's common to see trash like you lie like this -

"May GOD BLESS and keep the Wetback.
Now, getoff your ass and go kill a Wetback
That way we'll all enjoy a double blessing - one less illegal alien
and one thrown away piece of white trash.
One Mexican with a pistol can do more to secure the border than all
of those old men together can.
I *want* the Mexicans to feel free to come by and cut my lawn. "

gatt

unread,
Mar 28, 2006, 4:50:11 PM3/28/06
to

"Sanders Kaufman" <bu...@kaufman.net> wrote in message
news:FReWf.60854$Jd.2...@newssvr25.news.prodigy.net...

>> Isn't Kaufman a Jewish name?
>
> German - our Jewish Family was originally Chelemsky, but during the
> Holocaust we were helped by a family named "Kaufman".

Bet they regret that!

(Cheap shot.) But, seriously, that's probably the most interesting thing
you've posted in awhile. I presume that was before your time?

-c


Chip Anderson

unread,
Mar 28, 2006, 9:08:11 PM3/28/06
to
"Sanders Kaufman" <bu...@kaufman.net> wrote in
news:GReWf.60855$Jd.2...@newssvr25.news.prodigy.net:

> "Chip Anderson" <b_anders*NOSPAM*@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
> news:Xns9793D0A7D2BDBb...@216.77.188.18...
>
>> Yep, those Muhammadans who join or support al Quaeda are worth every
>> bullet
>> we pump into their useless hides. As are the far too many other
>> Islamists who commit or support terrorists acts.
>
> It's common to see trash like you lie like this - pretending to have
> served your country.
> Of course, you didn't.
> You're waaaay too chicken to fight your own fight.

It matters not whether or not I was in the service.

Sanders Kaufman

unread,
Mar 29, 2006, 3:35:57 AM3/29/06
to
"Chip Anderson" <b_anders*NOSPAM*@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:Xns9794CD6EDE0F4b...@216.77.188.18...

> "Sanders Kaufman" <bu...@kaufman.net> wrote in

>>> Yep, those Muhammadans who join or support al Quaeda are worth every


>>> bullet
>>> we pump into their useless hides. As are the far too many other
>>> Islamists who commit or support terrorists acts.
>>
>> It's common to see trash like you lie like this - pretending to have
>> served your country.
>> Of course, you didn't.
>> You're waaaay too chicken to fight your own fight.
>
> It matters not whether or not I was in the service.

It started to matter when you said "we".
*You* don't do shit for this war.
You're too chicken to serve, and to selfish to pay for it.
That's the common thread among those of you who want it.
--
That's why all those soldiers you don't care about have to die tonight.

Nicholas Name

unread,
Mar 29, 2006, 3:56:16 AM3/29/06
to


Oh- I think you and your myopic deluded crew spinning your
fantasies of a never ending slaughter- using other people's money and
other people's children might have a bit of a monoply on that.

Anyone giving you a reality check would be slandered as a traitor.

Acharya

unread,
Mar 29, 2006, 12:10:29 PM3/29/06
to

"Nicholas Name" <spam...@spamblocked.com> wrote in message
news:ajik22p528nmkvmuf...@4ax.com...


Not really. The self defense against terrorists is a global humanitarian
struggle against violent fascist totalitarianism masquerading as religion.
The US among other countries have already been attacked.
http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/index.html#Attacks


Yosemite Sam

unread,
Mar 29, 2006, 1:23:52 PM3/29/06
to
On Wed, 29 Mar 2006 08:35:57 GMT, "Sanders Kaufman"
<bu...@kaufman.net> wrote:

>*You* don't do shit for this war.

ROTFLAMO!

Well at least he isn't cheering for our soldiers to die like you !

Yosemite Sam

unread,
Mar 29, 2006, 1:25:09 PM3/29/06
to
On Wed, 29 Mar 2006 00:56:16 -0800, Nicholas Name
<spam...@spamblocked.com> wrote:

>On Tue, 28 Mar 2006 02:23:26 GMT, Yosemite Sam <m...@flap.net> wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 28 Mar 2006 01:22:30 GMT, "NCR" <libex...@revelations.com>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>"Don Homuth" <dhom...@comcast.net> wrote in message
>>>news:lc1h22hdlnb00rdf0...@4ax.com...
>>>> On Tue, 28 Mar 2006 00:24:47 GMT, "Don W. McCollough"
>>>> <let...@softhome.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>Isn't Kaufman a Jewish name?
>>>>
>>>> German surely.
>>>>
>>>> All who have it are not Jewish.
>>>
>>>He always supports Islamic Terrorists before his own Country regardless of
>>>any religious belief he might have.
>>>
>>Bucky's only religion is hatred.
>
>
>Oh- I think you and your myopic deluded crew

Bucky told us to kill "wetbacks".

You agree with that?

gatt

unread,
Mar 29, 2006, 2:31:04 PM3/29/06
to

"Sanders Kaufman" <bu...@kaufman.net> wrote in message
news:NFrWf.10091$tN3....@newssvr27.news.prodigy.net...

> "Chip Anderson" <b_anders*NOSPAM*@bellsouth.net> wrote in message

> *You* don't do shit for this war.

Sort of like how you don't do shit to stop it except whine on the internet?

> You're too chicken to serve, and to selfish to pay for it.

Sort of like how you're too chicken to go try to save all those innocent
people you whine about getting killed?

>That's why all those soldiers you don't care about have to die tonight.

100% guarantee that you'll be idling on the usenet while they do instead of
doing something about what you claim to think is right.


-c


gatt

unread,
Mar 29, 2006, 2:56:14 PM3/29/06
to

"Nicholas Name" <spam...@spamblocked.com> wrote in message
news:ajik22p528nmkvmuf...@4ax.com...
>
> Oh- I think you and your myopic deluded crew spinning your
> fantasies of a never ending slaughter- using other people's money and
> other people's children

I like observing all this rhetorical bullshit about "other people's
children" as if they're not adults who read and signed contracts, pledged
oaths and volunteered to serve. Anytime people talk about "mothers sending
their kids off to war" or "other people's children" I can already tell it's
propagandist nonsense. There are children, fathers, mothers and
GRANDPARENTS serving over there. They're big boys and girls, fully aware
of what is expected of them. It's interesting watching people like you
likely never served assuming that you somehow know more about the military
experience and mission than those actually doing it.

