Click Logo to go to:
.
1 posted on
09/05/2002 4:11:10 AM PDT by
Elle Bee
To: Elle Bee
It's going to be interesting what else they are going to try and connect him to.
I must say, in all seriousness, I hope they look into Saddam's connections to other things as well. How do we know that Iceberg that sunk the Titanic wasn't an Iraqi plot. Or how about that strange explosion of the Hindenburg, that looked an awful lot like a terrorist bomb.
I also hear tell that John Wilkes Booth had some pretty serious meetings with Saddam, where he recieved a complete map of Ford's Theatre...
To: Elle Bee
OKC bump
6 posted on
09/05/2002 5:00:55 AM PDT by
the crow
To: Elle Bee
I know these stories have been well covered by some smaller midwestern newspapers but as far as I know this is the first coverage by a mainstream big city newspaper. Anyone know if this is true?
To: dubyaismypresident; xsmommy
War Drum Ping.
11 posted on
09/05/2002 5:16:45 AM PDT by
hobbes1
To: Elle Bee
Bump to read later.
13 posted on
09/05/2002 5:24:13 AM PDT by
mombonn
To: Elle Bee; Wallaby; honway; Fred Mertz; OKCSubmariner; Plummz; Lion's Cub; glorygirl; rubbertramp
good to see michah morrison back on the beat.
the pressure to remove sadaam must be mighty intense if the bush administration is willing to expose a ME tie in to murrah after 7 years of covering up?
14 posted on
09/05/2002 5:26:44 AM PDT by
thinden
To: Elle Bee
No no no, Sadam had nothing to do with it. It was all those crazy right wing republicans that are to blame. I know because the klintoon told us so. He wouldn't lie, would he??
20 posted on
09/05/2002 5:33:32 AM PDT by
machman
To: Elle Bee
Bump
23 posted on
09/05/2002 5:39:21 AM PDT by
Wm Bach
To: Elle Bee; *OKCbombing
Bombing List PING!
TXnMA (No Longer!!!)
46 posted on
09/05/2002 7:33:48 AM PDT by
TXnMA
To: All
Big John Gibson ping.
Gibson and the Judge(Napolitano) just did a tete a tete on this.
Don't know what preceded it, I turned it on in the middle of the discussion, but the Judge was talking about the government's responsibility in all of this (read that FBI, Justice Department) and how this kind of information might have been a mitigating factor for the jury weighing the death penalty against McVeigh.
Anyway, my guess is Fox will do more on this tonight, so you might want to stay tuned.
To: Elle Bee; lavaroise; bat-boy; Orion78; EditorTFP; Noswad; swarthyguy; Jeff Head; OKCSubmariner
bttt
To: Elle Bee
We can speculate and ruminate and theorize to our heart's delight. 2,000 plus Iraqis relocating to Oklahoma after the '91 war - and we don't know how many were Saddamites. The good news is, we're the USA. And if/when we decide that someone is enough of a pest, threat, and vexatious burden, we can, should, and in this case probaly will, "terminate with prejudice."
84 posted on
09/05/2002 11:54:59 PM PDT by
185JHP
To: ladyinred
ping for later
To: Elle Bee
Bump
99 posted on
09/06/2002 9:17:59 AM PDT by
PGalt
To: Elle Bee
None of this is "hard evidence," let alone "conclusive evidence," that Saddam Hussein was complicit in Sept. 11 or any of the other domestic terrorist attacks.All too true. What would Saddam's motivation for supporting these attacks have been? Vengeance? Pure Evil?
I can certainly believe that Iraq gave sanctuary and funds to Arab or Muslim radicals, but it's less clear that they were the masterminds or even knew what was in the works. In any case, if Hussein did give money to someone who hated America and would do anything to hurt us, that would qualify as justification for war, and a warning to others to be more careful with terrorists. But Morison doesn't prove that he's at the center of it all.
BTW, the Epstein site is fascinating.
114 posted on
09/06/2002 10:13:44 PM PDT by
x
To: Elle Bee
indexing
122 posted on
09/07/2002 8:58:33 AM PDT by
Robe
To: Elle Bee
The next day, the federal government issued arrest warrants and sketches of two men seen together, John Doe No. 1 and No. 2. John Doe 1 turned out to be McVeigh, who was quickly picked up on an unrelated charge. Following the arrest of McVeigh and Nichols, the Justice Department changed course, saying the witnesses were confused and there was no John Doe 2 with McVeigh. Did the Justice Department actually say they were mistaken about John Doe #2 originally? Because in the trial they claimed that they got the description of John Doe #2 from the security tape from the truck rental place in Kansas.
To: Elle Bee
Of course he was involved...the biggest cover-up of modern time.
156 posted on
05/13/2003 7:04:00 PM PDT by
ApesForEvolution
("The only way evil triumphs is if good men do nothing" E. Burke)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson