Metalworking (rec.crafts.metalworking) Discuss various aspects of working with metal, such as machining, welding, metal joining, screwing, casting, hardening/tempering, blacksmithing/forging, spinning and hammer work, sheet metal work.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1   Report Post  
Walt LeRoy
 
Posts: n/a
Default Pearl Harbor

Time to take a moment and reflect on what happened to us 62 years ago,
today, and stop all the bickering and get behind our leaders and fighting
forces in our present struggle.

S/Sgt. Walt LeRoy
Co.A, 361st S S Regiment
1943--1946



  #2   Report Post  
SteveB
 
Posts: n/a
Default Pearl Harbor


"Walt LeRoy" wrote in message
...
Time to take a moment and reflect on what happened to us 62 years ago,
today, and stop all the bickering and get behind our leaders and fighting
forces in our present struggle.

S/Sgt. Walt LeRoy
Co.A, 361st S S Regiment
1943--1946





Take time to reflect on the difference following 12/7 and 9/11 for a moment,
too.

Pearl Harbor united the country against an outside agressor.

More people were killed on 9/11 than on 12/7. A lot more.

People remembered 12/7 longer.

Just a thought.

Steve


  #3   Report Post  
PhysicsGenius
 
Posts: n/a
Default Pearl Harbor

SteveB wrote:
"Walt LeRoy" wrote in message
...

Time to take a moment and reflect on what happened to us 62 years ago,
today, and stop all the bickering and get behind our leaders and fighting
forces in our present struggle.

S/Sgt. Walt LeRoy
Co.A, 361st S S Regiment
1943--1946






Take time to reflect on the difference following 12/7 and 9/11 for a moment,
too.

Pearl Harbor united the country against an outside agressor.

More people were killed on 9/11 than on 12/7. A lot more.

People remembered 12/7 longer.


Sorry, I'm confused. The OP seems to be talking about Iraq, you mention
9/11. What's the connection?

  #4   Report Post  
SteveB
 
Posts: n/a
Default Pearl Harbor


"PhysicsGenius" wrote in message
...
SteveB wrote:
"Walt LeRoy" wrote in message
...

Time to take a moment and reflect on what happened to us 62 years ago,
today, and stop all the bickering and get behind our leaders and

fighting
forces in our present struggle.

S/Sgt. Walt LeRoy
Co.A, 361st S S Regiment
1943--1946






Take time to reflect on the difference following 12/7 and 9/11 for a

moment,
too.

Pearl Harbor united the country against an outside agressor.

More people were killed on 9/11 than on 12/7. A lot more.

People remembered 12/7 longer.


Sorry, I'm confused. The OP seems to be talking about Iraq, you mention
9/11. What's the connection?


And you claim to be a genius! (?) Figure it out.

HAH!

Steve


  #5   Report Post  
Bob May
 
Posts: n/a
Default Pearl Harbor

Who mentioned Iraq?
It is no wonder that you are confused. You assume that only countries can
do damage to others. The war that we are in isn't with any particular
country but rather with a religion (Islam) that seems to think that you have
to either be a Muslim or dead. The worst part of that religion is that they
haven't even settled down to what the religion really means to the people
and how to interpet the teachings of that religion.

--
Bob May
Losing weight is easy! If you ever want to lose weight, eat and drink less.
Works evevery time it is tried!




  #6   Report Post  
Mike Patterson
 
Posts: n/a
Default Pearl Harbor

On Sun, 07 Dec 2003 19:15:08 GMT, PhysicsGenius
wrote:

SteveB wrote:
"Walt LeRoy" wrote in message
...

Time to take a moment and reflect on what happened to us 62 years ago,
today, and stop all the bickering and get behind our leaders and fighting
forces in our present struggle.

S/Sgt. Walt LeRoy
Co.A, 361st S S Regiment
1943--1946






Take time to reflect on the difference following 12/7 and 9/11 for a moment,
too.

Pearl Harbor united the country against an outside agressor.

More people were killed on 9/11 than on 12/7. A lot more.

People remembered 12/7 longer.


Sorry, I'm confused. The OP seems to be talking about Iraq, you mention
9/11. What's the connection?


To answer your transparently facetious question -

Radical Islamic terrorists who wish to kill as many non-Islamists in
general and American citizens in particular as possible in order to
contribute to a general global effort to impose Islamic theocracies.


Mike Patterson
Please remove the spamtrap to email me.

The question isn't "are there weapons of mass destruction?",
the question is "who has them now?"

http://www.strategypage.com/iraqwar/...ny/default.asp
http://www.strategypage.com/iraqwar/iraqweaponsgap.asp
  #7   Report Post  
Loren Coe
 
Posts: n/a
Default Pearl Harbor

In article nkKAb.69717$kl6.25804@fed1read03, SteveB wrote:

"Walt LeRoy" wrote in message
...
Time to take a moment and reflect on what happened to us 62 years ago,
today, and stop all the bickering and get behind our leaders and fighting
forces in our present struggle.

S/Sgt. Walt LeRoy
Co.A, 361st S S Regiment
1943--1946





Take time to reflect on the difference following 12/7 and 9/11 for a moment,
too.

Pearl Harbor united the country against an outside agressor.

More people were killed on 9/11 than on 12/7. A lot more.


how many? under 3000 was the final 9/11 count. the Arizona alone
was 1200. i seem to remember 2xxx total at Pearl --Loren



  #8   Report Post  
PhysicsGenius
 
Posts: n/a
Default Pearl Harbor

Mike Patterson wrote:
On Sun, 07 Dec 2003 19:15:08 GMT, PhysicsGenius
wrote:


SteveB wrote:

"Walt LeRoy" wrote in message
...


Time to take a moment and reflect on what happened to us 62 years ago,
today, and stop all the bickering and get behind our leaders and fighting
forces in our present struggle.

S/Sgt. Walt LeRoy
Co.A, 361st S S Regiment
1943--1946






Take time to reflect on the difference following 12/7 and 9/11 for a moment,
too.

Pearl Harbor united the country against an outside agressor.

More people were killed on 9/11 than on 12/7. A lot more.

People remembered 12/7 longer.


Sorry, I'm confused. The OP seems to be talking about Iraq, you mention
9/11. What's the connection?



To answer your transparently facetious question -

Radical Islamic terrorists who wish to kill as many non-Islamists in
general and American citizens in particular as possible in order to
contribute to a general global effort to impose Islamic theocracies.


And these people were located in Iraq somewhere?

  #9   Report Post  
jim rozen
 
Posts: n/a
Default Pearl Harbor

In article nkKAb.69717$kl6.25804@fed1read03, SteveB says...

People remembered 12/7 longer.


Not to change the topic, but I'm willing to go
out on a limb here and bet a coke that in 65
years, they're still gonna remember the WTC
disaster. But even then, the above statement
about pearl harbor will still be true. Folks
will always remember that longer than the WTC
thing, because pearl harbor happened first.

Jim

==================================================
please reply to:
JRR(zero) at yktvmv (dot) vnet (dot) ibm (dot) com
==================================================

  #10   Report Post  
Beecrofter
 
Posts: n/a
Default Pearl Harbor

"Walt LeRoy" wrote in message ...
Time to take a moment and reflect on what happened to us 62 years ago,
today, and stop all the bickering and get behind our leaders and fighting
forces in our present struggle.

S/Sgt. Walt LeRoy
Co.A, 361st S S Regiment
1943--1946


Which part should we reflect upon first, the failure of our government
to protect us from either attack or the blame and coverups that
followed?

Before 9/11 there was clear indication that we were under attack
whether it was the Cole, the Embassies, the first attempt on the WTC
or the Barracks.

As for Pearl Harbor the coverup and blame game that sent Admiral
Kimmel and General Short to be relieved of command and demoted when
the government had decoded messages in advance indicating there would
be a Japanese attack yet withheld that information from the commands
it blamed.

It's time to reflect and question every thing our government does so
we don't have more 9/11 and 12/7 surprises, or more misplaced blame to
protect the political interests of those in office.

We pay dearly in lives and in resources to defend this country but are
we getting what we paid for?

USN (ss) retired


  #11   Report Post  
jim rozen
 
Posts: n/a
Default Pearl Harbor

In article , Beecrofter says...

It's time to reflect and question every thing our government does so
we don't have more 9/11 and 12/7 surprises, or more misplaced blame to
protect the political interests of those in office.


Well put. But oddly, it is getting tougher and tougher to
pose those questions - Patriot Act and all....