Tell us...do you presume to know more about flying than professional pilots?
If there's a midair collision, would you presume to know more about air
traffic control than ATC? If there's a housefire, do you presume to know
more about it than firefighters? If you need surgery, do you operate on
yourself? Or is it just the business of war that you know more about than
warriors and their families? Why is that?

My brother has recently -VOLUNTEERED- for a second tour of Iraq. Didn't
like the first tour (at all) but he was there, did that, and believes he
knows what has to be done based on his first-hand experience in the Anbar
province.

> Anyone giving you a reality check would be slandered as a traitor.

There's one for you. Let's see if you're big enough to address it.

-c


Sanders Kaufman

unread,
Mar 29, 2006, 3:29:04 PM3/29/06
to
"Acharya" <harin...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:9czWf.16899$w86....@tornado.socal.rr.com...

> Not really. The self defense against terrorists is a global humanitarian
> struggle against violent fascist totalitarianism masquerading as religion.
> The US among other countries have already been attacked.

> http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/index.html#Attacks

The URL speaks volumes about the organization.


--

unread,
Mar 29, 2006, 6:34:51 PM3/29/06
to

"gatt" <LiveFromTh...@gfy.com> wrote in message
news:YfBWf.4288$kg....@news02.roc.ny...

>
> "Nicholas Name" <spam...@spamblocked.com> wrote in message
> news:ajik22p528nmkvmuf...@4ax.com...
>>
>> Oh- I think you and your myopic deluded crew spinning your
>> fantasies of a never ending slaughter- using other people's money and
>> other people's children
>
> I like observing all this rhetorical bullshit about "other people's
> children" as if they're not adults who read and signed contracts, pledged
> oaths and volunteered to serve. Anytime people talk about "mothers
> sending their kids off to war" or "other people's children" I can already
> tell it's propagandist nonsense. There are children, fathers, mothers
> and GRANDPARENTS serving over there. They're big boys and girls, fully
> aware of what is expected of them. It's interesting watching people like
> you likely never served assuming that you somehow know more about the
> military experience and mission than those actually doing it.
>
> Tell us...do you presume to know more about flying than professional
> pilots? If there's a midair collision, would you presume to know more
> about air traffic control than ATC? If there's a housefire, do you
> presume to know more about it than firefighters? If you need surgery, do
> you operate on yourself? Or is it just the business of war that you know
> more about than warriors and their families? Why is that?

Would you presume that the laborer pouring concrete knows more about the
building than the engineer or architect? Would you presume that the
private or even Sgt. in the raid, just because they were there, knows more
about the battle plan and training status of the military force as a whole
than the general who was in charge of in theatre training?

> My brother has recently -VOLUNTEERED- for a second tour of Iraq. Didn't
> like the first tour (at all) but he was there, did that, and believes he
> knows what has to be done based on his first-hand experience in the Anbar
> province.

Out of curiosity, assuming you know the answer, what does your brother
perceive the "mission" to be and why we are there?


Sanders Kaufman

unread,
Mar 29, 2006, 6:53:32 PM3/29/06
to
"--" <anon...@anonymous.com> wrote in message
news:vQEWf.5575$tT....@news01.roc.ny...

> "gatt" <LiveFromTh...@gfy.com> wrote in message

>> My brother has recently -VOLUNTEERED- for a second tour of Iraq. Didn't
>> like the first tour (at all) but he was there, did that, and believes he
>> knows what has to be done based on his first-hand experience in the Anbar
>> province.
>
> Out of curiosity, assuming you know the answer, what does your brother
> perceive the "mission" to be and why we are there?

I'd *love* to know the answer to that one, myself.
It's usually answered by some kind of babble.
The most lucid answers come from the televangelicals - who just want Muslims
killed.
The same, less lucid answer, comes from gun-nuts and bigots.

I think, gatt, that you will not answer the question.
The answer that your brother, the terrorist, would give would likely be one
you would be ashamed to repeat.
... so you'll just say the mission is to "stay the course" or somesuch.

--
NeoChristians and al Quaedans don't respond to torture.
NeoChristians and al Quaedans don't respond to diplomacy.
They can only be stopped through seizure and destruction of their property
and lives.


NCR

unread,
Mar 29, 2006, 8:30:16 PM3/29/06
to
>
> --
> NeoChristians and al Quaedans don't respond to torture.
> NeoChristians and al Quaedans don't respond to diplomacy.
> They can only be stopped through seizure and destruction of their property
> and lives.

But they have nothing to worry about from you do they traitor? You are a
Coward and all blow and no go.
>
>


Chip Anderson

unread,
Mar 29, 2006, 11:52:58 PM3/29/06
to
"Sanders Kaufman" <bu...@kaufman.net> wrote in
news:NFrWf.10091$tN3....@newssvr27.news.prodigy.net:

As I said, you haven't a clue as to whether or not I have served and it
matters where it concerns you. You are both ignorant and un-American.

Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted

Sanders Kaufman

unread,
Mar 30, 2006, 1:20:24 AM3/30/06
to
"Chip Anderson" <b_anders*NOSPAM*@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:Xns9795E9624A4E8b...@216.77.188.18...

> "Sanders Kaufman" <bu...@kaufman.net> wrote in

>> You're too chicken to serve, and to selfish to pay for it.


>> That's the common thread among those of you who want it.
>
> As I said, you haven't a clue as to whether or not I have served and it
> matters where it concerns you.

Oh, I have *real* good clues - and it does matter.
It matters because all those innocent Muslims are dying.

If we could only force trash like you to fight your own fights - this war
would be over in a minute.

Acharya

unread,
Mar 30, 2006, 1:25:24 AM3/30/06
to
"Sanders Kaufman" <bu...@kaufman.net> wrote in message
news:k6CWf.64524$dW3....@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com...


An empty vessel criticizes the URL not the contents.


