Alleged links between Iraq and Al-Qaeda unravelling?

[Crazed Rabbit]

How does that relate to ....so far not a single al-quaeda operative has been an iraqi, either. ?

Hmm. Let's think about this a bit. it shouldn't take longer than 1/7825 of a second to come to the right conclusion:
He's a terrorist, claiming allegiance to Al Queda, and he's in Iraq orchestrating terrorist attacks.

Now since the whole story centred on him getting treatment after losing his leg , yet he still has both legs , just shows it to be bull .

Where did it say he got treatment for a lost leg, and how are you so well informed of his current health?

Crazed Rabbit

[Redleg]

Hmm. Let's think about this a bit. it shouldn't take longer than 1/7825 of a second to come to the right conclusion:
He's a terrorist, claiming allegiance to Al Queda, and he's in Iraq orchestrating terrorist attacks.

You only got part of the answer correct - he is from a different country so he is not Iraqi. However your headed in the right direction.

Where did it say he got treatment for a lost leg, and how are you so well informed of his current health?

Crazed Rabbit

It was in a much earlier article - no one really knows - which means neither does Tribesman.

[Tribesman]

It was in a much earlier article - no one really knows - which means neither does Tribesman.
Yeah must be my drink addled faulty memory , it means I cannot remember what government , military and intelligence people spoke publicly about a couple of years ago on numerous occasions .
So the "article" you refer to is public statements by your government , not media stories .
Of course the media never reports the truth just bull to drive up the circulation and fool the idiots that read only the one source of information.
Of course when they are showing live coverage of people making these false statements the media is only making it up right

Now think about it Tribesman its not hard
Since the article is about false claims from before the invasion then what is the relevance of events after the invasion ?
Its like slashing someones tyres and telling them that they had always been flat .
Besides which there was Al-qaida in Iraq before the invasion , but it was in the area run by Kurdish terrorists and protected by Britain and America .

Where did it say he got treatment for a lost leg
Come on Rabbit , surely you can remember a failure of intelligence of that magnitude , it was only when the bastard starting releasing videos that they realised that they were not looking for a one legged terrorist .

[Redleg]

It was in a much earlier article - no one really knows - which means neither does Tribesman.
Yeah must be my drink addled faulty memory , it means I cannot remember what government , military and intelligence people spoke publicly about a couple of years ago on numerous occasions .
So the "article" you refer to is public statements by your government , not media stories .

LOL - your reaching - article means nothing other then that it was reported in the news. But nice try there. So yep the achocal has indeed effected your ability to reason.

Of course the media never reports the truth just bull to drive up the circulation and fool the idiots that read only the one source of information.
Of course when they are showing live coverage of people making these false statements the media is only making it up right

Oh so you didn't like your little game being played back at you. Tsk tsk.. Try again. The comeback here is so far beneath your normal ability - you must be on the sauce tonight more then usual.

Now think about it Tribesman its not hard
Since the article is about false claims from before the invasion then what is the relevance of events after the invasion ?
Its like slashing someones tyres and telling them that they had always been flat .
Besides which there was Al-qaida in Iraq before the invasion , but it was in the area run by Kurdish terrorists and protected by Britain and America .

And since I was responding to Solypsist's post you will have to do better then that for a counter. Since you just proved that Al-Qadea had Iraqi operatives since the Kurds in Northern Iraq are indeed Iraqi citizens also. Remember [b]Solypsists initial comment was
so far not a single al-quaeda operative has been an iraqi, either.

But your not even close to what I initially meet - so try again if you can. Here is another clue - how can a terrorist cell function and not be discovered?


Ah the persecution complex must be in over-drive tonight since you missed the orginial intent so completly.

[Tribesman]

The comeback here is so far beneath your normal ability
Well when you only put out rubbish is it worth the effort , like.....
Of course the media never reports the truth
Thats a pretty absolute statement isn't it , absolute rubbish .

article means nothing other then that it was reported in the news.
So any statement by anyone becomes false the moment the media repeat it .
Though in this case the statement was false even if it hadn't been repeated , just like most of the statements made about Iraq before the invasion .

Since you just proved that Al-Qadea had Iraqi operatives since the Kurds in Northern Iraq are indeed Iraqi citizens also.
So that means that Britain and America were linked to Al-Qaida rather than Saddams Iraq as in 2001 when Ansar al Islam set up there Saddam was not in control of the area , foriegn backed terrorists were (almost said western backed there , but of course there are many backers of the various groups), under the protection of the western military , BTW you might want to insert the word "some" into that statement as many of the Kurds in N.Iraq are not Iraqi citizens .

how can a terrorist cell function and not be discovered?

The best way is to have the population so shit scared of you that they don't turn you in , so does that mean that the population are "operatives" ?

[Soulforged]

Wait a second, I appear to have all the picture wrong in my head:
1- Bush admited that they didn't found any connections between Saddam Hussein and terrorists organizations, right after the attack (when actions seemed justified btw). And that they attacked with little solid proof of it.
2- Later someone of his administration did the same with the weapons of mass destruction.
3- Bush and his administration admitted later that they invented all this false founds, only to jutify the attack. Not to mention that the enemy was created previously, and also that the supposed all armed emperor uncle Saddam was disarmed after the war in the '90.

So why is that this is discussed even now?

[Redleg]

The comeback here is so far beneath your normal ability
Well when you only put out rubbish is it worth the effort , like.....
Of course the media never reports the truth
Thats a pretty absolute statement isn't it , absolute rubbish .

LOL

article means nothing other then that it was reported in the news.
So any statement by anyone becomes false the moment the media repeat it .
Though in this case the statement was false even if it hadn't been repeated , just like most of the statements made about Iraq before the invasion .

Nice try but that isn't what I said. try again.

Since you just proved that Al-Qadea had Iraqi operatives since the Kurds in Northern Iraq are indeed Iraqi citizens also.
So that means that Britain and America were linked to Al-Qaida rather than Saddams Iraq as in 2001 when Ansar al Islam set up there Saddam was not in control of the area , foriegn backed terrorists were (almost said western backed there , but of course there are many backers of the various groups), under the protection of the western military , BTW you might want to insert the word "some" into that statement as many of the Kurds in N.Iraq are not Iraqi citizens .

Getting warm, yes indeed a decent part of the Kurdish population in Northern Iraq come from another country or two - but a significant portion are indeed also Iraqi citizens.

how can a terrorist cell function and not be discovered?

The best way is to have the population so shit scared of you that they don't turn you in , so does that mean that the population are "operatives" ?

Ah your getting very close - but no cigar yet. And to answer your queston - no that is not what it means.

[JAG]

There clearly was a link, we were told. Have some of that you liberal wussies!

[Tribesman]

Nice try but that isn't what I said. try again.

Don't be silly Red ...Its plain what you said and it is rubbish
Of course the media never reports the truth just bull to drive up
If it never reports the truth then everything it reports must be false .......So any statement by anyone is false the moment the media report it , or if it is true it isn't reported .

Hence......Thats a pretty absolute statement isn't it , absolute rubbish .

But anyway those claims of links appear on official documents as well as in the media . They were untrue at the time and still are , that is the topic at hand .


So why is that this is discussed even now?
I think it might be because of the mid-term elections coming up ,some people are trying to remind voters that the Administration are a bunch of decietful fools who got them into an expensive quagmire over a pile of bullshit .
Expect plenty more of it to be filling the airwaves in the coming months .There is certainly no shortage of material to use .