It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by slank
.
The math doesn't add up to the reported totals from the report itself.
Originally posted by slank
Other sources: Researchers from Johns Hopkins University and Columbia University in the US and the Al-Mustansiriya University in Baghdad put the civilian death toll at up to 100,000 since the invasion.
To conduct the survey, investigators visited 33 neighborhoods spread evenly across the country in September, randomly selecting clusters of 30 households to sample. Of the 988 households visited, 808, consisting of 7,868 people, agreed to participate in the survey. At each one they asked how many people lived in the home and how many births and deaths there had been since January 2002.
Originally posted by slank
Saddam did send money to families of palestinian suicide bombers in Israel,
But i have never heard a single credible account of training terrorists on Iraqi soil.
..........
Can you say 'Credibility Gap'?
WASHINGTON — U.S. authorities in Iraq say they have new evidence that Saddam Hussein's regime gave money and housing to Abdul Rahman Yasin, a suspect in the World Trade Center bombing in 1993, according to U.S. intelligence and law enforcement officials.
Originally posted by slank
Saddam wanted WMDs.
Point of fact he, due to UN inspectors had NONE.
CIA's final report: No WMD found in Iraq
Are you saying the CIA is in the pocket of the so-called liberal media?
Originally posted by slank
What alternate reality are you living in?
Originally posted by slank
9 billion dollars is UNACCOUNTED for. That by definition means it has gone into unknown hands. The term used is Embezzled...
Originally posted by slank
.
Maybe the US government is responsible because,
they invaded the country and by default assumed responsibility for monitoring everything that goes on there? aka. pottery barn rule.
Originally posted by slank
they were in fantasy land when they decided they knew exactly how Iraqis were going to fall down on their knees in praise and did ZERO contingincy planning?
Originally posted by slank
they couldn't even adapt when anyone who wasn't blind could see their scenario was totally faulty?
Originally posted by slank
they lied about aluminum rocket tubes magically being used in centrifuges?
On the nuclear issue, Judis and Ackerman write that Powell "rehashed" the "much-disputed" report that Iraq tried to purchase aluminum tubes that could be used to enrich uranium for nuclear weapons. The authors cite experts who call the tubes evidence "unpersuasive" and who "made quick work" of discrediting the claim. Judis and Ackerman do this to argue that the administration, which clearly knew there was a dispute about the tubes' purpose, lied to the American people by claiming definitively that the tubes were intended for use in a nuclear-weapons program.
But in fact Powell was quite cautious in his U.N. speech. He acknowledged that there was a controversy about the tubes and considered the argument that they were in fact intended for another use, as artillery rockets. Here is the portion of Powell's speech dealing with the issue:
Saddam Hussein is determined to get his hands on a nuclear bomb. He is so determined that he has made repeated covert attempts to acquire high-specification aluminum tubes from 11 different countries, even after inspections resumed.
These tubes are controlled by the Nuclear Suppliers Group precisely because they can be used as centrifuges for enriching uranium. By now, just about everyone has heard of these tubes, and we all know that there are differences of opinion. There is controversy about what these tubes are for.
Most U.S. experts think they are intended to serve as rotors in centrifuges used to enrich uranium. Other experts, and the Iraqis themselves, argue that they are really to produce the rocket bodies for a conventional weapon, a multiple rocket launcher.
Let me tell you what is not controversial about these tubes. First, all the experts who have analyzed the tubes in our possession agree that they can be adapted for centrifuge use. Second, Iraq had no business buying them for any purpose. They are banned for Iraq.
I am no expert on centrifuge tubes, but just as an old Army trooper, I can tell you a couple of things: First, it strikes me as quite odd that these tubes are manufactured to a tolerance that far exceeds U.S. requirements for comparable rockets. Maybe Iraqis just manufacture their conventional weapons to a higher standard than we do, but I don't think so.
Second, we actually have examined tubes from several different batches that were seized clandestinely before they reached Baghdad. What we notice in these different batches is a progression to higher and higher levels of specification, including, in the latest batch, an anodized coating on extremely smooth inner and outer surfaces. Why would they continue refining the specifications, go to all that trouble for something that, if it was a rocket, would soon be blown into shrapnel when it went off?
Originally posted by slank
they were more concerned about funnelling money to Haliburton than in having a genuine dialogue with actual Iraqis that might have given them some useful and productive insights?
Originally posted by slank
If you support the war in Iraq you support terrorism.
Originally posted by slank
Stable nation turned to chaos . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .+ for terrorism
According to Mr. Putin, after September 11, 2001, and before the start of the military operation in Iraq, “Russian special services received information that officials from Saddam's regime were preparing terrorist attacks in the United States and outside it against the US military and other interests."
Originally posted by slank
Admit it you like having terrorists around.
[edit on 9-8-2005 by slank]
Originally posted by grover
I think the whole point here is being misplaced...It isn't a matter of those of us who objected to bushes spendid little war to begin with, dispite all the venemous retoric from the right,
Originally posted by grover
The fact that this woman's son not only enlisted but re-upped and volenteered for Iraq before he was killed is illrevelant...
