Wake up!! Islam is coming in your back door.

Originally posted by Trustnone
Souljah, whats your PROBLEM? what do you know of islam? are you a muslim? It may sound stereotypical but this is the behavior i see from muslims. I see few making any attempt to end this war.

Dude, everything you said is right on the money.


Maximu§

posted by alfred e neuman:Kudos to you paperclip - truly!! Please know that not all christians are xenophobic racists, just as not all followers of Mohammed are terrorists[/qoute]As a christian I totally agree with that statement

I got this from The West Wing(tv show)Islamic terrorist is to Islam as KKK is to christianity...seems to apply here. Hating another human being who is searching for GOD and wanting to please GOD, because they don't agree with your view of how to do that, is ignorance plain and simple.

I only hope muslims aren't so close minded as to judge all christians based on what someone in the KKK does or some ultra conservative radical christian does, as has been done here by lumping all muslims together with the radical minority of there religion......IMO

Good point Rren, on the KKK to christianity, since to be in the KKK you have to be christian, no jews or athiests allowed.

ANyways, just more "kill anyone who won't take it from a priest" trolling.

Don't Feed the Trolls.

And lately don't give them cigarettes, that was funny, a chimp smoking.

Muslims: 5 - 7 Million members in the U.S.

Catholics: 64 Million members in the U.S.

Christians: About 3/4 adults call themselves Christians in the U.S. (May include Catholic denomination).

Anyways, what I'm trying to say here is its not a big deal. If they were trying to overthrow our country as a whole, then it would be. Since they aren't, I like Muslims. I find that discussing the similarities between Islam and Christianity to be fascinating.

In fact, if you pay attention, Judaism, Christianity, and Islam are very alike indeed.

-wD

we dont mandate that jews and non-christians must be put to the sword.

Neither does Islam. They are "People of the Book" and must be respected.

Originally posted by stumason

we dont mandate that jews and non-christians must be put to the sword.

Neither does Islam. They are "People of the Book" and must be respected.

You are incorrect Stumason. The teachings of the Qur'an are very clear about not befriending Jews and Christians. It very clearly deliniates between believers (Muslims) vs non-believers (everyone else) and that other than making attempts to convert non-believers, Muslims should not associate with them as [Theirs is the path of darkness and their destiny is the fire where they will abide therein]. It is very intolerant of non-muslims and their beliefs. I can post here a plethera of Quranic references supporting my position but somehow I think it would make little difference.

In any case, one could argue that it's simply how one interprets those references. The problem is that the so-called "extreme interpretation" by a tiny minority of Islamists under-estimates by a significant number the extent of the problem. I placed extreme interpretation in quotes because when I read the Qur'an it's not extreme at all. Literal perhaps, but not extreme.

I can post here a plethera of Quranic references supporting my position but somehow I think it would make little difference.

I am sure you can, however, I am sure that I could do the same from the Bible as well.

Personally, I am more bothered by the Jehovas and Mormons that come knocking at my door, uninvited, and try and preach to me crap from the Bible.

Never (and I work with Muslims and live in an area with alot of Muslims) have I been subjected to an attempted conversion or preaching from a Muslim.

Having said that, there are intergration problems with Muslims in that some do not (and will not) speak English and i am forced to find another school for when my daughter grows older as the local ones are full of Muslim children (nothing racist, but I think she should be in a balanced cultural mix rather than surrounded by those of a completely different culture).

hey thanks Maximus for some support and freedom for sum thanks for posting what the quran really says. Sometimes i feel like i get unnecesarily slamed because i am not with the popular anti-war, anti-american sentiment. I have known to many people who have sacrificed so much for our country and i feel the least i could do is support them and our country. Honor seems to be a forgotten concept.

Originally posted by Trustnone
Paperclip, whats your problem with christianity? If you'd like to become a muslim than go right ahead, wrap a turbin around your face and shoot guns in the air, rape women and children and become utter scum. islam is about one thing and it's not peace.

This is utter BS.

(Take note here Souljah)

You can not condemn the BILLION or so Muslims as "utter scum" for the actions of a relatively few insane fanatics. Your own words show you for what you are.

Are all Christians child molesters because a handful of Priests are?

I can point out where in the CHRISTIAN BIBLE it says to put unbelievers to the sword, do ALL Christians follow that?

How about those that Murder Gays and Abortion Docs in the Name of God?

How about the BTK killer?

