Skip to comments.
IRAN SMUGGLED IRAQIS INTO USA;CIA DD SAYS "IRAQI TERROR ATTACKS COULD START"
Human Events ^
| 10/14/02
| Terence P. Jeffrey
Posted on 10/20/2002 6:14:06 PM PDT by ninenot
Edited on 10/20/2002 6:25:07 PM PDT by Jim Robinson.
[history]
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-42 next last
Hmmmm.
1
posted on
10/20/2002 6:14:06 PM PDT
by
ninenot
To: ninenot
Just one more reason to get a CCW permit.
2
posted on
10/20/2002 6:16:04 PM PDT
by
OXENinFLA
To: ninenot
ping for future reference!
To: OXENinFLA
Just one more reason to get a CCW permit. And carry ALL the time, preferrable with a rifle in the truck also.
4
posted on
10/20/2002 6:18:36 PM PDT
by
Mulder
To: Thornwell Simons; Tumbleweed_Connection; marktwain
CCW, maybe. Methinks GWB is waiting to make the connection VERY solid and then it's bombs away....
5
posted on
10/20/2002 6:18:56 PM PDT
by
ninenot
To: OXENinFLA
amen to that when mr iraqi shows his face he will meet mr kimber .45
To: ninenot
Yah! LOL! "We don't have weapons of mass destruction but we will use them on you if you attack us!"
PPPPSSSSSSSSTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT!
7
posted on
10/20/2002 6:21:01 PM PDT
by
Cold Heat
To: ninenot
Should Saddam conclude that a U.S.-led attack could no longer be deterred, he probably would become much less constrained in adopting terrorist actions. So what? It's now or later. I'd rather see what he's got up his sleeve now than wait another 12 years.
To: ninenot
--> If Osama bin Laden could smuggle terrorists into the United States to carry out attacks why couldnt Saddam Hussein do the same? <--
Well why he didn't do this for past 10 years?
Did he need Osama for inspiration?
This article should be seen as part of the
WHY WE NEED TO INVADE IRAQ TOP 10 LIST
nothing amasing here to comment
9
posted on
10/20/2002 6:26:46 PM PDT
by
bobi
To: ninenot
I would hope we have smuggled our teams into enemy capitals and cities so that we could respond in kind.
10
posted on
10/20/2002 6:29:31 PM PDT
by
Siobhan
To: ninenot
I'll bet it's starting already. That beltway sniper isn't just some guy that went nuts one day and decided to become a spree killer. Saddam is putting out professional hits on random American citizens and this is only the beginning.
To: Mulder
And carry ALL the time, preferrable with a rifle in the truck also. And a shotgun.
12
posted on
10/20/2002 6:40:15 PM PDT
by
Mr. Mojo
To: ninenot
The U.S. government does not know how many Iraqis have entered the United States illegally in recent years. For the Clinton re-election, they allowed thousands of immagrants to become US citizens without background checks because they were in a hurry to get them to vote. They just taught them the basics, and shipped them to cities that needed the votes.
Many have committed crimes on US soil, and are now in jail. That's how they found out the immagrants went through without the back ground checks. They never should have been allowed into the country in the first place.
If the Democrats were desperate enough to do this, I doubt if they checked anyone comming into the US during those years.
Right now, Kennedy is calling for bolistic fingerprinting to win her election, but never bothered to do background checks on gun buyers for months. She may just have needed the issue. One shooter, and her campain could be a shoe-in.
To: ninenot
Another Mohammed? You have got to be kiddin' me.
Why don't we just deport everyone named Mohammed?
To: TheLooseThread
Why don't we just deport everyone named Mohammed? You've got that right. They take on that name for a reason.
To: bobi
WHY WE NEED TO INVADE IRAQ TOP 10 LIST Perhaps - but then again there was the intelligence failure called 9/11. Now we are more alert to what our enemies are up to. Sort of like Enron. The more you start digging the more you start finding that others were doing the same thing all along, and to think only assmama and al-queerda were the only ones wanting to attack and kill us on our soil is a bit naive.
Saddam hates the Bush family, and America. If he wanted to attack it would be when his friends the liberals were not in power, and the liberals could care less if he attacks because it will give them ammo against Bush either way (if we attack saddam we are bad, if we don't and he attacks us first we are bad for not stopping him when we had the chance - either way the left will use this because they are scum).
Reasons? We don't need no stinkin reasons. He is a mini Hitler, which many on the left say if they had the chance to go back in time and stop hitler they would have (although I suspect secretly they would have helped him). Well, now is the time to get a child killing freak off the face of the earth. Unless of course you want him living next door to you. The man should be killed for the crimes he has committed, period. No more reasons needed.
To: ninenot
Sorry no time to read the article but the media has chosen to firewall the security clowns at the airports responsible for allowing 15 of the 19 terrorists into America. The upcoming deadline for security equipment will not be met by a large number of airports and security in general has sucked. This is a government program plowed through by Dashole et al. (spouse as well) which is costing taxpayers a fortune and yielding no results except less travel. You've heard the phrase, economy is security. If this had been a private operation the results would have been entirely different. People wouldn't be afraid of snipers, terrorists, attacks..., and the economy would change.
Comment #18 Removed by Moderator
To: ninenot
Scary stuff.
To: ninenot
...could start as soon as April 1995.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-42 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson