They said the report concluded that there were no links between Saddam’s Ba’ath govt. and Al Qaeda. Apparently, they wanted just people to look at their article’s title and form a conclusion on this subject without reading the actual report.

After all, anyone who actually takes the time to read the report would probably conclude the same thing that Bush did before the war. That Saddam and Al Qaeda did not collaborate with each other on the 9-11-01 attacks, but they did have ties and some of them took place in Iraq.

However, you don’t have to just read the report to know that the NYT and McClatchy’s conclusion of the report was bogus, you could also take into account the fact that the report’s author’s publicly spoke against McClatchy as well as the other news outlets who’ve parroted the same conclusion without actually reading the report.

Yeah, I doubt Egyptian Islamic Jihad(which is one of those cells that I was talking about) has just 3 to 5 people in it, and I don’t think that they have any ties to the Kurdish Iraqis.

EIJ is not just a terror cell, they’re also are a political movement, consisting of thousands of loyalists who are radical and dangerous in their ideologies.

For years they have been a part of the Al Qaeda terror network, and they have helped collect funding, and weapons for AQ. They also help AQ carry out attacks too.

Dumb statement. 9/11 required less than half that!!

A terrorist cell normally consists of between 3 and 5 people. 5X5=25! Wow, 25 people who may or may not have been Al Qaeda who were in the Kurdish region of Iraq. The region were Hussein had virtually no power. While Bin Laden roams free….good move.

I was pretty sure that Bush(as well as Rice, and Powell) said to a worldwide audience that they didn’t believe that Saddam was behind 9-11 months before our Congress voted to authorize military action in Iraq.

We never said it was to avenge 9-11. We said Saddam’s government was harboring terrorists from the Al Qaeda terror network, and they were.

After all, the suspicion that Iraq was harboring members of Al Qaeda wasn’t one of the reasons why we went into Iraq to remove Saddam from power anyway.
[end of sarcasm]

Also, just to point this out. News is out of the ordinary. It’s an event that doesn’t usually occur under normal circumstances. If these characteristics are what defines news, then how would reporting success at the responsibility of our troops be news?

When I was in, we had Saudis in training with us. Let me tell you, as a people, they are soft and weak. The Iragis have been hardened by years of war, bombing and sanctions, they are used to hardship. The Saudis are not. Hopefully, we put a back door into the military hardware we have been selling them for years. Use it to shut down their air force, ADA and any other high tech equipment. Then hit their electrical plants. A couple of days without AC and they would be done.

I hope you didn’t think I was a pacifist or some kind of peacenik just because I think the invasion of Iraq was wrong.