The Spanish Inqusition, the Crusades, the Murder and enslavement of the American Indians in the name of God?

Are these the "typical" Christian?

I dont think so.

And neither is your description the "typical" Muslim



[edit on 29-4-2005 by Amuk]

I've never claimed that ALL Muslims are violent or evil. In fact, I acknowledge that most Muslims are peace-loving. My question is: Are they peace-loving BECAUSE of Islam, or IN SPITE of Islam. I believe the latter is true based on what I've read in the Qur'an and Hadith.

You're not acknowledging that most muslims are peace loving; you are stating that most Muslims are peace loving for reasons which are fostered by a deep sense of isolation from true Islamic ethos which will quite obviously never manifest into reality in current society. Your belief seems to stem a great sense of urgency to place blame on societies dependency to accept foriegn creeds which you find utterly abhorant for reasons which seem unwholly accountable to logical deduction. The Qu'ran and the Hadith are not materials which seem to be universaly acceptable in the current globalized society, however, even the most pacifist creeds such as Vedicsm, Sikhism, Buddhism, Shintoism, to the philosophical disourses of the west, seem to be unable to manifest themselves as dictates. You can't come to the conclusions that those peace loving Muslims you percieve are as such in spite of Islam due to material you read which was written over a thousand years ago, to do as such is ignorant and proves your disillusionment.

Paperclip, whats your problem with christianity? If you'd like to become a muslim than go right ahead, wrap a turbin around your face and shoot guns in the air, rape women and children and become utter scum. islam is about one thing and it's not peace.

She has no problem with Christianity, not that I see nor did anyone in this thread other then yourself. Paperclip simply asserted that Islamic clerics are expressing thier right to organization of expression of opinions without goverment involvment which would revoke such rights. Paperclip is simply asserting that the modicum of Islamic clerics which have an ultra-conservative countenance and bias and would rather see Islam as the dominate authority in America then participate in inter-religious organizations where they can express their opinions on American society and how Islam could participate through a forum of productive and positive dialouge.

I'm a Sikh and I wear a turban, as do countless other creeds and nationalities, why you would try to use that as line of detration is beyond me. The turban, according to some, is a sign of devotion, and to others, simply the equivlent of a ball cap.

I would also stress that you check up on the cases of rape that occure in America by non-Islamic persons, it may do your highly ignorant mind some justice.

Well then Paperclip--I'll pose the same question to you as I did earlier: What's your opinion on Sura 4:34? Do you believe that women are the weaker sex and deserving of beatings as punishment by their men?

What are you asserting here? It's just plain stupid and you're trying to illicit a response fostered by deep emotions and pity, not logic. Yes, it's quite certain that Islamic doctrine is not tatamount to current standards set by western countries in regards to parity, however, if I may be so bold as to ask, when did Sweden allow women vote? When did America give African Americans and women equal rights? Are women still payed equaly in America as thier male counterparts? Why are many household product commercials still using women to market thier products? Are they still stating that women are the sole users of household cleaners? Do tell me, what sort of rights did the great Saul of Taurus --Paul-- grant women in ancient Rome? Or the Judiac teachings which allowed for the stoning of women who were raped? May I bring forth evidence for you? Regardless, what was the point in this when it had nothing to do with the topic at hand: Islamic clerics advocating thier right to expression and organization.

So then what you're saying is that you can pick and choose those parts of the Qur'an you wish to follow? That's not very Islamic.

Something we both agree on, however, allow me to fill in the blanks; it's human nature to stray from status quo, or did you forget that? How many religious followers do you see truely devoted to the words codified in thier religious scriptures? Are you angry that Many Muslims here in the west tend to disregard the violent and opressive verses of thier holy book? Seems as such. Would you rather them not and propogate this so called violence you see in the Qu'ran? Maybe it's simply due to the reason that globalization has brought an era of universalization of values, ethics, and morality? Maybe many Muslims understand that Islam is a faith which cannot be wholly followed in current society, but due to some conceptual habituation and desire to preserve thier culture for future generations, they still superficialy practice, or did you not think about that? You're not thinking too criticaly are you?

In currents events around the world, Islamic terrorism is up 300% since 2003. You don't hear of Christians decapitating and blowing up innocent people in the name of God. It was because of the actions of these Muslims that I became compelled to read the Qur'an. I was surprised to find their actions were by and large supported by what the Qur'an and Hadith both say.