Jim

==================================================
please reply to:
JRR(zero) at yktvmv (dot) vnet (dot) ibm (dot) com
==================================================

  #12   Report Post  
Mark
 
Posts: n/a
Default Pearl Harbor



Walt LeRoy wrote:

Time to take a moment and reflect on what happened to us 62 years ago,
today, and stop all the bickering and get behind our leaders and fighting
forces in our present struggle.

S/Sgt. Walt LeRoy



Food for thought, Walt;



Pearl Harbor is being used to sell video games.





--

Mark

N.E. Ohio


Never argue with a fool, a bystander can't tell you apart. (S. Clemens,
A.K.A. Mark Twain)

When in doubt hit the throttle. It may not help but it sure ends the
suspense. (Gaz, r.moto)

  #13   Report Post  
Mike Patterson
 
Posts: n/a
Default Pearl Harbor

On Sun, 07 Dec 2003 22:08:43 GMT, PhysicsGenius
wrote:

Mike Patterson wrote:
On Sun, 07 Dec 2003 19:15:08 GMT, PhysicsGenius
wrote:


SteveB wrote:

"Walt LeRoy" wrote in message
...


Time to take a moment and reflect on what happened to us 62 years ago,
today, and stop all the bickering and get behind our leaders and fighting
forces in our present struggle.

S/Sgt. Walt LeRoy
Co.A, 361st S S Regiment
1943--1946






Take time to reflect on the difference following 12/7 and 9/11 for a moment,
too.

Pearl Harbor united the country against an outside agressor.

More people were killed on 9/11 than on 12/7. A lot more.

People remembered 12/7 longer.


Sorry, I'm confused. The OP seems to be talking about Iraq, you mention
9/11. What's the connection?



To answer your transparently facetious question -

Radical Islamic terrorists who wish to kill as many non-Islamists in
general and American citizens in particular as possible in order to
contribute to a general global effort to impose Islamic theocracies.


And these people were located in Iraq somewhere?


Many were. Many others were receiving financial support from the
former Iraqi regime. Do you wish to contest this?

The man who planned the Achille Lauro attack was arrested in Iraq in
April of this year.
http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/meast/...bbas.arrested/
http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story...937781,00.html

I have the impression that you are one of the folks who believe that
the invasion of Iraq was based on a false claim of Iraqi complicity in
the 9/11 terrorist attacks.

Is this the case? If so, is your mind open to facts? Mine is. If you
can present facts (not rhetoric) to prove your theory, I'm listening.

So far I've not seen anything on this subject from such theorists
other than semi-coherent ranting that always degenerates into
name-calling and assertions that GWB is a son of Satan, or else the
person just plain stops communicating, which I am forced to assume
means they cannot or will not continue a logical discussion based on
fact.

Care to break the record?

BTW, I despise GWB and his ilk on the grounds that they are using this
to radically erode individual rights in the USA.


Mike Patterson
Please remove the spamtrap to email me.

The question isn't "are there weapons of mass destruction?",
the question is "who has them now?"

http://www.strategypage.com/iraqwar/...ny/default.asp
http://www.strategypage.com/iraqwar/iraqweaponsgap.asp
  #14   Report Post  
PhysicsGenius
 
Posts: n/a
Default Pearl Harbor

Mike Patterson wrote:

I have the impression that you are one of the folks who believe that
the invasion of Iraq was based on a false claim of Iraqi complicity in
the 9/11 terrorist attacks.


No, I'm one of the folks who believe that the invasion of Iraq was based
on a false claim of Iraqi ownership of WMDs.

  #15   Report Post  
Mike Patterson
 
Posts: n/a
Default Pearl Harbor

On Sun, 07 Dec 2003 23:42:02 GMT, PhysicsGenius
wrote:

Mike Patterson wrote:

I have the impression that you are one of the folks who believe that
the invasion of Iraq was based on a false claim of Iraqi complicity in
the 9/11 terrorist attacks.


No, I'm one of the folks who believe that the invasion of Iraq was based
on a false claim of Iraqi ownership of WMDs.


Oy. You're either a troll or oblivious to the world around you.

After the first Gulf war Iraq submitted documents inventorying their
biological and chemical weapons and delivery systems to the UN. Most
of those were never relinquished, which was the point of the YEARS of
attempts at inspections by the UN, which were blocked and evaded by
the government of Iraq.

As I said before, you got facts, I'm listening, but you look more like
either a politically motivated ignoramus or a troll right now.

As my sig indicates, the questions isn't "were there Iraqi WMD?", it's
"where ARE they?". Are they still in Iraq? In Iran? Jordan? London?
Israel? New York harbor?

Mike Patterson
Please remove the spamtrap to email me.

The question isn't "are there weapons of mass destruction?",
the question is "who has them now?"

http://www.strategypage.com/iraqwar/...ny/default.asp
http://www.strategypage.com/iraqwar/iraqweaponsgap.asp


  #16   Report Post  
Stuart Wheaton
 
Posts: n/a
Default Pearl Harbor

Mike Patterson wrote:

On Sun, 07 Dec 2003 23:42:02 GMT, PhysicsGenius
wrote:


Mike Patterson wrote:


I have the impression that you are one of the folks who believe that
the invasion of Iraq was based on a false claim of Iraqi complicity in
the 9/11 terrorist attacks.


No, I'm one of the folks who believe that the invasion of Iraq was based
on a false claim of Iraqi ownership of WMDs.



Oy. You're either a troll or oblivious to the world around you.


As my sig indicates, the questions isn't "were there Iraqi WMD?", it's
"where ARE they?". Are they still in Iraq? In Iran? Jordan? London?
Israel? New York harbor?


They weren't anywhere where they posed an immediate threat. Nobody used
one, not the fedyin, not the republican guards, they didn't have them on
the front lines to be found when we over-ran their positions, none were
released as we shelled them, no resistance fighter has had any access to
them, Uday and Qusay didn't have any.

Prior to the war, we knew where much of saddam's nuclear ( or nukular if
you prefer) material was. The IAEA had secured it near Baghdad. We
also knew of a facility where Saddam conducted nuclear exposure
experiments.

At the conclusion of the war, we secured the offices of the OIL ministry
before we attempted to stop the looting of the Dirty bomb components at
the IAEA site. Much of that is now missing or dumped on the ground so
people could steal the barrels. By the time we got around to visiting
the exposure facility, Cobalt sources were missing! And even now at
least 50 known ammo dumps are unsecured, allowing anybody to waltz in
and pick up a dozen RPG's and missiles and walk away with
them...Supposedly we have enough troops there? This is where the bombs
that kill half a dozen Americans a week are coming from!

And as for your suggestion that Militant Islam is our enemy. Saddam's
regime was a very secular Islamic regime, in all probability the final
government in Iraq will be a shiite dominated Islamic theo-democracy
more like Iran than like Turkey. Boy that improves things!

And, one last question, why was the state department guy who had spent a
year doing post war planning removed from the Iraq team against the will
of the commanding general?

  #17   Report Post  
Marcus
 
Posts: n/a
Default Pearl Harbor

PhysicsGenius wrote in message .. .


Sorry, I'm confused. The OP seems to be talking about Iraq, you mention
9/11. What's the connection?



Man, you must get your news from Dan Rather or something. Get your
head out of your fool butt:


Usama bin Laden (search) and Saddam Hussein (search) had an
operational relationship from the early 1990s to 2003 that involved
training in explosives and weapons of mass destruction, logistical
support for terrorist attacks, Al Qaeda training camps and safe haven
in Iraq, and Iraqi financial support for Al Qaeda - perhaps even for
Mohamed Atta - according to a top secret U.S. government memorandum.

The memo, dated October 27, 2003, was sent from Undersecretary of
Defense for Policy Douglas J. Feith (search) to Senators Pat Roberts
and Jay Rockefeller, the chairman and vice chairman of the Senate
Intelligence Committee. It was written in response to a request from
the committee as part of its investigation into prewar intelligence
claims made by the administration. Intelligence reporting included in
the 16-page memo comes from a variety of domestic and foreign
agencies, including the FBI, the Defense Intelligence Agency, the
Central Intelligence Agency, and the National Security Agency. Much of
the evidence is detailed, conclusive, and corroborated by multiple
sources. Some of it is new information obtained in custodial
interviews with high-level Al Qaeda terrorists and Iraqi officials,
and some of it is more than a decade old. The picture that emerges is
one of a history of collaboration between two of America's most
determined and dangerous enemies.

According to the memo, which lays out the intelligence in 50 numbered
points, Iraq-Al Qaeda contacts began in 1990 and continued through
mid-March 2003, days before the Iraq War began. Most of the numbered
passages contain straight, fact-based intelligence reporting, which in
some cases includes an evaluation of the credibility of the source.
This reporting is often followed by commentary and analysis.

The relationship began shortly before the first Gulf War. According to
reporting in the memo, bin Laden sent "emissaries to Jordan in 1990 to
meet with Iraqi government officials." At some unspecified point in
1991, according to a CIA analysis, "Iraq sought Sudan's assistance to
establish links to Al Qaeda." The outreach went in both directions.
According to 1993 CIA reporting cited in the memo, "bin Laden wanted
to expand his organization's capabilities through ties with Iraq."

The primary go-between throughout these early stages was Sudanese
strongman Hassan al-Turabi, a leader of the Al Qaeda-affiliated
National Islamic Front (search). Numerous sources have confirmed this.
One defector reported that "al-Turabi was instrumental in arranging
the Iraqi-Al Qaeda relationship. The defector said Iraq sought Al
Qaeda influence through its connections with Afghanistan, to
facilitate the transshipment of proscribed weapons and equipment to
Iraq. In return, Iraq provided Al Qaeda with training and
instructors."

One such confirmation came in a postwar interview with one of Saddam
Hussein's henchmen. As the memo details:

4. According to a May 2003 debriefing of a senior Iraqi intelligence
officer, Iraqi intelligence established a highly secretive
relationship with Egyptian Islamic Jihad , and later with Al Qaeda.
The first meeting in 1992 between the Iraqi Intelligence Service (IIS)
and Al Qaeda was brokered by al-Turabi. Former IIS deputy director
Faruq Hijazi and senior Al Qaeda leader [Ayman al] Zawahiri were at
the meeting - the first of several between 1992 and 1995 in Sudan.
Additional meetings between Iraqi intelligence and Al Qaeda were held
in Pakistan. Members of Al Qaeda would sometimes visit Baghdad where
they would meet the Iraqi intelligence chief in a safe house. The
report claimed that Saddam insisted the relationship with Al Qaeda be
kept secret. After 9/11, the source said Saddam made a personnel
change in the IIS for fear the relationship would come under scrutiny
from foreign probes.

A decisive moment in the budding relationship came in 1993, when bin
Laden faced internal resistance to his cooperation with Saddam.

5. A CIA report from a contact with good access, some of whose
reporting has been corroborated, said that certain elements in the
"Islamic Army" of bin Laden were against the secular regime of Saddam.
Overriding the internal factional strife that was developing, bin
Laden came to an "understanding" with Saddam that the Islamic Army
would no longer support anti-Saddam activities. According to sensitive
reporting released in U.S. court documents during the African Embassy
trial, in 1993 bin Laden reached an "understanding" with Saddam under
which he (bin Laden) forbade Al Qaeda operations to be mounted against
the Iraqi leader.

Another facilitator of the relationship during the mid-1990s was
Mahmdouh Mahmud Salim (a.k.a. Abu Hajer al-Iraqi). Abu Hajer, now in a
New York prison, was described in court proceedings related to the
August 1998 bombings of U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania as bin
Ladenąs "best friend." According to CIA reporting dating back to the
Clinton administration, bin Laden trusted him to serve as a liaison
with Saddam's regime and tasked him with procurement of weapons of
mass destruction for Al Qaeda. FBI reporting in the memo reveals that
Abu Hajer "visited Iraq in early 1995" and "had a good relationship
with Iraqi intelligence. Sometime before mid-1995 he went on an Al
Qaeda mission to discuss unspecified cooperation with the Iraqi
government."

Some of the reporting about the relationship throughout the mid-1990s
comes from a source who had intimate knowledge of bin Laden and his
dealings. This source, according to CIA analysis, offered "the most
credible information" on cooperation between bin Laden and Iraq.

This source's reports read almost like a diary. Specific dates of when
bin Laden flew to various cities are included, as well as names of
individuals he met. The source did not offer information on the
substantive talks during the meetings. . . . There are not a great
many reports in general on the relationship between bin Laden and Iraq
because of the secrecy surrounding it. But when this source with close
access provided a "window" into bin Laden's activities, bin Laden is
seen as heavily involved with Iraq (and Iran).

Reporting from the early 1990s remains somewhat sketchy, though
multiple sources place Hassan al-Turabi and Ayman al Zawahiri
(search), bin Laden's current No. 2, at the center of the
relationship. The reporting gets much more specific in the mid-1990s:

8. Reporting from a well placed source disclosed that bin Laden was
receiving training on bomb making from the IIS's [Iraqi Intelligence
Service] principal technical expert on making sophisticated
explosives, Brigadier Salim al-Ahmed. Brigadier Salim was observed at
bin Laden's farm in Khartoum in Sept.-Oct. 1995 and again in July
1996, in the company of the Director of Iraqi Intelligence, Mani
abd-al-Rashid al-Tikriti.

9 . . . Bin Laden visited Doha, Qatar (17-19 Jan. 1996), staying at
the residence of a member of the Qatari ruling family. He discussed
the successful movement of explosives into Saudi Arabia, and
operations targeted against U.S. and U.K. interests in Dammam, Dharan,
and Khobar, using clandestine Al Qaeda cells in Saudi Arabia. Upon his
return, bin Laden met with Hijazi and Turabi, among others.

And later more reporting, from the same "well placed" source:

10. The Director of Iraqi Intelligence, Mani abd-al-Rashid al-Tikriti,
met privately with bin Laden at his farm in Sudan in July 1996.
Tikriti used an Iraqi delegation traveling to Khartoum to discuss
bilateral cooperation as his "cover" for his own entry into Sudan to
meet with bin Laden and Hassan al-Turabi. The Iraqi intelligence chief
and two other IIS officers met at bin Ladenąs farm and discussed bin
Ladenąs request for IIS technical assistance in: a) making letter and
parcel bombs; b) making bombs which could be placed on aircraft and
detonated by changes in barometric pressure; and c) making false
passport [sic]. Bin Laden specifically requested that [Brigadier Salim
al-Ahmed], Iraqi intelligence's premier explosives maker‹especially
skilled in making car bombs‹remain with him in Sudan. The Iraqi
intelligence chief instructed Salim to remain in Sudan with bin Laden
as long as required.

The analysis of those events follows:

The time of the visit from the IIS director was a few weeks after the
Khobar Towers bombing. The bombing came on the third anniversary of a
U.S. [Tomahawk missile] strike on IIS HQ (retaliation for the
attempted assassination of former President Bush in Kuwait) for which
Iraqi officials explicitly threatened retaliation.

In addition to the contacts clustered in the mid-1990s, intelligence
reports detail a flurry of activities in early 1998 and again in
December 1998. A "former senior Iraqi intelligence officer" reported
that "the Iraqi intelligence service station in Pakistan was Baghdad's
point of contact with Al Qaeda. He also said bin Laden visited Baghdad
in Jan. 1998 and met with Tariq Aziz."

11. According to sensitive reporting, Saddam personally sent Faruq
Hijazi, IIS deputy director and later Iraqi ambassador to Turkey, to
meet with bin Laden at least twice, first in Sudan and later in
Afghanistan in 1999. . . .

14. According to a sensitive reporting [from] a "regular and reliable
source," [Ayman al] Zawahiri, a senior Al Qaeda operative, visited
Baghdad and met with the Iraqi Vice President on 3 February 1998. The
goal of the visit was to arrange for coordination between Iraq and bin
Laden and establish camps in an-Nasiriyah and Iraqi Kurdistan under
the leadership of Abdul Aziz.

That visit came as the Iraqis intensified their defiance of the U.N.
inspection regime, known as UNSCOM, created by the cease-fire
agreement following the Gulf War. UNSCOM (search) demanded access to
Saddam's presidential palaces that he refused to provide. As the
tensions mounted, President Bill Clinton went to the Pentagon on
February 18, 1998, and prepared the nation for war. He warned of "an
unholy axis of terrorists, drug traffickers, and organized
international criminals" and said "there is no more clear example of
this threat than Saddam Hussein."

The day after this speech, according to documents unearthed in April
2003 in the Iraqi Intelligence headquarters by journalists Mitch
Potter and Inigo Gilmore, Saddam's intelligence service wrote a memo
detailing coming meetings with a bin Laden representative traveling to
Baghdad. Each reference to bin Laden had been covered by liquid paper
that, when revealed, exposed a plan to increase cooperation between
Iraq and Al Qaeda. According to that memo, the IIS agreed to pay for
"all the travel and hotel costs inside Iraq to gain the knowledge of
the message from bin Laden and to convey to his envoy an oral message
from us to bin Laden." The document set as the goal for the meeting a
discussion of "the future of our relationship with him, bin Laden, and
to achieve a direct meeting with him." The Al Qaeda representative,
the document went on to suggest, might provide "a way to maintain
contacts with bin Laden."