Chip Anderson

unread,
Mar 30, 2006, 1:33:48 AM3/30/06
to
"Sanders Kaufman" <bu...@kaufman.net> wrote in
news:IMKWf.10354$tN3....@newssvr27.news.prodigy.net:

> "Chip Anderson" <b_anders*NOSPAM*@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
> news:Xns9795E9624A4E8b...@216.77.188.18...
>> "Sanders Kaufman" <bu...@kaufman.net> wrote in
>
>>> You're too chicken to serve, and to selfish to pay for it.
>>> That's the common thread among those of you who want it.
>>
>> As I said, you haven't a clue as to whether or not I have served and
>> it matters where it concerns you.
>
> Oh, I have *real* good clues - and it does matter.
> It matters because all those innocent Muslims are dying.
>
> If we could only force trash like you to fight your own fights - this
> war would be over in a minute.

Actually, I meant to write that it matters _not_. As for trash, I've had
enough of your garbage.

-->plonk<--

Nicholas Name

unread,
Mar 30, 2006, 5:49:23 AM3/30/06
to
On Wed, 29 Mar 2006 19:56:14 GMT, "gatt"
<LiveFromTh...@gfy.com> wrote:

>
>"Nicholas Name" <spam...@spamblocked.com> wrote in message
>news:ajik22p528nmkvmuf...@4ax.com...
>>
>> Oh- I think you and your myopic deluded crew spinning your
>> fantasies of a never ending slaughter- using other people's money and
>> other people's children
>
>I like observing all this rhetorical bullshit about "other people's
>children" as if they're not adults who read and signed contracts, pledged
>oaths and volunteered to serve. Anytime people talk about "mothers sending
>their kids off to war" or "other people's children" I can already tell it's
>propagandist nonsense.

The Commander-in-chief has yet to send his own children however-
avoiding combat themselves is the bond that seems to unite the
instigators of this horror show-


> There are children, fathers, mothers and
>GRANDPARENTS serving over there.

> They're big boys and girls, fully aware
>of what is expected of them.

Really?

And what might be "expected of them" when the reasons for the
slaughter changes almost daily?

> It's interesting watching people like you
>likely never served assuming that you somehow know more about the military
>experience and mission than those actually doing it.
>
>Tell us...do you presume to know more about flying than professional pilots?
>If there's a midair collision, would you presume to know more about air
>traffic control than ATC? If there's a housefire, do you presume to know
>more about it than firefighters? If you need surgery, do you operate on
>yourself? Or is it just the business of war that you know more about than
>warriors and their families? Why is that?

Despite the propaganda the average soldier is clueless about the
political purpose he is used as a tool for.

They do as they are told.


>
>My brother has recently -VOLUNTEERED- for a second tour of Iraq. Didn't
>like the first tour (at all) but he was there, did that, and believes he
>knows what has to be done based on his first-hand experience in the Anbar
>province.

Then he seems to know more than his commander-in-chief.


>> Anyone giving you a reality check would be slandered as a traitor.
>
>There's one for you. Let's see if you're big enough to address it.


sure-


http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/iraq/complete/la-me-coffins21nov21,1,4969605.story?coll=la-iraq-complete

War's Toll Respects Neither Youth Nor Experience


Two California men died on the same day in Iraq. The Marine was 21;
the Guardsman was 45.
By Rone Tempest
Times Staff Writer

November 21, 2004

SAN FRANCISCO — The coffins arrived on the same commercial airplane,
US Airways Flight 29 from Philadelphia.

Two grieving families, representing different generations of loss in
the Iraq conflict, huddled in the fog-shrouded cargo bay outside San
Francisco International Airport.

On one side of a cargo zone parking lot, standing in the eerie green
glow of airport halite lights, the mother of 21-year-old Marine Lance
Cpl. Erick James Hodges said it seemed only yesterday that her young
son was at home playing with his Rambo doll and vowing to be a Marine.

"In my mind, he was still my little boy," said Marina Beyer, 46.
Hodges was the second of Beyer's six children, ranging in age from 8
to 23. For Hodges' birthday earlier this month, she sent him a card
showing a boy on a tricycle. In his letter back, he chided her for
treating him like a kid and asked for cigars.

Hodges, from Bay Point, Calif., died in a bomb explosion in Fallouja
on his birthday, Nov. 10. "He was 21 for a day," Beyer said.

Less than 100 yards away on Wednesday night, the family of 45-year-old
California National Guard Sgt. 1st Class Michael Ottolini mourned the
loss of a husband and father of two grown children. He had been in the
Guard longer than the young Marine whose body was sent home with his
on Flight 29 had been alive.

Ottolini, a Sebastopol hay hauler and a 28-year Guard veteran who had
never before seen combat, was also killed Nov. 10, when the truck he
was driving north of Baghdad exploded after hitting a roadside bomb.

As the casualties in Iraq continue, the generation gap widens.
Unmarried and childless, Hodges had yet to realize a full life. Family
members described Ottolini, a civilian truck driver, as a man whose
life goals had been largely met.

Most of those killed on the front lines in Fallouja and other hotspots
are in their early 20s. Many of those killed in support positions and
on transportation convoys are older reservists and National Guard
soldiers whose units are fighting in their first overseas conflict
since the Korean War.

Since the U.S. invasion of Iraq, 149 members of the National Guard
have died there.

The average age of the nine California National Guard members killed
so far in Iraq is 31. Ottolini was the oldest. The oldest soldier to
die in combat in Iraq was also in the National Guard, 54-year-old
grandfather Sgt. Roger Dale Rowe of Bon Aqua, Tenn. Rowe, who had
served as a medic in Vietnam, was killed by a sniper July 9, 2003.

Going into this weekend, 346 U.S. Marines had been killed in the Iraqi
campaign, 61 from California. The average age of the Californians
killed in action was 22. Hodges was younger than the average. Despite
his youth, he was serving his second tour in Iraq.

He enlisted while still a student at Mt. Diablo High School in
Concord, and his first full-time job was in the Marine Corps. In
between tours in Iraq, friends said, he took real estate courses and
talked about helping his family move out of the working-class East Bay
area where he grew up.