You've made enough assumptions for today, you should be the last to chide others for making assumptions. As for being surprised, well, I doubt you were, if anything, I'm quite sure you were hoping that it would be substantiated to fuel your illogical discourse. Now do tell me, do you really believe that Islamic terrorism spawned from doctrine, or a deep sense of socio-political unrest and deeply rooted xenophobia coulped with sheer fear of opression? Do you believe that Iraqies beheading innocents is due to Allahs will, or due to the fact that utter anarchy and war was raged in thier country for reasons not wholly accountable? I, too, would be angry if a foreign country sold my dictator chemical weapons and vetoed resolutions against such actions by the U.N, and wholly disregarded the fact that he opressed my people to the closed eyes of the world.

I disagree that this is a past vs. present form of Islam. Islam is intertwined with its own set of laws called the Sharia. Those laws are based on the Qur'an and Hadith. As far as a woman's place in Islam, for example, her testimony is not given the same value as a man's in an Islamic court.

That's interesting to hear you know your islamic theology, now, do tell me, how many Islamic women are opressed in America, and what it has to do with anything?

I dont believe it does simply because for Islam to exist in its pure form, Sharia must accompany it. Islamic law is completely inconsistent with our constitutional law. The problem, however, is that organizations, such as CAIR, are using our civil laws to squash some protections provided under the Consitution. The result of this is a clash of cultures.

Instead of assimilating into their host nation's culture, immigrated Muslims instead foist their own culture on every one else.

I find it ironic that while Islam may be the fastest growing religion right now (there is some debate whether some of these conversions are willful or forceful) much of the conversions are taking place in prison.

Islam can and did exist without the advent of Sharia, but obviously you never picked this up. Sharia is used here in my city of Edmonton in luie of expensive court apearences and lawyers, and in all my short life --22 years-- I've never come across cases of women being opressed, if anything, it does occur, and it does in myraid of creeds like my own, Sikhism, which extols women as goddesses and grants them equal rights, and if you do some more research into Sikhism, you would be surprised to see the existence of Sikh terrorist who commited the greatest act of terrorism in Canada.

Once again, this little paragraph made too many assumptions which out evidence; the melting pot which is America also enforced thier culture and values on native Americans when they first arrived in this country, and it's leaders walk hand in hand with Saudi Arabian princes who treat women like inferior beings, but i'm sure you forgot that too. Germans, Pols, Swedes, Frenchies, Punjabies, Fijans, Pakistanies, Mexicans, they all refuse to assimilate into thier host countries, this is a fact of life which you will eventualy realize, and it's a matter of fact that many of these peoples have a dispostion to adhere thier cultures to the one of thier host countries.

I would also like to see these debates that prisoners are forced to covert to Islam, and that most of them occure in prison, and furthermore, what point must be taken that they take place in prison.

'm not Christian; but as an American I would blow people up (under military direction) for freedom and democracy including fighting for other's freedoms. You're free today because of it--ENJOY!! We did it in Kosovo for Kosovars--WHO ARE MUSLIM!!.

I'm not free becuase of you, nor are those hundreds of thousands under dicatorships your countries has abetted including Saddam Husain. You can blow up whoever you want, but the very fact that you stated this first and did consider bringing freedom and democracy under different avenues speaks volumes..

If we didn't fight for freedom Ace--we'd all likely be speaking German today. Who are you going to rely on? France?? HAHAHAHAHA

Were I not a vulcun, I may have lauged at that 'joke', however, it should realized that the French did help you win your civil war with a good number of thier soldiers, 90 percent of the gun powder you used, and millions of dollars; and when the war had finaly ended at Yorktown, the redcoats were surrounded by more french troops than colonists, but i'm sure you forget that aswell.

I'm not going to responsd to the rest of this the idiotic dribble I saw propounded by Trustnoone.

Deep

This thread is about as worthless as they get. As I type this there are Christian extremists lobbying in D.C. trying to get their way towards turning the U.S. into a Christian nation. Daily there are reports in the paper about homosexuals being banned from this or that. Its all due to Christianity and its prejudices. The biggest religions of our contemporary world are constantly attempting to exert more of their influence which includes Islam. Nothing new there.

As we have heard so often these days: "GET OVER IT!"

[edit on 29-4-2005 by Frith]

Deep; I am having extreme difficulty following your writing as it is repleat with run-on sentences and contradictory expressions. But none-the-less, I will attempt to respond to each of your points.