Four days later, on February 23, 1998, bin Laden issued his now-famous
fatwa on the plight of Iraq, published in the Arabic-language daily,
al Quds al-Arabi: "For over seven years the United States has been
occupying the lands of Islam in the holiest of places, the Arabian
Peninsula, plundering its riches, dictating to its rulers, humiliating
its people, terrorizing its neighbors, and turning its bases in the
Peninsula into a spearhead through which to fight the neighboring
Muslim peoples." Bin Laden urged his followers to act: "The ruling to
kill all Americans and their allies‹civilians and military‹is an
individual duty for every Muslim who can do it in any country in which
it is possible to do it."

Although war was temporarily averted by a last-minute deal brokered by
U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan, tensions soon rose again. The
standoff with Iraq came to a head in December 1998, when President
Clinton launched Operation Desert Fox (search), a 70-hour bombing
campaign that began on December 16 and ended three days later, on
December 19, 1998.

According to press reports at the time, Faruq Hijazi, deputy director
of Iraqi Intelligence, met with bin Laden in Afghanistan on December
21, 1998, to offer bin Laden safe haven in Iraq. CIA reporting in the
memo to the Senate Intelligence Committee seems to confirm this
meeting and relates two others.

15. A foreign government service reported that an Iraqi delegation,
including at least two Iraqi intelligence officers formerly assigned
to the Iraqi Embassy in Pakistan, met in late 1998 with bin Laden in
Afghanistan.

16. According to CIA reporting, bin Laden and Zawahiri met with two
Iraqi intelligence officers in Afghanistan in Dec. 1998.

17. . . . Iraq sent an intelligence officer to Afghanistan to seek
closer ties to bin Laden and the Taliban in late 1998. The source
reported that the Iraqi regime was trying to broaden its cooperation
with Al Qaeda. Iraq was looking to recruit Muslim "elements" to
sabotage U.S. and U.K. interests. After a senior Iraqi intelligence
officer met with Taliban leader [Mullah] Omar, arrangements were made
for a series of meetings between the Iraqi intelligence officer and
bin Laden in Pakistan. The source noted Faruq Hijazi was in
Afghanistan in late 1998.

18. . . . Faruq Hijazi went to Afghanistan in 1999 along with several
other Iraqi officials to meet with bin Laden. The source claimed that
Hijazi would have met bin Laden only at Saddamąs explicit direction.

An analysis that follows No. 18 provides additional context and an
explanation of these reports:

Reporting entries #4, #11, #15, #16, #17, and #18, from different
sources, corroborate each other and provide confirmation of meetings
between Al Qaeda operatives and Iraqi intelligence in Afghanistan and
Pakistan. None of the reports have information on operational details
or the purpose of such meetings. The covert nature of the relationship
would indicate strict compartmentation [sic] of operations.

Information about connections between Al Qaeda and Iraq was so
widespread by early 1999 that it made its way into the mainstream
press. A January 11, 1999, Newsweek story ran under this headline:
"Saddam + Bin Laden?" The story cited an "Arab intelligence source"
with knowledge of contacts between Iraq and Al Qaeda. "According to
this source, Saddam expected last month's American and British bombing
campaign to go on much onger than it did. The dictator believed that
as the attacks continued, indignation would grow in the Muslim world,
making his terrorism offensive both harder to trace and more
effective. With acts of terror contributing to chaos in the region,
Turkey, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, and Kuwait might feel less inclined to
support Washington. Saddam's long-term strategy, according to several
sources, is to bully or cajole Muslim countries into breaking the
embargo against Iraq, without waiting for the United Nations to lift
if formally."

Intelligence reports about the nature of the relationship between Iraq
and Al Qaeda from mid-1999 through 2003 are conflicting. One senior
Iraqi intelligence officer in U.S. custody, Khalil Ibrahim Abdallah,
"said that the last contact between the IIS and Al Qaeda was in July
1999. Bin Laden wanted to meet with Saddam, he said. The guidance sent
back from Saddamąs office reportedly ordered Iraqi intelligence to
refrain from any further contact with bin Laden and Al Qaeda. The
source opined that Saddam wanted to distance himself from Al Qaeda."

The bulk of reporting on the relationship contradicts this claim. One
report states that "in late 1999" Al Qaeda set up a training camp in
northern Iraq that "was operational as of 1999." Other reports suggest
that the Iraqi regime contemplated several offers of safe haven to bin
Laden throughout 1999.

23. . . . Iraqi officials were carefully considering offering safe
haven to bin Laden and his closest collaborators in Nov. 1999. The
source indicated the idea was put forward by the presumed head of
Iraqi intelligence in Islamabad (Khalid Janaby) who in turn was in
frequent contact and had good relations with bin Laden.

Some of the most intriguing intelligence concerns an Iraqi named Ahmed
Hikmat Shakir:

24. According to sensitive reporting, a Malaysia-based Iraqi national
(Shakir) facilitated the arrival of one of the Sept 11 hijackers for
an operational meeting in Kuala Lumpur (Jan 2000). Sensitive reporting
indicates Shakirąs travel and contacts link him to a worldwide network
of terrorists, including Al Qaeda. Shakir worked at the Kuala Lumpur
airport‹a job he claimed to have obtained through an Iraqi embassy
employee.

One of the men at that Al Qaeda operational meeting in the Kuala
Lumpur Hotel was Tawfiz al Atash, a top bin Laden lieutenant later
identified as the mastermind of the October 12, 2000, attack on the
USS Cole.

25. Investigation into the bombing of the USS Cole in October 2000 by
Al Qaeda revealed no specific Iraqi connections but according to the
CIA, "fragmentary evidence points to possible Iraqi involvement."

26. During a custodial interview, Ibn al-Shaykh al-Libi [a senior Al
Qaeda operative] said he was told by an Al Qaeda associate that he was
tasked to travel to Iraq (1998) to establish a relationship with Iraqi
intelligence to obtain poisons and gases training. After the USS Cole
bombing in 2000, two Al Qaeda operatives were sent to Iraq for
CBW-related [Chemical and Biological Weapons] training beginning in
Dec 2000. Iraqi intelligence was "encouraged" after the embassy and
USS Cole bombings to provide this training.

The analysis of this report follows.

CIA maintains that Ibn al-Shaykh's timeline is consistent with other
sensitive reporting indicating that bin Laden asked Iraq in 1998 for
advanced weapons, including CBW and "poisons."

Additional reporting also calls into question the claim that relations
between Iraq and Al Qaeda cooled after mid-1999:

27. According to sensitive CIA reporting, . . . the Saudi National
Guard went on a kingdom-wide state of alert in late Dec 2000 after
learning Saddam agreed to assist Al Qaeda in attacking U.S./U.K.
interests in Saudi Arabia.

And then there is the alleged contact between lead 9/11 hijacker
Mohamed Atta and an Iraqi intelligence officer in Prague. The
reporting on those links suggests not one meeting, but as many as
four. Whatąs more, the memo reveals potential financing of Atta's
activities by Iraqi intelligence.

The Czech counterintelligence service reported that the Sept. 11
hijacker [Mohamed] Atta met with the former Iraqi intelligence chief
in Prague, [Ahmed Khalil Ibrahim Samir] al Ani, on several occasions.
During one of these meetings, al Ani ordered the IIS finance officer
to issue Atta funds from IIS financial holdings in the Prague office.

And the commentary:

CIA can confirm two Atta visits to Prague‹in Dec. 1994 and in June
2000; data surrounding the other two, on 26 Oct 1999 and 9 April 2001,
is complicated and sometimes contradictory and CIA and FBI cannot
confirm Atta met with the IIS. Czech Interior Minister Stanislav Gross
continues to stand by his information.

It's not just Gross who stands by the information. Five high-ranking
members of the Czech government have publicly confirmed meetings
between Atta and al Ani. The meeting that has gotten the most press
attention ,April 9, 2001, is also the most widely disputed. Even some
of the most hawkish Bush administration officials are privately
skeptical that Atta met al Ani on that occasion. They believe that
reports of the alleged meeting, said to have taken place in public,
outside the headquarters of the U.S.-financed Radio Free Europe/Radio
Liberty, suggest a level of sloppiness that doesnąt fit the pattern of
previous high-level Iraq-Al Qaeda contacts.

Whether or not that specific meeting occurred, the report by Czech
counterintelligence that al Ani ordered the Iraqi Intelligence Service
officer to provide IIS funds to Atta might help explain the lead
hijacker's determination to reach Prague, despite significant
obstacles, in the spring of 2000. (Note that the report stops short of
confirming that the funds were transferred. It claims only that the
IIS officer requested the transfer.) Recall that Atta flew to Prague
from Germany on May 30, 2000, but was denied entry because he did not
have a valid visa. Rather than simply return to Germany and fly
directly to the United States, his ultimate destination, Atta took
pains to get to Prague. After he was refused entry the first time, he
traveled back to Germany, obtained the proper paperwork, and caught a
bus back to Prague. He left for the United States the day after
arriving in Prague for the second time.

Several reports indicate that the relationship between Saddam and bin
Laden continued, even after the September 11 attacks:

31. An Oct. 2002 . . . report said Al Qaeda and Iraq reached a secret
agreement whereby Iraq would provide safe haven to Al Qaeda members
and provide them with money and weapons. The agreement reportedly
prompted a large number of Al Qaeda members to head to Iraq. The
report also said that Al Qaeda members involved in a fraudulent
passport network for Al Qaeda had been directed to procure 90 Iraqi
and Syrian passports for Al Qaeda personnel.

The analysis that accompanies that report indicates that the report
fits the pattern of Iraq-Al Qaeda collaboration:

References to procurement of false passports from Iraq and offers of
safe haven previously have surfaced in CIA source reporting considered
reliable. Intelligence reports to date have maintained that Iraqi
support for Al Qaeda usually involved providing training, obtaining
passports, and offers of refuge. This report adds to that list by
including weapons and money. This assistance would make sense in the
aftermath of 9-11.

Colin Powell, in his February 5, 2003, presentation to the U.N.
Security Council, revealed the activities of Abu Musab al Zarqawi.
Reporting in the memo expands on Powell's case and might help explain
some of the resistance the U.S. military is currently facing in Iraq.

37. Sensitive reporting indicates senior terrorist planner and close
Al Qaeda associate al Zarqawi has had an operational alliance with
Iraqi officials. As of Oct. 2002, al Zarqawi maintained contacts with
the IIS to procure weapons and explosives, including surface-to-air
missiles from an IIS officer in Baghdad. According to sensitive
reporting, al Zarqawi was setting up sleeper cells in Baghdad to be
activated in case of a U.S. occupation of the city, suggesting his
operational cooperation with the Iraqis may have deepened in recent
months. Such cooperation could include IIS provision of a secure
operating bases [sic] and steady access to arms and explosives in
preparation for a possible U.S. invasion. Al Zarqawiąs procurements
from the Iraqis also could support Al Qaeda operations against the
U.S. or its allies elsewhere.

38. According to sensitive reporting, a contact with good access who
does not have an established reporting record: An Iraqi intelligence
service officer said that as of mid-March the IIS was providing
weapons to Al Qaeda members located in northern Iraq, including rocket
propelled grenade (RPG)-18 launchers. According to IIS information,
northern Iraq-based Al Qaeda members believed that the U.S. intended
to strike Al Qaeda targets during an anticipated assault against Ansar
al-Islam positions.

The memo further reported pre-war intelligence which "claimed that an
Iraqi intelligence official, praising Ansar al-Islam, provided it with
$100,000 and agreed to continue to give assistance."

Critics of the Bush administration have complained that Iraq-Al Qaeda
connections are a fantasy, trumped up by the warmongers at the White
House to fit their preconceived notions about international terror;
that links between Saddam Hussein and Usama bin Laden have been
routinely "exaggerated" for political purposes; that hawks
"cherry-picked" bits of intelligence and tendentiously presented these
to the American public.

Carl Levin, a senior member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, made
those points as recently as November 9, in an appearance on Fox News
Sunday. Republicans on the committee, he complained, refuse to look at
the administrationąs "exaggeration of intelligence."

Said Levin: "The question is whether or not they exaggerated
intelligence in order to carry out their purpose, which was to make
the case for going to war. Did we know, for instance, with certainty
that there was any relationship between the Iraqis and the terrorists
that were in Afghanistan, bin Laden? The administration said that
there's a connection between those terrorist groups in Afghanistan and
Iraq. Was there a basis for that?"

There was, as shown in the memo to the committee on which Levin
serves. And much of the reporting comes from Clinton-era intelligence.
Not that you would know this from Al Goreąs recent public statements.
Indeed, the former vice president claims to be privy to new "evidence"
that the administration lied. In an August speech at New York
University, Gore claimed: "The evidence now shows clearly that Saddam
did not want to work with Usama bin Laden at all, much less give him
weapons of mass destruction." Really?

One of the most interesting things to note about the 16-page memo is
that it covers only a fraction of the evidence that will eventually be
available to document the relationship between Iraq and Al Qaeda. For
one thing, both Saddam and bin Laden were desperate to keep their
cooperation secret. (Remember, Iraqi intelligence used liquid paper on
an internal intelligence document to conceal bin Laden's name.) For
another, few people in the U.S. government are expressly looking for
such links. There is no Iraq-Al Qaeda equivalent of the CIA's
1,400-person Iraq Survey Group currently searching Iraq for weapons of
mass destruction.

Instead, CIA and FBI officials are methodically reviewing Iraqi
intelligence files that survived the three-week war last spring. These
documents would cover several miles if laid end-to-end. And they are
in Arabic. They include not only connections between bin Laden and
Saddam, but also revolting details of the regime's long history of
brutality. It will be a slow process.

So Feith's memo to the Senate Intelligence Committee is best viewed as
sort of a "Cliffąs Notes" version of the relationship. It contains the
highlights, but it is far from exhaustive.

One example. The memo contains only one paragraph on Ahmed Hikmat
Shakir, the Iraqi facilitator who escorted two September 11 hijackers
through customs in Kuala Lumpur. U.S. intelligence agencies have
extensive reporting on his activities before and after the September
11 hijacking. That they would include only this brief overview
suggests the 16-page memo, extensive as it is, just skims the surface
of the reporting on Iraq-Al Qaeda connections.

Other intelligence reports indicate that Shakir whisked not one but
two September 11 hijackers - Khalid al Midhar and Nawaq al Hamzi -
through the passport and customs process upon their arrival in Kuala
Lumpur on January 5, 2000. Shakir then traveled with the hijackers to
the Kuala Lumpur Hotel where they met with Ramzi bin al Shibh, one of
the masterminds of the September 11 plot. The meeting lasted three
days. Shakir returned to work on January 9 and January 10, and never
again.

Shakir got his airport job through a contact at the Iraqi Embassy.
(Iraq routinely used its embassies as staging grounds for its
intelligence operations; in some cases, more than half of the alleged
"diplomats" were intelligence operatives.) The Iraqi embassy, not his
employer, controlled Shakirąs schedule. He was detained in Qatar on
September 17, 2001. Authorities found in his possession contact
information for terrorists involved in the 1993 World Trade Center
bombing, the 1998 embassy bombings, the 2000 `ck on the USS Cole, and
the September 11 hijackings. The CIA had previous reporting that
Shakir had received a phone call from the safe house where the 1993
World Trade Center attacks had been plotted.

The Qataris released Shakir shortly after his arrest. On October 21,
2001, he flew to Amman, Jordan, where he was to change planes to a
flight to Baghdad. He didnąt make that flight. Shakir was detained in
Jordan for three months, where the CIA interrogated him. His
interrogators concluded that Shakir had received extensive training in
counter-interrogation techniques. Not long after he was detained,
according to an official familiar with the intelligence, the Iraqi
regime began to "pressure" Jordanian intelligence to release him. At
the same time, Amnesty International complained that Shakir was being
held without charge. The Jordanians released him on January 28, 2002,
at which point he is believed to have fled back to Iraq.

Was Shakir an Iraqi agent? Does he provide a connection between Saddam
Hussein and September 11? We donąt know. We may someday find out.

But there can no longer be any serious argument about whether Saddam
Hussein's Iraq worked with Usama bin Laden and Al Qaeda to plot
against Americans.

(November 15, 2003)
  #18   Report Post  
PhysicsGenius
 
Posts: n/a
Default Pearl Harbor

Mike Patterson wrote:
On Sun, 07 Dec 2003 23:42:02 GMT, PhysicsGenius
wrote:


Mike Patterson wrote:


I have the impression that you are one of the folks who believe that
the invasion of Iraq was based on a false claim of Iraqi complicity in
the 9/11 terrorist attacks.


No, I'm one of the folks who believe that the invasion of Iraq was based
on a false claim of Iraqi ownership of WMDs.



Oy. You're either a troll or oblivious to the world around you.

After the first Gulf war Iraq submitted documents inventorying their
biological and chemical weapons and delivery systems to the UN. Most
of those were never relinquished, which was the point of the YEARS of
attempts at inspections by the UN, which were blocked and evaded by
the government of Iraq.

As I said before, you got facts, I'm listening, but you look more like
either a politically motivated ignoramus or a troll right now.

As my sig indicates, the questions isn't "were there Iraqi WMD?", it's
"where ARE they?". Are they still in Iraq? In Iran? Jordan? London?
Israel? New York harbor?


The CIA and Bush were 100% sure where they were before the war began,
right? So that leaves us with 3 possibilities:

1) The bombs are still right where they were. Likelihood: Impossible.
After all, they looked and the bombs aren't there now.

2) The bombs moved. Likelihood: Improbable. How does one move a
presumably massive arsenal (you mentioned "delivery systems") in such a
way as to be hidden from the most advanced satellite recon in the world
while simultaneously fighting a losing war? And even if you moved it,
how would you keep it hidden from same? Neighbor countries would
probably less than enthusiastic about taking the hot potato after what
happened in Iraq.

3) They lied. (Or possibly worse: They are so imcompetent that they
really did think there were bombs there.) Likelihood: It's happened
many times before.

  #19   Report Post  
Gunner
 
Posts: n/a
Default Pearl Harbor

On 7 Dec 2003 14:31:45 -0800, (Beecrofter) wrote:

"Walt LeRoy" wrote in message ...
Time to take a moment and reflect on what happened to us 62 years ago,
today, and stop all the bickering and get behind our leaders and fighting
forces in our present struggle.

S/Sgt. Walt LeRoy
Co.A, 361st S S Regiment
1943--1946


Which part should we reflect upon first, the failure of our government
to protect us from either attack or the blame and coverups that
followed?

Before 9/11 there was clear indication that we were under attack
whether it was the Cole, the Embassies, the first attempt on the WTC
or the Barracks.

As for Pearl Harbor the coverup and blame game that sent Admiral
Kimmel and General Short to be relieved of command and demoted when
the government had decoded messages in advance indicating there would
be a Japanese attack yet withheld that information from the commands
it blamed.

It's time to reflect and question every thing our government does so
we don't have more 9/11 and 12/7 surprises, or more misplaced blame to
protect the political interests of those in office.

We pay dearly in lives and in resources to defend this country but are
we getting what we paid for?

USN (ss) retired


Then when we tighten up security and make sure it doesnt happen
again..the actions are demonized as violations of the Constitution and
Civil Rights..witness Patriot Act, Gitmo etc etc.

I wish you folks would come up with a counter proposal to ensure the
security of the US, all the while taking money from the HUMINT side of
the equation, and solutions that do not violate (allegedly) someones
rights.

If you dont have any solutions..then you are part of the problem.

Gunner

No 220-pound thug can threaten the well-being or dignity of a 110-pound
woman who has two pounds of iron to even things out. Is that evil?
Is that wrong? People who object to weapons aren't abolishing violence,
they're begging for the rule of brute force, when the biggest, strongest
animals among men were always automatically "right". Guns end that,
and social democracy is a hollow farce without an armed populace to make
it work.
- L. Neil Smith
  #20   Report Post  
SteveB
 
Posts: n/a
Default Pearl Harbor


"PhysicsGenius" wrote in message
...
Mike Patterson wrote:

I have the impression that you are one of the folks who believe that
the invasion of Iraq was based on a false claim of Iraqi complicity in
the 9/11 terrorist attacks.


No, I'm one of the folks who believe that the invasion of Iraq was based
on a false claim of Iraqi ownership of WMDs.


Then the gas weapons they (the Iraqis) used to kill hundreds of thousands of
Kurds weren't WMDs?

What is YOUR definition of a WMD?

Steve




  #21   Report Post  
Abrasha
 
Posts: n/a
Default Pearl Harbor

Mark wrote:

Walt LeRoy wrote:

Time to take a moment and reflect on what happened to us 62 years ago,
today, and stop all the bickering and get behind our leaders and fighting
forces in our present struggle.

S/Sgt. Walt LeRoy


Food for thought, Walt;

Pearl Harbor is being used to sell video games.

--


The war in Iraq is being used to sell action figures of GWB (complete in flight
suit), Ann Coulter, Tony Blair, Donald Rumsfeld and Baghdad Bob (the last four
as seen in the Dec. 8 issue of Times)

Abrasha
http://www.abrasha.com
  #22   Report Post  
Eastburn
 
Posts: n/a
Default Pearl Harbor

Regarding Pearl - May all of them rest in peace.

Been to Punch Bowl to visit lost ones.

Today I backed up a video tape onto a DVD and created a cover
with pictures of the Harbor map, Arizona exploding, Arizona resting
under the white bridge,
The Utah on her side, and the Oklahoma on her stacks.
Details of text on the DVD cover included some vitals.
Some of which are :

PERSONNEL KILLED

Navy 2001
Marine Corps 109
Army 231
Civilian 54

PERSONNEL WOUNDED

Navy 710
Marine Corps 69
Army 364
Civilian 35

SHIPS

Sunk or beached 12
Damaged 9

AIRCRAFT

Destroyed 164
Damaged 159

Martin [ who has a resting Great Grandfather who used to steer those
boats as his ]

--
Martin Eastburn, Barbara Eastburn
@ home at Lion's Lair with our computer
NRA LOH, NRA Life
NRA Second Amendment Task Force Charter Founder


Walt LeRoy wrote:

Time to take a moment and reflect on what happened to us 62 years ago,
today, and stop all the bickering and get behind our leaders and fighting
forces in our present struggle.

S/Sgt. Walt LeRoy
Co.A, 361st S S Regiment
1943--1946

  #23   Report Post  
Gary Coffman
 
Posts: n/a
Default Pearl Harbor

On Sun, 7 Dec 2003 20:49:23 -0800, "SteveB" wrote:
"PhysicsGenius" wrote in message
.. .
Mike Patterson wrote:

I have the impression that you are one of the folks who believe that
the invasion of Iraq was based on a false claim of Iraqi complicity in
the 9/11 terrorist attacks.


No, I'm one of the folks who believe that the invasion of Iraq was based
on a false claim of Iraqi ownership of WMDs.


Then the gas weapons they (the Iraqis) used to kill hundreds of thousands of
Kurds weren't WMDs?


No and no. First of all, Iraq hasn't gassed "hundreds of thousands of Kurds".
The only documented case caused casualties of under 5,000, and that was
because the Kurds were in the path of the advancing Iranian army, which was
the actual target. It isn't even clear whether it was Iraqi gas or Iranian gas
which did them in, since both sides were using gas (mustard gas) in that battle.
Such collateral damage is common in war. There have been some other
unconfirmed claims, but none so large. Second, gas is at best a tactical
battlefield weapon, and a tricky one to employ effectively at that, as Europeans
learned in WWI.

Note well two other things. First, the US supplied Iran with the materials to
make the gas used in the Iraq-Iran war. Second, there is little or no evidence
(16 empty gas shell casings) that Iraq maintained a stockpile of poison gas
after the 1991 Gulf War in contravention of the ceasefire accords. The UN
didn't find any, the 1400 man US task force searching for WMD haven't found
any, even though Bush claimed in his State of the Union address that Iraq
still had 29,234 shells loaded with gas. Makes one wonder, how Bush knew
such an exact number, and why he hasn't clued his task force as to where
he did the count.

What is YOUR definition of a WMD?


Strategic weapons. Example, a 300 kT or larger city buster nuke. Gas doesn't
qualify as a city buster, since the quantities required would be huge. Biological
weapons might, though we have to go back to the Black Death to actually see
an example, which had more to do with lack of sanitation and medical services
than the actual plague agent.

Ordinary bombs aren't traditionally considered WMD, but when applied in
sufficient numbers, as with the firebombing of Dresden in WWII, the effects
are much the same, 135,000 civilian dead in a single raid.

Meanwhile, Bush proclaimed that Iraq had 45,000 liters of biological weaponry,
but not so much as a microliter has been found by his 1,400 man task force.
He also claimed the Iraqis had mobile biological warfare laboratories, but the
claims to have found the trailers so proudly hawked at the start of the war
have been quietly withdrawn, after the British manufacturer came forward
and confirmed that they were actually barrage balloon inflation trailers as
the Iraqis had maintained.