Beyer, who lives in Alamo, Calif., and works as a clerk at Longs
Drugs, said that she last spoke with her son Oct. 29 and that he was
in good spirits.

"Please tell me that I'm going to wake up, and this is just a horrible
dream," Beyer said as she stood in the chill outside the San Francisco
airport.

When the flag-draped coffin was pulled on a baggage cart into the US
Airways cargo zone, Beyer leaned against the casket and wailed, "No!
No!"

Three months earlier, she recalled, the family had dropped the young
Marine off at the same airport after his last leave before his return
to Iraq.

Services for Hodges were held Friday morning at Salvation Army
Community Church in Concord. He was buried with full military honors
at the Golden Gate National Cemetery in San Bruno.

In a separate ceremony on the other side of the airport cargo
facility, Ottolini family members gathered as a National Guard honor
guard lifted Ottolini's silver casket into a hearse. Among the
pallbearers was Col. Michael Herman of El Dorado Hills, commander of
the California National Guard Engineer Brigade. Herman had previously
been commander of the Santa Rosa-based 579th Engineers, in which
Ottolini and five other members of his family, including his father
and his son, had served.

"As commander," Herman said, "you are not supposed to play favorites.
But the Ottolini family has always been special."

Despite their training as military engineers, the 110 members of the
579th serving in Iraq have been converted into infantry soldiers and
have been deployed to patrol the perimeters of Camp Anaconda, the
sprawling U.S. military base near Balad.

The 579th has suffered more casualties than any other California
National Guard unit in Iraq. In addition to Ottolini, Lt. Andree Tyson
of Riverside and Spc. Patrick McCaffrey of Tracy died June 22 after
their patrol was ambushed outside Balad.

Ottolini's 78-year-old father, Daniel, a veteran of 33 years in the
Army and National Guard, was calm and resigned to his son's death.

"I feel bad about what happened, but going to Iraq is what he wanted
to do," said his father, who during his World War II service
participated in the D-day invasion at Omaha Beach. Five of his six
sons served in the military. When they finished their regular service,
they joined the 579th, where the senior Ottolini was top sergeant.

"I can take comfort in the fact that my dad was actually doing
something that he loved," said Michael Ottolini's 27-year-old son,
Darrell, a heavy-equipment rental agent from Ukiah.

Still, he said, quietly smoking a cigarette on the edge of the parking
lot, the reality of his father's death did not come home to him until
he saw the coffin in the airport cargo dock.

One by one, members of the family approached the casket, some pausing
to rest a hand on the flag. One family member snapped pictures of the
coffin with a disposable camera.

Dan Ottolini, 54, the dead soldier's older brother, served as a Marine
in Japan during the Vietnam War. When he returned home to the United
States, the antiwar movement was at its peak and public attitudes
toward the returning soldiers could be harsh. He recalled being spit
on by an airport flower seller. He said he was pleased to see his
brother treated with more respect.

"I don't know if this is a good war or a bad war," he said of the
conflict in Iraq. "I just don't want it to turn out like 'Nam."

When the family was finished paying their respects, an eight-member
volunteer motorcycle escort from the Santa Rosa Police Department led
the hearse and trailing cars across the Golden Gate Bridge to
Sebastopol, where services were set for today.

>
>-c
>

Nicholas Name

unread,
Mar 30, 2006, 6:01:16 AM3/30/06
to
On Wed, 29 Mar 2006 17:10:29 GMT, "Acharya" <harin...@yahoo.com>
wrote:

That could come straight from the mouth of Bin Laden-the chief
beneficiary of current US foreign policy!


>The US among other countries have already been attacked.

The US has NEVER been attacked by Iraq which is-and always has been
-incapable of such.

The mass murder of Iraqi civilians as payback for 9-11 is an
indefensible war crime.

In what way do you imagine the "Shock and Awe" atrocity differed from
the Twin Towe s atrocity?

>http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/index.html#Attacks


"This non-partisan, straight-shooting Website"

You ARE joking-right?

Lobby Dosser

unread,
Mar 30, 2006, 7:09:46 AM3/30/06
to
Nicholas Name <spam...@spamblocked.com> wrote:

>
> The mass murder of Iraqi civilians as payback for 9-11 is an
> indefensible war crime.

So Sue!

Nicholas Name

unread,
Mar 30, 2006, 7:31:32 AM3/30/06
to

http://www.ccr-ny.org/v2/newsroom/releases/pReleases.asp?ObjID=YSEdERQm7U&Content=216

Generally, Americans carrying out war crimes may be able to do so
without fear of prosecution before the International Criminal Court
(ICC) because one of the pre-conditions to the Court exercising
jurisdiction is that the individual concerned be a national of a state
that is a Party to the ICC. However, the Court also has jurisdiction
over crimes carried out on the territory of a State which is a Party,
or onboard a ship or aircraft of a State which is a Party.

A Senior Pentagon official has stated publicly: “There will not be a
safe place in Baghdad… you have this simultaneous effect, rather like
the nuclear weapon at Hiroshima, not in days or weeks but in minutes.”
The purpose is to “take the city down. By that I mean you get rid of
their power, water. In two, three, four, five days, they are
physically, emotionally, and psychologically exhausted.” In a press
statement yesterday, Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld obviously referring
to “shock and awe” said that Wednesday night’s attack would be
followed by a military campaign “of a force and scope and scale that
will be beyond” anything seen before.

It has been widely reported that U.S. U2 Bombers to be involved in the
“shock and awe” strategy are based at the U.S. Air Base on Diego
Garcia, in the Indian Ocean and will be loaded with cruise missiles
there for use against Iraq. Diego Garcia is UK territory, which it
leases to the U.S. As the UK is a Party to the ICC, crimes under the
statute, including war crimes, committed wholly or in part on Diego
Garcia fall within the Court’s jurisdiction.

Shock and awe” forms an integral part of the official U.S. war plan
for the invasion of Iraq. The strategy calls for the launching of
3,000 precision-guided bombs in the first 48 hours of war at Baghdad,
a densely populated city of 5.6 million. In Afghanistan, these weapons
had a maximum success rate of 85%, indicating that at least 200
missiles will miss their targets daily resulting in the indiscriminate
deaths of countless numbers of innocent civilians.

