Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: ZacandPook
Sometimes "DOTS" are NOT "DOTS".............for instance.....

The following dots existed on Sept 12, 2001.

Dot 1. Al Qaeda successfully attacked the United States of America on US soil and killed 3000 civilians.
Dot 2. Al Qaeda, if in possession of WMD on 911 would have killed 10 or 100 times that amount.
Dot 3. Saddam Hussein had WMD, USED WMD and paid suicide bomber's families to conduct terrorism.
Dot 4. Al Qaeda was in the market for WMD.

George Bush connected these DOTS, but the DOTS were WRONG [supposedly] and has been demonized like no other president in history during war time.

So much for dot connecting!!

56 posted on 09/19/2007 6:57:59 PM PDT by PISANO
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: PISANO

Hi Pisano,

Thank you for raising a very important issue to consider.

After the public relations of Luxor, these considerations you raise were all hotly debated by the IG and EIJ senior leaders in telephone conference calls intercepted by the FBI. Thus, there is no need to make assumptions. The transcripts were made exhibits in the trial of the post office worker. Respectively, the transcripts show you are mistaken — there was great concern about the wisest approach, one calculated to win public support while gaining the release of thousands imprisoned in Egypt.

Apart from that, there was a requirement under the hadiths to provide warning before the use of nonconventional weapons. At the time there was no fatwa authorizing the use of a biological weapons against civilians. The islamic jurisprudence was of the utmost importance to the militants as their very souls were at stake.

Moreover, there was the small matter that they were well-integrated US-based operatives. They certainly would not want to drop it on their head or kill people they knew.

Finally, they were capable only of small scale production. As it was, they caused $6 billion in damage with a few grams.

As for WMD in Iraq, proper analysis at the time would have led to the conclusion the Salafists being responsible, not Saddam. VP Cheney pointed to Al Qaeda in a PBS interview with Lehrer. See CHENEY, at 356-359 (2007) His analysis was sound from the start.

Under your logic, the militants were not responsible for the 1997 al Hayat letter bombs to DC and NYC newspapers and people in symbolic positions because they could have instead blown up the buildings.

The specifics of the true crime or intelligence analysis are provided in outline form at:
http://www.anthraxandalqaeda.com


57 posted on 09/19/2007 8:08:21 PM PDT by ZacandPook
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson