countries, not including my term in the Canadian military, I was
considered conservative in England, moderate to conservative in Canada
and liberal here in the US. At the same time the only political party
I ever joined was the Progressive Conservative Party in Canada. So
take your pick, it really depends on where your biases are.
As far as Saddam's support of terrorists, again that depends. There
was never any connection between Al-Queda beyond some initial very
preliminary contacts which were discontinued quickly. Hussien and
Al-Queda were very different and ideologically were poles apart. The
secular B'aathist party ws considered anathema to the fundimentalist
Islamicist philosophy.
It is undisputed however that he did give money to Hamas and similar
groups, and may have supported the families of suicide bombers. BTW
was that ever conclusively proven, as in some family actually getting
a bundle of bills or a cheque? At the same time this country, either
officially or unofficially, has also supported terrorism, just not
necessarily middle eastern terrorist groups. We are not pure in this
matter either.
As for WMD's I read the reports issued by the UN and similar groups. I
also read the later reports of the pressures put on the US
intelligence communities by the current administration to reach a
foregone conclusion. It was obvious early on that the UN inspectors,
who were engaged in a very intrusive inspection protocol had it right.
It was also obvious that the administration was looking for any excuse
to go to war, almost to the point of manufacturing evidence. That was
completely wrong. The evidence points to the Iraqi destruction of
WMD's in the early to mid 1990's. Why he did not publicize it I do not
know, it could have been an elaborate bluff as a way to prevent an
invasion by his neighbours. Essentially then Saddam Hussein was no
more involved in 9/11 than I was.
larry
On Fri, 13 Aug 2004 15:54:27 -0500, Andy Ousterhout
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Doug,
>
> I've never listened to that wind bag and don't plan on starting. I fully
> believe that Rush is part of the problem, not part of the solution.
>
> I am just stating facts about people I know and the discussions I've had,
> included those with people on this list. I've heard lots of folks stating
> that "people" believed there was a direct connection, but no one has said that
> they were in that camp. So....
>
> Let's do a little poll from those on this list: Did you believe that Sadaam
> was involved in 9/11 at the start of the war and do you consider yourself
> Left, Right or Center?
>
> Andy
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Doug White [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Friday, August 13, 2004 3:34 PM
> To: CF-Community
> Subject: Re: Right-wingers - Iraq & 9/11 Was ( Washington Post issues mea
> culpa for prewar coverage)
>
> I get it from polls quoted by your friend, Rush, and polls run by Fox News,
> as
> well as others.
> I likewise agree that this thinking permeates both sides of the aisle, but
> don't
> try to assert to me that the majority of republican voters are completely
> clear
> on this subject, because they just aren't.
> The religious evangelist types, ignore this completely as they are mostly
> single
> issue voters, and support the "family values" platform.
> This is my take on the campaign so far.
>
> Even Rush quoted today the most current Bush approval rating poll shows him
> down
> to 51%, his lowest since taking office.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Andy Ousterhout
>
> Doug,
>
> I don't know of a single right-winger who thinks that Iraq had any
> involvement
> in 9/11. I do know a number of left wingers who think that this is what
> right-wingers think.
>
> I've read this comment many times from those who are against the war.
> Just
> how/where did you gain this perspective?
>
> Andy
>
>
[Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings] [Donations and Support]