Freedom_for_sum said:
I've never claimed that ALL Muslims are violent or evil. In fact, I acknowledge that most Muslims are peace-loving. My question is: Are they peace-loving BECAUSE of Islam, or IN SPITE of Islam. I believe the latter is true based on what I've read in the Qur'an and Hadith.

ZeroDeep Said:
You're not acknowledging that most muslims are peace loving; you are stating that most Muslims are peace loving for reasons...

So I guess I am acknowledging and have stated that most Muslims are peace-loving.

ZeroDeep Said:
...which are fostered by a deep sense of isolation from true Islamic ethos which will quite obviously never manifest into reality in current society. .

Isolation from or an unwillingness to follow true islamic ethos? I don't know. But I do know that Muslims who are "Literalists", that is, they follow the Qur'an/Hadith as literal instruction, consider "moderate Muslims" as apostates and are therefore worthy of the same treatment as any non-believer.

ZeroDeep Said:
The Qu'ran and the Hadith are not materials which seem to be universaly acceptable in the current globalized society, however, even the most pacifist creeds such as Vedicsm, Sikhism, Buddhism, Shintoism, to the philosophical disourses of the west, seem to be unable to manifest themselves as dictates. You can't come to the conclusions that those peace loving Muslims you percieve are as such in spite of Islam due to material you read which was written over a thousand years ago, to do as such is ignorant and proves your disillusionment.

They are not universally accepted because the human spirit naturally seeks out free-will--which Islam doesn't allow for. Simply look to those nations that are under Islamic rule for examples. Why do you think there are so many Muslims in Europe, Canada, and the US? The one thing Islamic nations have in common is the oppression of free-will. Yet, like a woman unable to leave her abuser, Immigrated Muslims seem unable to abandon the very ideology that oppressed them to begin with; choosing instead to grasp on to the only belief system they've known since childhood.

ZeroDeep Said:
I would also stress that you check up on the cases of rape that occure in America by non-Islamic persons, it may do your highly ignorant mind some justice.

American law provides for severe punishment for rape and a woman's testimony is given the same value as a man's. Under Islamic law, a woman who is raped is dishonored and since such a low value is placed on her testimony, she often has extreme difficulty proving her case. Instead, she could find herself down-range of a stoning for her "participation" in adultery or pre-marital sex.

Freedum_for_sum said
Well then Paperclip--I'll pose the same question to you as I did earlier: What's your opinion on Sura 4:34? Do you believe that women are the weaker sex and deserving of beatings as punishment by their men?

ZeroDeep Said:
What are you asserting here? It's just plain stupid and you're trying to illicit a response fostered by deep emotions and pity, not logic. Yes, it's quite certain that Islamic doctrine is not tatamount to current standards set by western countries in regards to parity, however, if I may be so bold as to ask, when did Sweden allow women vote? When did America give African Americans and women equal rights? Are women still payed equaly in America as thier male counterparts? Why are many household product commercials still using women to market thier products? Are they still stating that women are the sole users of household cleaners? Do tell me, what sort of rights did the great Saul of Taurus --Paul-- grant women in ancient Rome? Or the Judiac teachings which allowed for the stoning of women who were raped? May I bring forth evidence for you? Regardless, what was the point in this when it had nothing to do with the topic at hand: Islamic clerics advocating thier right to expression and organization.

I am asserting that under Islam women are not equal. My question was put to PaperClip because she is a Muslim women and I wanted to get her opinion on 4:34.

America is a relatively young country and it took awhile to advance constitutional protections to women and blacks. But before this there was no religious doctrine preventing their rights. Islamic nations have been around for thousands of years and they still don't have it right.
As far as slavery is concerned; this was purely economic. Just as it is purely economic to market houshold cleaners primarily to women--Generally, they are cleaner and men are slobs.

Islamic clerics excercising there freedom of expression by preaching America-hating doctrine to their followers? My question is: If they hate America so much, why are they here?

By Freedom_for_sum:
So then what you're saying is that you can pick and choose those parts of the Qur'an you wish to follow? That's not very Islamic.

ZeroDeep Said
Something we both agree on, however, allow me to fill in the blanks; it's human nature to stray from status quo, or did you forget that?

Was never aware of that.

ZeroDeep Said
How many religious followers do you see truely devoted to the words codified in thier religious scriptures?

Let's see; the Taliban comes to mind, as does Saudi Arabia, Al Qaeda(sp), Somalia. Geez--I could go on.

ZeroDeep Said
Are you angry that Many Muslims here in the west tend to disregard the violent and opressive verses of thier holy book? Seems as such.

No. I'm grateful they disregard them. By the way, thanks for acknowledging that the Qur'an has violent and oppressive text.

ZeroDeep Said
Maybe it's simply due to the reason that globalization has brought an era of universalization of values, ethics, and morality? .

Indeed, the world is getting smaller due to global economy, internet, satelite communications, air travel etc. The smaller it gets the more clashes of culture we're going to see. Islamic nations seem unable to change to accomodate this global shrinkage--primarily due to the intolerant nature of Islam.

ZeroDeep Said
Maybe many Muslims understand that Islam is a faith which cannot be wholly followed in current society, but due to some conceptual habituation and desire to preserve thier culture for future generations, they still superficialy practice, or did you not think about that?

Hmmm. Conceptual habituation. I defer to my previous statement about women unable to leave their abusers.

ZeroDeep Said
Now do tell me, do you really believe that Islamic terrorism spawned from doctrine,...

Yes

ZeroDeep Said
...or a deep sense of socio-political unrest and deeply rooted xenophobia coulped with sheer fear of opression?

There are many Muslims who believe that our presence, whether civillian or military, on Arab soil is oppression and therefore feel justified to invoke Jihad.

ZeroDeep Said
Do you believe that Iraqies beheading innocents is due to Allahs will, or due to the fact that utter anarchy and war was raged in thier country for reasons not wholly accountable? I, too, would be angry if a foreign country sold my dictator chemical weapons and vetoed resolutions against such actions by the U.N, and wholly disregarded the fact that he opressed my people to the closed eyes of the world.

It's not Iraqis doing the beheadings. They are insurgents from other Islamic nations, such as Syria and Egypt. The Iraqis are generally grateful that we liberated them from Sadam Hussein.

By Freedom_for_sum
'm not Christian; but as an American I would blow people up (under military direction) for freedom and democracy including fighting for other's freedoms. You're free today because of it--ENJOY!! We did it in Kosovo for Kosovars--WHO ARE MUSLIM!!.

ZeroDeep Said
I'm not free becuase of you, nor are those hundreds of thousands under dicatorships your countries has abetted including Saddam Husain. You can blow up whoever you want, but the very fact that you stated this first and did consider bringing freedom and democracy under different avenues speaks volumes..

That statement was directed toward AceofBase, who I believe is American. I'm not sure I understand the rest of your statement.

ZeroDeep Said
Were I not a vulcun, I may have lauged at that 'joke', however, it should realized that the French did help you win your civil war with a good number of thier soldiers, 90 percent of the gun powder you used, and millions of dollars; and when the war had finaly ended at Yorktown, the redcoats were surrounded by more french troops than colonists, but i'm sure you forget that aswell.

I don't know what you mean by "vulcun".

Go back to your history books. The French had nothing to do with the civil war. It was the Revolutionary War in which they provided assistance--and we paid them back in 1944. It's too bad we are no longer on the same page.

Sorry I couldn't comment on every point you made--it was too long and I ran outta time.

[edit on 30-4-2005 by Freedom_for_sum]

Originally posted by Trustnone
Souljah, whats your PROBLEM? what do you know of islam? are you a muslim? It may sound stereotypical but this is the behavior i see from muslims. I see few making any attempt to end this war.

How many Muslims do You know?

To how many Muslims have You talked 2 in your Life?

What do you even know about Islam & Muslim, which you havent learned from Fox News?

And, no I am not a Muslim. But I do know them better than U, I see.

Originally posted by LA_Maximus

Originally posted by Trustnone
Souljah, whats your PROBLEM? what do you know of islam? are you a muslim? It may sound stereotypical but this is the behavior i see from muslims. I see few making any attempt to end this war.

Dude, everything you said is right on the money.

Maximu§

WRONG!

Souljah, whats your PROBLEM?
My problem is Your president Bush and his Burning Desire to Rule this World with his Daddy.

what do you know of islam?
More than you

are you a muslim?
No.

It may sound stereotypical but this is the behavior i see from muslims. I see few making any attempt to end this war.
And Christians are really making a BIG effort to end This War?


PS: Read what AMUK said above.

