Connecting Singles^® Forums100% Free Online Dating

People on here will have to wait until Obama's elected. Then there'll be free HBO for everyone! So it wasn't about dimpled chads after all?

I am sure there were millions others Indy. Do you watch anything but fox or read anything but republican blogs?


Did you read this, it is very short and quite interesting. It is written by
Peter Rundlet one of the members of the 9/11 commission.

http://thinkprogress.org/2006/09/30/911-meeting/

Especially since Democrats were in charge of most of the Voting Machines/Precincts.
And Gore was declared the Winner by the Media,while Voting was still going on in the Florida Panhandle!
Those "Having Stolen The Election" Arguments are getting Stale and Moldy.
Gore lost,Plain and simple,in spite of all the Rabbits his Lawyers were trying to pull out of the hat!!!

Truth be known, I probably watch more of the official "Obama for President" station, MSNBC. It's got a lot of humor on it. Watch some CNN and maybe 1/4 Fox. I don't have tunnel vision as I like to get a lot of perspectives before making a decision on where I stand on a position. BTW, Fox has it's fair share of libs...so that dog doesn't hunt all that well.

Gosh there's such defensiveness around here... I'm outta here. Bye all! Have a great evening!

Surely, everything won't be free, but Obama is not another Bush who is like a teenager with a creditcard. Bush's philosophy is just keep making the money, it doesn't matter if we actually have it, as long as his rich friends have theirs. Your granddaughter and great grandchildren will be paying for Bush's deficit.

I am just asking you to read the article. You're not on trial.

We all knew this before Bush's re-election.. you just choose to ignore it.
There were no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq

1,625 UN and US inspectors spent two years searching 1,700 sites at a cost of more than $1bn. Yesterday they delivered their verdict
* Julian Borger in Washington
* The Guardian,
* Thursday October 7, 2004
Saddam Hussein destroyed his last weapons of mass destruction more than a decade ago and his capacity to build new ones had been dwindling for years by the time of the Iraq invasion, according to a comprehensive US report released yesterday.

The report, the culmination of an intensive 15-month search by 1,200 inspectors from the CIA's Iraq Survey Group (ISG), concluded that Saddam had ambitions to restart at least chemical and nuclear programmes once sanctions were lifted.

However, concrete plans do not appear to have been laid down, let alone set in motion. Nor did Saddam issue direct verbal orders to develop weapons of mass destruction (WMD). The main evidence of his intentions are his own cryptic remarks, and the meaning his aides inferred from them.

The ISG conclusions, delivered to Congress yesterday, are badly timed for George Bush's re-election bid, as they starkly contradict his pre-war claims as well as statements he has made on the campaign trail.

Even in recent days the president has insisted that, although Iraq had no WMD at the time of the war, it was a "gathering threat" which had to be confronted. Instead the ISG found Saddam represented a diminishing threat.

However, Charles Duelfer, the head of the ISG and the report's chief author, said that by late 2001, when the international embargo on Iraq was tightened, it was clear sanctions would not have contained Saddam for much longer.

Mr Duelfer told a Senate committee yesterday the Saddam regime "had made progress in eroding sanctions, and had it not been for September 11, things would have taken a very different turn for the regime". He pointed out the report was comprehensive but "not final" as a team of 900 linguists were still sifting through a mountain of documents.

But Mr Duelfer, a former UN weapons inspector, added: "I still do not expect that militarily significant WMD stocks are hidden in Iraq."

Tony Blair said that the report showed Saddam was seeking to develop weapons of mass destruction and had retained key scientists to do so.

Mr Blair said in Ethiopia that the report showed that "the situation is far more complicated than many thought. Just as I have had to accept that the evidence now shows that there were not stockpiles of actual weapons ready to deploy, I hope others will have the honesty to accept that the report also shows that sanctions were not working. On the contrary Saddam was doing his best to get round those sanctions".

Iraq had pesticide plants and other chemical facilities which could have been converted to the production of chemical weapons, the ISG found, but there was no clear evidence of such plans.