If initiated, this strategy will almost certainly result in the
commission of war crimes, primarily through its impact on civilians
and the civilian infrastructure such as water, electrical power and
hospitals.

According to CCR Legal Director, Jeffrey Fogel, “The laws of war
prohibit civilians being targeted and there is a fundamental rule that
Parties to the conflict must distinguish between the civilian
population and combatants and between civilian objects and military
objectives. Parties must restrict their operations to the targeting of
military objectives. The proposed U.S. “shock and awe” strategy fails
on all counts and as such constitutes a war crime under Article 8 of
the Rome Statute.”

Yosemite Sam

unread,
Mar 30, 2006, 3:18:15 PM3/30/06
to
On Thu, 30 Mar 2006 02:49:23 -0800, Nicholas Name
<spam...@spamblocked.com> wrote:

>The Commander-in-chief has yet to send his own children

Does he OWN them???

Yosemite Sam

unread,
Mar 30, 2006, 3:18:16 PM3/30/06
to
On Thu, 30 Mar 2006 03:01:16 -0800, Nicholas Name
<spam...@spamblocked.com> wrote:

>The US has NEVER been attacked by Iraq

http://www.cnsnews.com/SpecialReports/archive/200410/SPE20041004a.html

They detail the Iraqi regime's purchase of five kilograms of mustard
gas on Aug. 21, 2000 and three vials of malignant pustule, another
term for anthrax, on Sept. 6, 2000. The purchase order for the mustard
gas includes gas masks, filters and rubber gloves. The order for the
anthrax includes sterilization and decontamination equipment. (See
Saddam's Possession of Mustard Gas)

The documents show that Iraqi intelligence received the mustard gas
and anthrax from "Saddam's company," which Tefft said was probably a
reference to Saddam General Establishment, "a complex of factories
involved with, amongst other things, precision optics, missile, and
artillery fabrication."

"Sa'ad's general company" is listed on the Iraqi documents as the
supplier of the sterilization and decontamination equipment that
accompanied the anthrax vials. Tefft believes this is a reference to
the Salah Al-Din State Establishment, also involved in missile
construction. (See Saddam's Possession of Anthrax)

The Jaber Ibn Hayan General Company is listed as the supplier of the
safety equipment that accompanied the mustard gas order. Tefft
described the company as "a 'turn-key' project built by Romania,
designed to produce protective CW (conventional warfare) and BW
(biological warfare) equipment (gas masks and protective clothing)."

"Iraq had an ongoing biological warfare project continuing through the
period when the UNSCOM inspections ended," the senior government
official and source of the documents said. "This should cause us to
redouble our efforts to find the Iraqi weapons of mass destruction
programs."

'Hunt the Americans'

The first of the 42 pages of Iraqi documents is dated Jan. 18, 1993,
approximately two years after American troops defeated Saddam's army
in the first Persian Gulf War. The memo includes Saddam's directive
that "the party should move to hunt the Americans who are on Arabian
land, especially in Somalia, by using Arabian elements ..."

On Oct. 3, 1993, less than nine months after that Iraqi memo was
written, American soldiers were ambushed in Mogadishu, Somalia by
forces loyal to Somali warlord Mohammed Farah Aidid, an alleged
associate of Osama bin Laden. Eighteen Americans were killed and 84
wounded during a 17-hour firefight that followed the ambush in which
Aidid's followers used civilians as decoys. (See Saddam's Connections
to al Qaeda)

An 11-page Iraqi memo, dated Jan. 25, 1993, lists Palestinian,
Sudanese and Asian terrorist organizations and the relationships Iraq
had with each of them. Of particular importance, Tefft said, are the
relationships Iraq had already developed or was in the process of
developing with groups and individuals affiliated with al Qaeda, such
as Abu Musab al-Zarqawi and Ayman al-Zawahiri. The U.S. currently is
offering rewards of up to $25 million for each man's capture.

The documents describe Al-Jehad wa'l Tajdeed as "a secret Palestinian
organization" founded after the first Persian Gulf War that "believes
in armed struggle against U.S. and western interests." The leaders of
the group, according to the Iraqi memo, were stationed in Jordan in
1993, and when one of those leaders visited Iraq in November 1992, he
"showed the readiness of his organization to execute operations
against U.S. interests at any time." (See More Saddam Connections to
al Qaeda)

Tefft believes the Tajdeed group likely included al-Zarqawi, whom Teft
described as "our current terrorist nemesis" in Iraq, "a Palestinian
on a Jordanian passport who was with al Qaeda and bin Laden in
Afghanistan prior to this period (1993)."

Tajdeed, which means Islamic Renewal, currently "has a website that
posts Zarqawi's speeches, messages, claims of assassinations and
beheading videos," Tefft told CNSNews.com. "The apparent linkages are
too close to be accidental" and might "be one of the first operational
contacts between an al Qaeda group and Iraq," he added.

Tefft said the documents, all of which the Iraqi Intelligence Service
labeled "Top secret, personal and urgent" show several links between
Saddam's government and terror groups dedicated not only to targeting
America but also U.S. allies like Egypt and Israel.

The same 11-page memo refers to the "re-opening of the relationship"
with Al-Jehad al-Islamy, which is described as "the most violent in
Egypt," responsible for the 1981 assassination of Egyptian President
Anwar Sadat. The documents go on to describe a Dec. 14, 1990 meeting
between Iraqi intelligence officials and a representative of Al-Jehad
al-Islamy, that ended in an agreement "to move against [the] Egyptian
regime by doing martyr operations on conditions that we should secure
the finance, training and equipments." (See More Saddam Connections to
al Qaeda)

Al-Zawahiri was one of the leaders of Jehad al-Islamy, which is also
known as the Egyptian Islamic Group, and participated in the
assassination of Sadat, Tefft said. "Iraq's contact with the Egyptian
Islamic Group is another operational contact between Iraq and al
Qaeda," he added.