[edit on 30/4/05 by Souljah]

Islam being established around 600 A.D. by the prophet muhammed who claimed to have spoken to the angel Gabriel. He revealed god's word to muhammed who later recorded it. Muhammed was in his 40's i think and first converted some family members in the mecca area before being chased out and fled to medina. any way soljah this right of the top of my head but a good book for you to read would be "why i am not a muslim" concerning some descrepensies in in the koran. While i will not make such an ignorant statement like "i know more than you" etc. and i am not muslim but there are a number of things i do know about it. some of the pillars of islam etc. please dont assume that because i disagree with islam i know nothing of it. liberals know little of it either.


By the way we did not start this war, they did after 9/11 and declared a holy war on us.

[edit on 30-4-2005 by Trustnone]

By the way we did not start this war, they did after 9/11 and declared a holy war on us.

Define this "they". The way your talking it is the whole damn muslim world! But rather, it is a small band of wacko nutjobs. Having said that, the US Government was more than likely complicit in one way or another to allow it too happen, so I think you should look at your own Oil Mad, psycho leaders first to see who really cranked up this war!

How is this war our fault, did we invade Afghanistan or Iraq prior to 9/11?

Yes, in fact there was this little war called the Gulf War were we did invade Iraq. But we weren't doing it for oil, an ally, Kuwait, had been invaded by Saddam, a friend of Bush Sr./Cheney/Rumsfeild, someone they trusted with anthrax and nuclear technology in 1989. So we were just pushing back the army, or what little was left, most surrendered for they didn't care, the buses we brought to carry the wounded carried the POWs for no one fought. Of course, they knew we weren't trying to kill them for oil, like this time.

Also Iraq had NOTHING to do with 9/11, according to the facts anyways. So few people realize OBL and Saddam hated each other, Saddam was to "liberal" according to OBL, and OBL was a Saudi, so Saddam didn't like. All Iraq did was have oil, no WMDs, no mass graves reported by the pentagon, nothing, hell, we weren't even their to "liberate" them until a couple weeks before our election.

Originally posted by stumason

By the way we did not start this war, they did after 9/11 and declared a holy war on us.

Define this "they". The way your talking it is the whole damn muslim world! But rather, it is a small band of wacko nutjobs. Having said that, the US Government was more than likely complicit in one way or another to allow it too happen, so I think you should look at your own Oil Mad, psycho leaders first to see who really cranked up this war!

Sooo, based on your logic; a woman who is raped is partly complicit for dressing in a provocative way to provoke the rapist. A friend's truck was stolen last week so I suppose HE was complicit in its theft for owning it in the first place.

The notion that these "extremists" are simply a tiny minority is the exact perception a large number of Muslims are counting on you to have.

Originally posted by James the Lesser
Yes, in fact there was this little war called the Gulf War were we did invade Iraq. But we weren't doing it for oil, an ally, Kuwait, had been invaded by Saddam, a friend of Bush Sr./Cheney/Rumsfeild, someone they trusted with anthrax and nuclear technology in 1989. So we were just pushing back the army, or what little was left, most surrendered for they didn't care, the buses we brought to carry the wounded carried the POWs for no one fought. Of course, they knew we weren't trying to kill them for oil, like this time.

Also Iraq had NOTHING to do with 9/11, according to the facts anyways. So few people realize OBL and Saddam hated each other, Saddam was to "liberal" according to OBL, and OBL was a Saudi, so Saddam didn't like. All Iraq did was have oil, no WMDs, no mass graves reported by the pentagon, nothing, hell, we weren't even their to "liberate" them until a couple weeks before our election.

Great post James with one exception: Have you ever heard the expression "The enemy of my enemy is my freind"? While WMD were never found in Iraq the charge that they existed was supported by intelligence agencies from Germany AND Russia, and of course, the CIA. Given those reports there was great concern that Saddam would be inclined to deliver these types of weapons to al Qaida. The fact that none were found doesn't mean they didn't exist before the war. It COULD mean that Saddam successfully hid them (perhaps in Syria) before the invasion.

How would the American people respond to the hypothetical fact that if Pres. Bush ignored these independent reports and we were subsequently attacked by WMD's provided by Iraq? He would probably be impeeched. While I'm no major fan of the Bush (pres that is) he has been faced with some of the toughest situations and scenarios of most any other preident in our history. At least he is a man of conviction. Perhaps if Clinton had more conviction, 911 could have been prevented. But I digress from the original topic.