(continued)

Meanwhile, Saddam appears to have lost interest altogether in biological weapons. "ISG found no direct evidence that Iraq, after 1996, had plans for a new BW [biological warfare] programme or was conducting BW-specific work for military purposes," the report concluded, adding that "there appears to be a complete absence of discussion or even interest in BW at the presidential level".

Iraq would therefore "have faced great difficulty in re-establishing an effective BW agent production capability".

As far as making a nuclear bomb was concerned, Mr Duelfer said Saddam "was further away in 2003 than he was in 1991. So the nuclear programme was decaying steadily".

Mr Duelfer's team did find evidence that Saddam wanted to restart his weapons programmes if the United Nations embargo on his country was lifted. However, none of that evidence was on paper. The primary source was the imprisoned dictator himself.

According to Mr Duelfer, Saddam saw WMD primarily as a counterbalance to Iran's programmes. The ousted dictator reportedly told his interrogators "he would do whatever it took to offset the Iranian threat, making it clear he was referring to Iran's nuclear capability", Mr Duelfer said.

He suggested that only the ousted leader knew what his weapons plans were and that even close aides were uncertain whether Iraq had WMD or not.

The Duelfer report found that there had been no "identifiable group of WMD policy makers or planners separate from Saddam.

"Instead, his lieutenants understood WMD revival was his goal from their long association with Saddam and his infrequent but firm, verbal comments and directions to them."

In the 12 years between the first and second Gulf wars, however, an American official who helped compile the report said, it was clear that UN sanctions had been effective in persuading Saddam to disarm.

Mr Duelfer said Saddam's "prime objective was the termination of UN sanctions on Iraq. And he weighed all policy actions and steps for their impact on this overarching objective".

Saddam apparently believed WMD had stopped the US marching on Baghdad in 1991 and had prevented defeat by Iran.

A separate CIA report, leaked to the US press this week, severely weakened the Bush claim of a link between Baghdad and al-Qaida. It found no clear evidence of Iraq harbouring Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, a Jordanian terrorist believed to be behind many of the attacks and now holding the British hostage, Kenneth Bigley.

In all, 1,625 US and UN inspectors were working in Iraq for two years - from November 2002 to September 2004 - at a cost of over $1bn. They searched nearly 1,700 sites.
About this article
Close
This article appeared in the Guardian on Thursday October 07 2004 . It was last updated at 11:35 on October 07 2004.

This was all announced to the entire world.............. can you not remember that far back?

Just an observation....

A few "ifs" and "maybes?"

Well, if HBO won't be free, I probably won't vote for him...but you still can. I'm sure there will be some freebies in there re-distribution for ya.

the entire point was that Bush concluded that Iraq definitely had WMD..

That is what the war was started over

the inspectors made it clear that there were most likely none.
which we found out is the case.. we didn't even find 1.

So.. keep defending that stance..
This war was based on lies and coverup. when we had no solid evidence of anything.

There should be no war at all without solid proof.

Bush just had to finish his Daddy's war.

Later...... I think I might need to go beat my neighbor because I think he might have spit on my car

You seemed to have forgot how to highlight the important parts!

in this entire report,, is there even one mention of any inspector saying "yes. we think they might have WMD's"

no.. not even one..

so why was this war really started?
clear this up for us

Have at it...

Won't he feel silly when I beat him with my crutch

Not if he spit on your car.

We're not defensive. We're chippy.

Everyone loves everyone else. Really.

like most bed-wetting liberals, you're not remembering the mountain of documents that OUTLINED Iraq's connection to Al Queda..

in fact.. it's called "Al Queda In Iraq"

various training camps north and south of Baghdad...

not to mention the use of Chemical Weapons AGAINST HIS OWN PEOPLE... christ. I'm not going to rant in this forum too

give it a fucking rest.. you're not a military man.. you have NO IDEA what you're talking about.. you're just quoting crap from the news.

get over it.