The Big Lie can be an effective propaganda technique, but only as long as
the pesky truth doesn't insist on surfacing.

Gary
  #24   Report Post  
Gunner
 
Posts: n/a
Default Pearl Harbor

On Sun, 07 Dec 2003 22:09:33 -0500, Stuart Wheaton
wrote:


They weren't anywhere where they posed an immediate threat. Nobody used
one, not the fedyin, not the republican guards, they didn't have them on
the front lines to be found when we over-ran their positions, none were
released as we shelled them, no resistance fighter has had any access to
them, Uday and Qusay didn't have any.


This was on CBS News last night, with an interview by al-Dabbagh

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/...in541815.shtml

(CBS/AP) An Iraqi officer has identified himself as the source for a
British claim about Saddam Hussein's alleged weapons of mass
destruction that sparked a controversy marked by the death of a
British government arms expert, a newspaper reported Sunday.

Prime Minister Tony Blair's office declined to comment on the
newspaper report, except to urge anyone with information about the
so-far elusive weapons to contact the military.

The Sunday Telegraph reports Lt. Col. al-Dabbagh identified himself as
the source for the British government's assertion that Iraq could have
deployed chemical or biological weapons of mass destruction within 45
minutes of a decision to do so. The paper gave the officer's surname
only, citing fears for his safety if he was fully identified.

“We're not prepared to comment but we urge all those involved to
provide the Iraq Survey Group with whatever information they believe
they have,” a spokeswoman for Blair's office said on customary
condition of anonymity. The ISG is the coalition body searching for
Saddam's alleged chemical or biological weapons.

The 45-minute claim was in a government dossier published in September
2002. A British Broadcasting Corp. report later accused the government
of “sexing up” the dossier to make a more convincing case for military
action. Government weapons adviser David Kelly apparently committed
suicide in July after being identified as the source for the BBC
report.

Kelly's death prompted a judicial inquiry that scrutinized the
workings of Blair's government and its use of intelligence in the
buildup to the U.S.-led war. A report from the inquiry is expected
early next year.

The Sunday Telegraph reported that al-Dabbagh was the former head of
an Iraqi air defense unit in the country's western desert. It said he
had spied for the Iraqi National Accord, a London-based exile group,
and provided reports to British intelligence from early 2002 on
Saddam's plans to deploy weapons of mass destruction.

Al-Dabbagh said cases containing chemical or biological warheads were
delivered to front-line units, including his own, in late 2002, the
paper reported. He said they were designed to be launched by hand-held
rocket-propelled grenades, and did not know what exactly the warheads
contained.

The Blair government's September dossier said that “Iraq's military
forces are able to use chemical and biological weapons, with command,
control and logistical arrangements in place. The Iraqi military are
able to deploy these weapons within 45 minutes of a decision to do
so.”

The head of the MI6 spy agency, Sir Richard Dearlove, told the inquiry
into Kelly's death that the 45-minute warning in the dossier came from
an “established and reliable source,” quoting a senior Iraqi military
officer who was in a position to know the information.

The Sunday Telegraph said al-Dabbagh believed he was the source for
that claim.

“I am the one responsible for providing this information,” he was
quoted as saying. “It is 100 percent accurate.

“Forget 45 minutes, we could have fired these within half an hour,”
al-Dabbagh added. He said the weapons were not used because most of
the Iraqi army did not want to fight for Saddam.

The newspaper said al-Dabbagh works as an adviser to the
U.S.-appointed Iraqi Governing Council and said he has received death
threats from Saddam loyalists.

It reported that Iyad Allawi, the head of the Iraqi National Accord
and a prominent council member, confirmed that he had passed
information from al-Dabbagh on Saddam's weapons to British and
American intelligence officials in the spring and summer of 2002.



No 220-pound thug can threaten the well-being or dignity of a 110-pound
woman who has two pounds of iron to even things out. Is that evil?
Is that wrong? People who object to weapons aren't abolishing violence,
they're begging for the rule of brute force, when the biggest, strongest
animals among men were always automatically "right". Guns end that,
and social democracy is a hollow farce without an armed populace to make
it work.
- L. Neil Smith
  #25   Report Post  
Gunner
 
Posts: n/a
Default Pearl Harbor

On Mon, 08 Dec 2003 03:37:41 GMT, PhysicsGenius
wrote:

Mike Patterson wrote:
On Sun, 07 Dec 2003 23:42:02 GMT, PhysicsGenius
wrote:


Mike Patterson wrote:


I have the impression that you are one of the folks who believe that
the invasion of Iraq was based on a false claim of Iraqi complicity in
the 9/11 terrorist attacks.

No, I'm one of the folks who believe that the invasion of Iraq was based
on a false claim of Iraqi ownership of WMDs.



Oy. You're either a troll or oblivious to the world around you.

After the first Gulf war Iraq submitted documents inventorying their
biological and chemical weapons and delivery systems to the UN. Most
of those were never relinquished, which was the point of the YEARS of
attempts at inspections by the UN, which were blocked and evaded by
the government of Iraq.

As I said before, you got facts, I'm listening, but you look more like
either a politically motivated ignoramus or a troll right now.

As my sig indicates, the questions isn't "were there Iraqi WMD?", it's
"where ARE they?". Are they still in Iraq? In Iran? Jordan? London?
Israel? New York harbor?


The CIA and Bush were 100% sure where they were before the war began,
right? So that leaves us with 3 possibilities:

1) The bombs are still right where they were. Likelihood: Impossible.
After all, they looked and the bombs aren't there now.

2) The bombs moved. Likelihood: Improbable. How does one move a
presumably massive arsenal (you mentioned "delivery systems") in such a
way as to be hidden from the most advanced satellite recon in the world
while simultaneously fighting a losing war? And even if you moved it,
how would you keep it hidden from same? Neighbor countries would
probably less than enthusiastic about taking the hot potato after what
happened in Iraq.

3) They lied. (Or possibly worse: They are so imcompetent that they
really did think there were bombs there.) Likelihood: It's happened
many times before.


Or..#2 is likely

Posted on Sun, Dec. 07, 2003

Report: Source of Iraq Arms Claim Emerges
MICHAEL McDONOUGH
Associated Press

LONDON - An Iraqi officer has identified himself as the source for a
British claim about Saddam Hussein's weapons that sparked a
controversy marked by the death of a British government arms expert, a
newspaper reported Sunday.

The Sunday Telegraph said Lt. Col. al-Dabbagh identified himself as
the source for the British government's assertion that Iraq could have
deployed chemical or biological weapons of mass destruction within 45
minutes of a decision to do so. The paper gave the officer's surname
only, citing fears for his safety if he was fully identified.

Prime Minister Tony Blair's office declined to comment on the
newspaper report, which was featured in early editions published late
Saturday.

"We're not prepared to comment but we urge all those involved to
provide the Iraq Survey Group with whatever information they believe
they have," a spokeswoman for Blair's office said on customary
condition of anonymity. The ISG is the coalition body searching for
Saddam's alleged chemical or biological weapons.

The 45-minute claim was in a government dossier published in September
2002. A British Broadcasting Corp. report later accused the government
of "sexing up" the dossier to make a more convincing case for military
action. Government weapons adviser David Kelly apparently committed
suicide in July after being identified as the source for the BBC
report.

Kelly's death prompted a judicial inquiry that scrutinized the
workings of Blair's government and its use of intelligence in the
buildup to the U.S.-led war. A report from the inquiry is expected
early next year.

The Sunday Telegraph reported that al-Dabbagh was the former head of
an Iraqi air defense unit in the country's western desert. It said he
had spied for the Iraqi National Accord, a London-based exile group,
and provided reports to British intelligence from early 2002 on
Saddam's plans to deploy weapons of mass destruction.

Al-Dabbagh said cases containing chemical or biological warheads were
delivered to front-line units, including his own, in late 2002, the
paper reported. He said they were designed to be launched by hand-held
rocket-propelled grenades, and did not know what exactly the warheads
contained.

The government's September dossier said that "Iraq's military forces
are able to use chemical and biological weapons, with command, control
and logistical arrangements in place. The Iraqi military are able to
deploy these weapons within 45 minutes of a decision to do so."

The head of the MI6 spy agency, Sir Richard Dearlove, told the inquiry
into Kelly's death that the 45-minute warning in the dossier came from
an "established and reliable source," quoting a senior Iraqi military
officer who was in a position to know the information.

The Sunday Telegraph said al-Dabbagh believed he was the source for
that claim.