One of the Asian groups listed on the Iraqi intelligence memo is
J.U.I., also known as the Islamic Clerks Society. The group is
currently led by Mawlana Fadhel al-Rahman, whom Tefft said is "an al
Qaeda member and co-signed Osama bin Laden's 1998 fatwa (religious
ruling) to kill Americans." The Iraqi memo from 1993 states that
J.U.I.'s secretary general "has a good relationship with our system
since 1981 and he is ready for any mission." Tefft said the memo shows
"another direct Iraq link to an al Qaeda group."

Iraq had also maintained a relationship with the Afghani Islamist
party since 1989, according to the memo. The "relationship was
improved and became directly between the leader, Hekmatyar and Iraq,"
it states, referring to Gulbuddin Hekmatyar, an Afghani warlord who
fought against the Soviet Union and current al Qaeda ally, according
to Tefft.

Last year, American authorities in Afghanistan ranked Hekmatyar third
on their most wanted list, behind only bin Laden and former Taliban
leader Mullah Omar. Hekmatyar represents "another Iraqi link to an al
Qaeda group," Tefft said. (See More Saddam Connections to al Qaeda)

The Iraqi intelligence documents also refer to terrorist groups
previously believed to have had links with Saddam Hussein. They
include the Palestine Liberation Front, a group dedicated to attacking
Israel, and according to the Iraqi memo, one with "an office in
Baghdad."

The Abu Nidal group, suspected by the CIA of having acted as
surrogates for Iraqi terrorist attacks, is also mentioned.

"The movement believes in political violence and assassinations," the
1993 Iraqi memo states in reference to the Abu Nidal organization. "We
have relationships with them since 1973. Currently, they have a
representative in the country. Monthly helps are given to them -- 20
thousand dinars - in addition to other supports," the memo explains.
(See Saddam's Connections to Palestinian Terror Groups)

Iraq not only built and maintained relationships with terrorist
groups, the documents show it appears to have trained terrorists as
well. Ninety-two individuals from various Middle Eastern countries are
listed on the papers.

Many are described as having "finished the course at M14," a reference
to an Iraqi intelligence agency, and to having "participated in Umm
El-Ma'arek," the Iraqi response to the U.S. invasion in 1991. The
author of the list notes that approximately half of the individuals
"all got trained inside the 'martyr act camp' that belonged to our
directorate."

The former UNSCOM weapons inspector who was asked to analyze the
documents believes it's clear that the Iraqis "were training people
there in assassination and suicide bombing techniques ... including
non-Iraqis."

SteveR

unread,
Mar 30, 2006, 3:34:34 PM3/30/06
to
In article <v5dn225hmcd8nnfh0...@4ax.com>,
Nicholas Name <spam...@spamblocked.com> wrote:

> On Wed, 29 Mar 2006 19:56:14 GMT, "gatt"
> <LiveFromTh...@gfy.com> wrote:

>
> > There are children, fathers, mothers and
> >GRANDPARENTS serving over there.
>

> > They're big boys and girls, fully aware
> >of what is expected of them.
>
> Really?
>
> And what might be "expected of them" when the reasons for the
> slaughter changes almost daily?

Bonehead argument number one.

Can you name a single "stated purpose" offered now that was not covered
prior to the invasion?



> > It's interesting watching people like you
> >likely never served assuming that you somehow know more about the military
> >experience and mission than those actually doing it.
> >
> >Tell us...do you presume to know more about flying than professional pilots?
> >If there's a midair collision, would you presume to know more about air
> >traffic control than ATC? If there's a housefire, do you presume to know
> >more about it than firefighters? If you need surgery, do you operate on
> >yourself? Or is it just the business of war that you know more about than
> >warriors and their families? Why is that?
>
> Despite the propaganda the average soldier is clueless about the
> political purpose he is used as a tool for.
>
> They do as they are told.

You're half-right, they do as they're told.

I know quite a few USMC, my kid was in Iraq. To the man, none of them
fit the "clueless" stereotype that is propogated by the leftosphere.

It's just the same old "if you don't agree with me, it's because you're
stupid" argument, applied to the military. Standard-issue boilerplate
rhetoric.

I will tell you what this rhetorical nonsense will get the left - even
fewer votes.

SteveR

unread,
Mar 30, 2006, 3:35:39 PM3/30/06
to
In article <kpeo22phgohmlm8qu...@4ax.com>,
Yosemite Sam <m...@flap.net> wrote:


When a lefty has to fall back on the "Bush twins aren't in the military"
schtick, they're falling on their own rhetorical sword.

Nicholas Name

unread,
Mar 30, 2006, 4:09:19 PM3/30/06
to
On Thu, 30 Mar 2006 20:18:16 GMT, Yosemite Sam <m...@flap.net> wrote:

>On Thu, 30 Mar 2006 03:01:16 -0800, Nicholas Name
><spam...@spamblocked.com> wrote:
>
>>The US has NEVER been attacked by Iraq
>
>http://www.cnsnews.com/SpecialReports/archive/200410/SPE20041004a.html
>
>They detail the Iraqi regime's purchase of five kilograms of mustard
>gas on Aug. 21, 2000 and three vials of malignant pustule, another
>term for anthrax, on Sept. 6, 2000. The purchase order for the mustard
>gas includes gas masks, filters and rubber gloves. The order for the
>anthrax includes sterilization and decontamination equipment. (See
>Saddam's Possession of Mustard Gas)

Was this suppolied by the US-as per usual?

Nothing in this article alters the fact that the USA has NEVER been
attacked by Iraq.

http://italy.indymedia.org/uploads/2003/02/rumsfeld-saddam.jpg

Nicholas Name

unread,
Mar 30, 2006, 4:33:07 PM3/30/06
to
On Thu, 30 Mar 2006 14:34:34 -0600, SteveR <tex_d...@comcast.net>
wrote:

>In article <v5dn225hmcd8nnfh0...@4ax.com>,
> Nicholas Name <spam...@spamblocked.com> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 29 Mar 2006 19:56:14 GMT, "gatt"
>> <LiveFromTh...@gfy.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> > There are children, fathers, mothers and
>> >GRANDPARENTS serving over there.
>>
>
>> > They're big boys and girls, fully aware
>> >of what is expected of them.
>>
>> Really?
>>
>> And what might be "expected of them" when the reasons for the
>> slaughter changes almost daily?
>
>Bonehead argument number one.
>
>Can you name a single "stated purpose" offered now that was not covered
>prior to the invasion?