Originally posted by grover
since our media has caputlated and is not doing it's job holding all (not just democratic or republican but all) adminstrations accountable and the congress has essentially become a rubber stamp body, who better to demand answers from this arrogant, self-righteous president and to hold him accountable than the parent of a slain soldier who fought and died in an absolutely unneccessary war?
Originally posted by grover
I stood in protest against bushes splendid little war and those of us who had the courage to do so were called cowards (I served my country honorably thank you :flame, traitors and worse...we had obsenities shouted at us and eggs and in a couple cases rocks thrown at us as people who disagreed with us drove by...I think I know something about the venom of the hard right. I read the hateful letters to the editors calling us the worst names in the book and demanding we leave so don't give me the left abuses the poor little right crap...it stinks to holy heaven!!!
Originally posted by grover
...............
As for holding that phony son of a bitch accountable , if Clinton deserved to be impeached for lying about a blowjob, bush deserves the same at the very least. He lied through his crooked little teeth to get us into a completely unneccessary war (I will grant the bastard Afghanistan after 9/11 and am on record saying so) in Iraq and 1,800 fine men and women have died because of it, 10's of thousands maimed and that is not counting the death toll in Iraq, even discounting the insurgent attacks, it is in the 100,000 range. bush and his whole cabinet deserves to be impeached, removed from office and then prosocuted, convicted and thrown into jail for their crime of drumming up, promoting and excuting an absoultely unneccessary, unprovoked war, then they should be turned over to the international courts of law. They are criminal and no amount of bull# from right wing apologists will change it.
here was much speculation about "other moms" and parents of troops serving in the war coming to join Sheehan, although no one seemed to know for certain. "A busload is coming from Seattle," one woman called out.
Stephanie Frizzell, 30, said she drove from Dallas with her son, Julian, 4, "to provide support for Cindy." They met last weekend at a Dallas convention of veterans for peace.
CRAWFORD, Texas — For more than a year, a modest bungalow known as "Peace House," located a few miles from
President Bush's ranch, has served as a headquarters for antiwar activists. It is lonely work, with little more than a skeleton crew on hand much of the time.
ADVERTISEMENT
But then Cindy Sheehan hit town.
The 48-year-old mother of Army Spc. Casey Sheehan, who was killed in an ambush in Baghdad last year, is consumed by the kind of grief that turns into a furious determination to do something — in her case, to confront the president and force him to explain why her son died.
Originally posted by Esoteric Teacher
Especially when she was so supportive of her son joining, and so proud of him afterwards. Hasn't she been paying attention to politics her entire life?
Originally posted by grover
That a man felt he was doing something honorable is fine, that is his heart and his concious...that he dies uselessly in a war based on known lies is a beast of an entirely different color...
and regardless of how he felt, how his mother feels is based on her heart and concious and is not predicated on her sons...it is hers and hers alone, as it is yours and mine.
if Clinton deserved to be impeached for lying about a blowjob, bush deserves the same at the very least.
They are criminal and no amount of crap from right wing apologists will change it.
Originally posted by Mayet
Well it's gaining in momentum. Whether this woman is setup or an unlikely accidental hero, she is the new poster woman for the anti war campaign.
Wrong or right, it has bought people out in the thousands to have their say on the war in Iraq.
Our family has been so distressed by the recent activities of Cindy we are breaking our silence and we have collectively written a statement for release. Feel free to distribute it as you wish. Thanks Ð Cherie
In response to questions regarding the Cindy Sheehan/Crawford Texas issue: Sheehan Family Statement:
The Sheehan Family lost our beloved Casey in the Iraq War and we have been silently, respectfully grieving. We do not agree with the political motivations and publicity tactics of Cindy Sheehan. She now appears to be promoting her own personal agenda and notoriety at the the expense of her son's good name and reputation. The rest of the Sheehan Family supports the troops, our country, and our President, silently, with prayer and respect.
Sincerely,
Casey Sheehan's grandparents, aunts, uncles and numerous cousins.
Originally posted by Aelita
How many people you see in the street have any deep knowledge about politics and strategy of the US and of what's really going on in Iraq? I bet not too many. And that's bad. Because most people are shortchanged on relevant facts by the media.
Originally posted by sigung86
...............
Regardless of my political afiliation, I think someone should talk to the lady. The President, unfortunately, is only making himself look even more uncaring. And like it or not, he does have a tendency to look that way on occasion.
Originally posted by subz
Muaddib, the most fervent partisan I see on these boards is yourself. If you honestly do not like seeing partisan behaviour you are going the wrong way about ending it. Its a cycle and one that you are very much a part of.
I'll stick up for conservatives when ever I see unjustified rhetoric. I'll do the very same for liberals.
Do yourself a big favour and spend your time debating the issues at hand, rather than fixating on the old partisan dog and bone show