UbL called Iraqi Baathists infidel along with Americans.
The DoD reaction and the involvement of Feith with his background with the OSP kind of say it all.
Just because Feith has reports, doesn’t mean anything as to the validity and/or worth of said reports.
I trust that all involved here recognize that this whole threat is speculation and conjecture. As soon as you ask if it is POSSIBLE for Sadam and OBL to have (had) an operational connection (what ever that may be) you are playing in the same ball park with the people who tell us it is possible for the earth to reverse its rotation and for the sun to rise in the West. Of course it is possible, just highly unlikely and not confirmed by any known information, or by any information released by governments who would greatly benefit by the release of such information. Any of us can be jaundiced by political distaste or affection but we must all recognize that none of this has any reliable factual basis and is therefore cloud musing and no basis for a rational conclusion. What we can say is that so far there is noting that indicated any cooperation at all between Sadam and OBL and the Weekly Standard piece provides not reason to say otherwise.
I saw this this morning on Fox, did a search tonight and could only come up with Fox and the Weekly Standard article they referenced, and decided it wasn’t serious.
The old Big Lie game all over again. Keep saying something and keep saying it and keep saying it, hoping that the repetition will be enough to get you to believe it.
If should be obvious to you and Squink that I was referring to Justice Roy Moore. Your inability to comprehend basic sarcasm is noted. I was using the removal of the 10 commandments from a Gov’t building as an example of secularism in the United States.
That would be separation of church and state, which Jefferson considered to be one of his most valuable legacies.
I think we all got the point of your sarcasm. I think you need to remember on what principles this nation was founded.
There are footnotes. What’s true in Iraq? I wish I was as positive as the HS teacher in truthout, nine months ago.
from Beagle’s site
Salt anyone?
Don’t we have evidence that Al-Qaeda was working with anti-Hussein Kurdish groups, esp. the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan? Seems odd for Hussein to work with a group that is opposed to him.
Yeah, it means some folks were also not content with bullshitting the American public and also tried to bullshit the Senate
I feel obligated to mention that, IIRC, the “Saddam tried to assassinate Bush Sr.” story has been debunked as nonsense. Fighting ignorance, y’know.
Along those lines it would be quite accurate to mention that “Bush Jr. is hellbent on assasinating Saddam.”
That’s why I picked that particular article. It’s not based on any one story, but tries to assemble what is out there. If your mind is made up, when there is real evidence Saddam has cooperated with terrorists, perhaps you need condiments of some kind.
“Debunked” is a always relative on issues of international intrigue and espionage. There are numerous stories that take years to properly bunk or debunk.
I don´t want to look like I´m picking on you, but Hitler and Stalin didn´t work togheter by any definition, chech the Hitler-Stalin non-aggression pact terms overe HERE
It was more like slicing the cake, not sharing resources being that inteligence, technology or expertice of any kind.
In short your analogy doesn´t work.
My POINT was, that people can and will do whats necessary, even if its distasteful. My analogy wasn’t direct of course…it was more like the analogy of comparing Iraq to Vietnam, say. In other words it was tenuous at best. However, all I was saying is that ObL and SH working together (or, their organizations working together) is NOT beyond the realm of possibility, just because they ideologies were so different, or even that they hated each other. To illustrate the POSSIBILITY, I showed Hitler and Stalin, who also were miles appart ideologically…and DID work together.
Sure, it was more like slicing a cake…but it was a cake neither could safely slice (at that time) without the others tacit cooperation. If they DIDN’T need it, they would never have signed the pact, no? So, they DID work together, and did plan together, and did basically divide up Poland together. I can certainly envision something similar, or even more intimate between ObL and SH, despite what they may or may not have publically said.
However, as I also said, just because they COULD have worked together, doesn’t mean they DID. Understand? I don’t understand all the hand waving on your part…why even focus on this (i.e. why bother with all this denial that it COULD have happened), when you can be better served by focusing on the (evident) fact that there IS no evidence to support an ObL/SH relationship appearently?? In other words, at this time, with what we currently know, isn’t it kind of a moot point…mearly an academic excersize?
-XT
Well, you opened the thread… 
Sure…and it was my bad. I jumped the gun, thinking there might be some new and interesting evidence out there, and that we could rationally examine it and see if there was anything there. I HOPED that the fact that this ‘evidence’ was presented to the Senate actually meant something. Again, my bad. 
-XT
Stalin and Hitler split Poland, cooperated militarily for years in violation of the Versailles Treaty, and then fought each other. Sounds fairly apt to me. Substitute “Iraq” for “Poland”
Usama and Saddam need each other right now.
May I ask for a cite?
The problem, Beagle, is while it might be entirely plausable that ObL and SH worked/are working together, there seems to be no evidence that they are. My original thought, when reading the article I posted in the OP, was that IF there were evidence, then that might factor into some of the broader discussions. However as far as I know, no other new service has picked up on this at all…leading me to believe its a load of bullshit. If some independant sources come out, or if this story is picked up and grows, I have an open mind and will review at that time. ATM though, it doesn’t look like there is anything here.
-XT
Actually Ale, he’s right…I don’t have a cite atm, but I can get one if you REALLY need it. If I’m representing his point, basically the Germans secretly trained in Russia during the post WWI years, because they were forbidden to train do to the treaty of Versailles. In addition, I seem to recall that there WAS some technology transfer. I remember one story where the Russians were suspicious of the Germans because when the Germans showed them their tank designs it was inferior to the Russians T-34 series…and the Russians thought they were holding back basically.
The time period he’s talking about (if I am representing him correctly) was BEFORE the non agression pact, and therefor before Poland obviously…I’m thinking mid to late 30’s. If you really want to discuss this, we can start a new thread about it and I promise to find some cites for you.
-XT
Not that bad xtime: I needed the exercise!
[sub](I see now that I need to improve my grammar, getting rusty again.)[/sub]
Beage: what we have here, is egg in the face of Fox news and their buddies.