Three Card Monte

http://www.pagat.com/misc/monte.html

This is not really a game, but a scam or swindle. Three Card Monte is
the American name for it. In Britain it is usually called Find the
Lady, and the equivalent French game is Bonneteau.

The appearance of the game is simple. It is played between the dealer
(or tosser), who manipulates the cards and takes the bets, and the
punter, a more or less gullible member of the public who places a bet
on the game in the (unrealistic) hope of winning some money.

The dealer has three cards, one of which is a queen. These cards are
shown to the punter and then simultaneously thrown face-down on a
table. The punter is invited to bet on which card is the queen. The
dealer will employ various tricks, often with the help of accomplices,
to ensure that the punter loses.

Normally the operators of the game work as a team:

* The Tosser (dealer) is the sleight of hand man who mixes the
cards and takes the bets
* The Shills are accomplices who pose as punters making bets, to
give real punters the impression that the game can be beaten
* The Lookout watches for cops (police) and signals their approach
so that the game can be "folded up" quickly
* The Muscle Man takes care of anyone who decides to complain
* The Roper seeks out likely punters and encourages them to join
the game

If you do happen to bet on the right card, the Tosser may employ
various tactics, such as accepting instead a wrong bet from a Shill
and refusing your bet on the grounds that only one bet can be taken at
a time, or swapping the cards while your attention is distracted, or
simply arranging for the table to be knocked over and declaring the
deal void.


>
>> > It's interesting watching people like you
>> >likely never served assuming that you somehow know more about the military
>> >experience and mission than those actually doing it.
>> >
>> >Tell us...do you presume to know more about flying than professional pilots?
>> >If there's a midair collision, would you presume to know more about air
>> >traffic control than ATC? If there's a housefire, do you presume to know
>> >more about it than firefighters? If you need surgery, do you operate on
>> >yourself? Or is it just the business of war that you know more about than
>> >warriors and their families? Why is that?
>>
>> Despite the propaganda the average soldier is clueless about the
>> political purpose he is used as a tool for.
>>
>> They do as they are told.
>
>You're half-right, they do as they're told.
>
>I know quite a few USMC, my kid was in Iraq. To the man, none of them
>fit the "clueless" stereotype that is propogated by the leftosphere.

I couldn't agree more thats why the majority want to come home and
not die for this political chimera.


Troops poll: Pull out of Iraq in six months

http://www.armytimes.com/story.php?f=1-292925-1566644.php

About half of American troops in Iraq believe the U.S. military should
leave the country within six months, and three out of four think they
should pull out within a year, according to a first-of-its-kind
attempt to scientifically gauge the opinion of troops in a war zone.

The poll, released on Tuesday by national pollster John Zogby,
includes face-to-face interviews of 944 randomly selected military
personnel at four large U.S. bases. Among the findings:


• 29 percent said U.S. troops should withdraw immediately. Another 22
percent said the U.S. should withdraw within six months, and 21
percent within a year. Just 23 percent said they believe troops should
remain “as long as they are needed.”

• 58 percent said the reasons for the U.S. mission in Iraq is clear in
their minds; 42 percent said it was unclear or they were unsure.

• 85 percent said they believed a main reason for invading Iraq was
“to retaliate for Saddam’s role in the 9/11 attacks.” That’s despite
the fact that there is very little concrete evidence linking Saddam
Hussein to al-Qaida, and that several independent inquiries have found
no links whatsoever between Saddam and the attacks on Sept. 11, 2001.

Zogby, a widely recognized pollster who has done work for NBC, the
Wall Street Journal and other organizations, conducted the poll for
the Le Moyne College of Syracuse, N.Y., his alma mater. He said he is
unaware of any previous attempts to independently and scientifically
poll troops deployed to a combat zone.

Stars and Stripes, an independent publication produced under the
auspices of the Defense Department, did an unscientific survey of
thousands of troops in 2003, finding low morale and other issues. In
January, the annual Military Times Poll — which surveys readers of the
Military Times papers as representative of career-oriented troops —
found support for the Bush administration’s policy in Iraq slipped
significantly in 2005.

Zogby said his poll used civilian surveyors to randomly select troops
for face-to-face interviews at four large U.S. bases in Iraq. The
technique is similar to those used by U.S. pollsters to perform exit
polls outside voting precincts on election day.

Zogby said he could not reveal more information on the personnel used
to perform the surveys, or specify which bases were polled, because of
concerns for the security of the interviewers.


>
>It's just the same old "if you don't agree with me, it's because you're
>stupid" argument, applied to the military. Standard-issue boilerplate
>rhetoric.

Interesting-

You criticize the mainstay of the Bush Administration's rationale?

>I will tell you what this rhetorical nonsense will get the left - even
>fewer votes.

yet it's the support for republicans that is hemorrhaging-


Republicans On The Run

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1176997,00.html

As midterm campaigns gear up, Bush's party fears a backlash that could
end its 12-year hold on the House


Iraq is driving nearly all the big indicators the wrong way for
Republicans. In a TIME poll conducted last week, Bush's job approval
rating was mired at 39%; 3 in 5 Americans said the country is headed
in the wrong direction, and when those surveyed were given the choice
between a generic Republican and a generic Democrat for Congress, the
nameless Democrat won, 50% to 41%. The signs suggest an
anti-Republican wave is building, says nonpartisan electoral
handicapper Stuart Rothenberg, whose Rothenberg Political Report is
closely followed in Washington. "The only question is how high, how
big, how much force it will have. I think it will be considerable."

