OT: Al Qaeda German links exposed

One cannot but wonder if the Bader-Meinhof brigades are coming back to life...

Your link gave a completely blank page. So if that's what you wanted to say....

That's Baader-Meinhof to you, 'Trailer Trash' Koren.

Ah. I see.

But since when do you rely on the French Interior Minister for your

You've got him there!!

regards, SG ( :

It's not the loss of an 'a', it's just the evidence that you don't know shit what you're talking about, trailer trash.

Only when they say something about German terrorists...

Whatever it may be?

One can always hope if one wants, of course, but I seriously doubt it. The nuclear story was one reason on a long list of reasons. It wasn't like that single Niger story was the only or even the most publicized element in the anti-Iraq case. If anybody will prove leaders have lied with prior knowledge and cynicism, that's deplorable of course, and it may have consequences (nowhere in the vicinity of the Watergate scandal level, that's only liberal wishful thinking). If they asked a simple man (but who'd have cared to ask?), the leaders of the Coalition should have insisted on the humanitarian aspects of the anti-Saddam case rather than on the disarming ones, even before all the hitherto unknown atrocities committed by the Saddamic regime were added to the record of the already known ones. The uncovered mass graves from Kirkuk, with the remains of 200 children buried alive, only one in an extraordinary list of atrocities, sound as enough of a reason to depose a Saddam Hussein, to many Americans who couldn't care less whether somewhere in the chain of communication between intelligence agencies and policy enforcers some less than reliable information was used, alongside lots of reliable information, to enforce the case of a 'regime change', which reality on the field shows now was strong as steel and, if anything, irresponsibly delayed and somewhat tardive. On one hand, for the sake of the credibility of the US in the world, I hope it is not true and provable that falsified evidence has been used deliberately by democratic leaders. On the other hand, rushed attempts on the Democrat side to create a storm in a teapot pinning an as yet unproven 'lie' on GWB might backfire too. . . if Americans will feel their present President was slandered with little reason. . . or if they feel that petty technicalities, rather than the alleged revelation of blatant lies, were being used to suggest that Saddam should have been left in power to this day.

regards,

I don't think it is liberal wishful thinking. I'd argue that your position is wishful thinking. This is serious, and it has extremely serious implications for the future of our democracy. The ends never justify the means, or so I've been told.

If they asked a simple man (but

But they didn't. That's the point. Now that's their cover story. But that's not what they did at all. Had they gone that route, they could have had Hussein indicted for Crimes Against Humanity, and actually had a basis for building support for his removal in the Muslim world. But that would have taken time and patience, and this crew had an agenda and a political timetable, with everything pointing to November 2004.

I agree that there are Americans who do not care. I'd argue that they have a simplistic understanding of events, as simplistic as the people who blame Israel and America for everything that has gone wrong with their governments, and in their lives. They are comfortable with the cover story, like the Palestinians who support Hamas' attacks rather than their new Prime Minister efforts to create a lasting peace.

On one hand, for the sake of the credibility of the US

If he did this, then slander will not be an issue, but rightful shame and condemnation will be.

Matt C