Yosemite Sam

unread,
Mar 30, 2006, 5:04:42 PM3/30/06
to
On Thu, 30 Mar 2006 13:09:19 -0800, Nicholas Name
<spam...@spamblocked.com> wrote:

>Nothing in this article alters the fact that the USA has NEVER been
>attacked by Iraq.

http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/003/033jgqyi.asp

The CIA has confirmed, in interviews with detainees and informants it
finds highly credible, that al Qaeda's Number 2, Ayman al-Zawahiri,
met with Iraqi intelligence in Baghdad in 1992 and 1998. More
disturbing, according to an administration official familiar with
briefings the CIA has given President Bush, the Agency has
"irrefutable evidence" that the Iraqi regime paid Zawahiri $300,000 in
1998, around the time his Islamic Jihad was merging with al Qaeda.

* Iraqi defectors had been saying for years that Saddam's regime
trained "non-Iraqi Arab terrorists" at a camp in Salman Pak, south of
Baghdad. U.N. inspectors had confirmed the camp's existence, including
the presence of a Boeing 707. Defectors say the plane was used to
train hijackers; the Iraqi regime said it was used in counterterrorism
training. Sabah Khodada, a captain in the Iraqi Army, worked at Salman
Pak. In October 2001, he told PBS's "Frontline" about what went on
there. "Training is majorly on terrorism. They would be trained on
assassinations, kidnapping, hijacking of airplanes, hijacking of
buses, public buses, hijacking of trains and all other kinds of
operations related to terrorism. . . . All this training is directly
toward attacking American targets, and American interests."

But the Bush administration said little about Salman Pak as it
demonstrated links between Iraq and al Qaeda. According to
administration sources, some detainees who provided credible evidence
of other links between Iraq and al Qaeda, including training in
terrorism and WMD, insist they have no knowledge of Salman Pak.
Khodada, the Iraqi army captain, also professed ignorance of whether
the trainees were members of al Qaeda. "Nobody came and told us, 'This
is al Qaeda people,'" he explained, "but I know there were some
Saudis, there were some Afghanis. There were some other people from
other countries getting trained."

* On February 13, 2003, the government of the Philippines asked Hisham
al Hussein, the second secretary of the Iraqi embassy in Manila, to
leave the country. According to telephone records obtained by
Philippine intelligence, Hussein had been in frequent contact with two
leaders of Abu Sayyaf, an al Qaeda affiliate in South Asia,
immediately before and immediately after they detonated a bomb in
Zamboanga City. That attack killed two Filipinos and an American
Special Forces soldier and injured several others. Hussein left the
Philippines for Iraq after he was "PNG'd"--declared persona non
grata--by the Philippine government and has not been heard from since.

According to a report in the Christian Science Monitor, an Abu Sayyaf
leader who planned the attack bragged on television a month after the
bombing that Iraq had contacted him about conducting joint operations.
Philippine intelligence officials were initially skeptical of his
boasting, but after finding the telephone records they believed him.

* No fewer than five high-ranking Czech officials have publicly
confirmed that Mohammed Atta, the lead September 11 hijacker, met with
Ahmed Khalil Ibrahim al-Ani, an Iraqi intelligence officer working at
the Iraqi embassy, in Prague five months before the hijacking. Media
leaks here and in the Czech Republic have called into question whether
Atta was in Prague on the key dates--between April 4 and April 11,
2001. And several high-ranking administration officials are "agnostic"
as to whether the meeting took place. Still, the public position of
the Czech government to this day is that it did.

That assertion should be seen in the context of Atta's curious
stop-off in Prague the previous spring, as he traveled to the United
States. Atta flew to Prague from Germany on May 30, 2000, but did not
have a valid visa and was denied entry. He returned to Germany,
obtained the proper paperwork, and took a bus back to Prague. One day
later, he left for the United States.

Nicholas Name

unread,
Mar 30, 2006, 5:17:27 PM3/30/06
to

Ah yes- these wonderful "credible sources " that told us of all the
WMD that could produce mushroom clouds in the USA.


http://www.armytimes.com/story.php?f=1-292925-1566644.php

It was all lies- time you dealt with THAT rather than this pathetic
retroactive spinning.

About half of American troops in Iraq believe the U.S. military should
leave the country within six months, and three out of four think they
should pull out within a year, according to a first-of-its-kind
attempt to scientifically gauge the opinion of troops in a war zone.

Sanders Kaufman

unread,
Mar 30, 2006, 5:17:47 PM3/30/06
to
"Lobby Dosser" <lobby.dos...@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:eUPWf.11663$Od7.7912@trnddc06...
> Nicholas Name <spam...@spamblocked.com> wrote:

There is no legal recourse.

Sanders Kaufman

unread,
Mar 30, 2006, 5:17:47 PM3/30/06
to
"SteveR" <tex_d...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:tex_driver-A2BB8...@comcast.dca.giganews.com...
> Nicholas Name <spam...@spamblocked.com> wrote:

>> And what might be "expected of them" when the reasons for the
>> slaughter changes almost daily?
>
> Bonehead argument number one.
> Can you name a single "stated purpose" offered now that was not covered
> prior to the invasion?

You ask that very insincere question a lot.

Here's some of the reasons you creeps give now, that you did not give
before:
- To "stand up" the Iraqi military.
- To "rebuild" what was destroyed (by the US).
- To put down the insurgency.

In fact, prior to the war, you creeps failed to realize they would resist.
You thought they were gonna welcome US death squads with flowers and kisses.


--
That's why all those soldiers you don't care about have to die tonight.


.

Yosemite Sam

unread,
Mar 30, 2006, 5:28:26 PM3/30/06
to
On Thu, 30 Mar 2006 22:17:47 GMT, "Sanders Kaufman"
<bu...@kaufman.net> wrote:

>That's why all those soldiers you don't care about have to die tonight.

> May GOD BLESS and keep the Wetback.
> Now, getoff your ass and go kill a Wetback
> That way we'll all enjoy a double blessing - one less illegal alien
> and one thrown away piece of white trash.

Yosemite Sam

unread,
Mar 30, 2006, 5:28:42 PM3/30/06
to
On Thu, 30 Mar 2006 22:17:47 GMT, "Sanders Kaufman"
<bu...@kaufman.net> wrote:

>There is no legal recourse.