"I am the one responsible for providing this information," he was
quoted as saying. "It is 100 percent accurate.

"Forget 45 minutes, we could have fired these within half an hour,"
al-Dabbagh added. He said the weapons were not used because most of
the Iraqi army did not want to fight for Saddam.

The newspaper said al-Dabbagh works as an adviser to the Iraqi
Governing Council and said he has received death threats from Saddam
loyalists.

It reported that Iyad Allawi, the head of the Iraqi National Accord
and a prominent council member, confirmed that he had passed
information from al-Dabbagh on Saddam's weapons to British and
American intelligence officials in the spring and summer of 2002.


No 220-pound thug can threaten the well-being or dignity of a 110-pound
woman who has two pounds of iron to even things out. Is that evil?
Is that wrong? People who object to weapons aren't abolishing violence,
they're begging for the rule of brute force, when the biggest, strongest
animals among men were always automatically "right". Guns end that,
and social democracy is a hollow farce without an armed populace to make
it work.
- L. Neil Smith


  #26   Report Post  
Mark
 
Posts: n/a
Default Pearl Harbor



SteveB wrote:


What is YOUR definition of a WMD?

Steve



I've always had a problem with the phrase "Weapons of Mass Destruction".

First time I heard the term WMD years ago the talking head had me full
attention because there is only one thing that causes mass destruction
and it involves a mushroom cloud and fire ball. I was scared ****less
till I figured they were talking only Chem and Bio weapons. Lets face
it, chemical and biological weapons don't destroy anything. They only
murder and kill.

WMD, nifty catch phrase used to create an emotive response in the populace.

Now a WMD is an envelope with white powder.



On a side note, when this Anthrax scare first happened I heard a talking
head stating how the machinery for reducing anthrax to weapons grade
size was highly specialized and difficult to come by so there was little
to worry about. Just a little propaganda to make the populace feel
better ? as at the time I was employed for a firm specializing in
milling machines. We had three or four small batch mills sitting there,
on display, waiting for someone to buy them. Not that we would sell the
machines knowing they would be used for the milling of murderous
potions, the purchaser would only have to have a good lie.



--
--

Mark

N.E. Ohio


Never argue with a fool, a bystander can't tell you apart. (S. Clemens,
A.K.A. Mark Twain)

When in doubt hit the throttle. It may not help but it sure ends the
suspense. (Gaz, r.moto)

  #27   Report Post  
Beecrofter
 
Posts: n/a
Default Pearl Harbor

Gunner wrote in message . ..


Then when we tighten up security and make sure it doesnt happen
again..the actions are demonized as violations of the Constitution and
Civil Rights..witness Patriot Act, Gitmo etc etc.

I wish you folks would come up with a counter proposal to ensure the
security of the US, all the while taking money from the HUMINT side of
the equation, and solutions that do not violate (allegedly) someones
rights.

If you dont have any solutions..then you are part of the problem.

I think that you need a broader view, we could have more security as a
totalitarian nation. It worked for years for other dictators and
despots but we have a constitution which our leaders are sworn to
defend as the basis for our society.
Their oath makes the point of defending our constitution from enemies
foriegn and domestic. I am of the belief that the patriot act and John
Ashcroft are both threats to our way of life and the constitution.
Not to worry, it really isn't in our economic interest to have peace
in the world as we are the largest arms merchant. We manage to sell
more arms in the world marketplace than Russia, China, Great Britain ,
France, and Germany added together. Our leaders won't suffer as the
death and dying and destruction will be mostly among the masses while
they grow profits and power.
If your only solution is the end of our constitution and a shift
towarrds totalitarianism then I have to choose between staying in the
battle or an exit visa.
Your solutions are the problem.
  #28   Report Post  
Beecrofter
 
Posts: n/a
Default Pearl Harbor


What is YOUR definition of a WMD?

Steve


It appears to me that the W of Mass Destruction inhabits the oval office.
  #29   Report Post  
Mark
 
Posts: n/a
Default Pearl Harbor



Abrasha wrote:



The war in Iraq is being used to sell action figures of GWB (complete in flight
suit), Ann Coulter, Tony Blair, Donald Rumsfeld and Baghdad Bob (the last four
as seen in the Dec. 8 issue of Times)



I've seen some of these 'action figures', other than the humor of Dubya
being in a flight suit it didn't surprise me. Fact I don't have any
feelings on it. These figures seem to be a logical step in someone
making money which, after all, isn't that what it's all about anyway.

Truth is, I'm more bothered by my not having feelings about these
figures than the figures themselves. Have I become that cynical.



What bothers me about EA Games using Pearl Harbor in a video game is ti
diminishes the people and lessens Pearl Harbors meaning.

What's next? The Grassy Knoll Sniper Game? How about Two Towers Flight
Simulator?




--

Mark

N.E. Ohio


Never argue with a fool, a bystander can't tell you apart. (S. Clemens,
A.K.A. Mark Twain)

When in doubt hit the throttle. It may not help but it sure ends the
suspense. (Gaz, r.moto)

  #30   Report Post  
jim rozen
 
Posts: n/a
Default Pearl Harbor

In article , Gunner says...

again..the actions are demonized as violations of the Constitution and
Civil Rights..witness Patriot Act, Gitmo etc etc.


Now could you please explain exactly why your view of the
BOR is a single, unitary amemdment - the second, of
course. And you will move heaven and earth to see to
it that the second is upheld verbatim, and stamp and
holler if anyone who supports it is denigrated.

Yet the adminstration can **** all over the rest of the
BOR and you seem to jump for joy. Part of me wants to
see Ashcroft do something that would drive you nuts,
something crazy like calling in all private weapons
in the US, under the guise of the patriot act. *Then*
you might take off the blinders and see that those
guys are not your friends. If they **** on part of
the BOR, they **** on the WHOLE THING. Including
the second.

Jim

==================================================
please reply to:
JRR(zero) at yktvmv (dot) vnet (dot) ibm (dot) com
==================================================



  #31   Report Post  
Mark
 
Posts: n/a
Default Pearl Harbor



Gunner wrote:




Then when we tighten up security and make sure it doesnt happen
again..the actions are demonized as violations of the Constitution and
Civil Rights..witness Patriot Act, Gitmo etc etc.

I wish you folks would come up with a counter proposal to ensure the
security of the US, all the while taking money from the HUMINT side of
the equation, and solutions that do not violate (allegedly) someones
rights.

If you dont have any solutions..then you are part of the problem.




Here's something it seems most people (at least the Dubya Dogmatics)
have missed: Pre 911 there were rules and procedures already in place
but the rules were not being followed and procedures were not being done.

Wife works for the local University. They were suppose to track foreign
students. Did they? Sort of but not really. Since 911 their suppose to
track these foreign students. Are they? Sort of but not really. Pre 911
I suspect they didn't force compliance because it may have caused these
students to take their money to a more friendly institution. Post 911,
at last report, the software wasn't working properly. There may be other
reasons.


Another problem lies in Government Agencies. Agencies have their piece
of the pie and their intent on keeping as much of their territory as
they can. Worse, each department within each agency has it's own piece
of the pie and their intent on holding onto as much as they can.

As long as all these people work at getting and keeping as much power as
each of them possibly can we don't stand a chance.

Please don't insult us by saying these people are here for our good,
these people in positions of power are there for their own good, and any
good that comes out of it for us is incidental.


Creation of the Patriot act and it's accompanying agency only created
more beaurocracy where people could vie for more power and in the
process reduced our rights.


What really bothers me is the way people want their illusions, they
prefer form over substance. And the people in office are more than happy
to create illusion.


I find this all very distressing.


--

Mark

N.E. Ohio


Never argue with a fool, a bystander can't tell you apart. (S. Clemens,
A.K.A. Mark Twain)

When in doubt hit the throttle. It may not help but it sure ends the
suspense. (Gaz, r.moto)

  #32   Report Post  
jim rozen
 
Posts: n/a
Default Pearl Harbor

In article , Beecrofter says...

If you dont have any solutions..then you are part of the problem.

I think that you need a broader view, ...


This is in the running for 'understatement of the year.'

Jim

==================================================
please reply to:
JRR(zero) at yktvmv (dot) vnet (dot) ibm (dot) com
==================================================

  #33   Report Post  
Gunner
 
Posts: n/a
Default Pearl Harbor

On 8 Dec 2003 07:14:34 -0800, (Beecrofter) wrote:

Gunner wrote in message . ..


Then when we tighten up security and make sure it doesnt happen
again..the actions are demonized as violations of the Constitution and
Civil Rights..witness Patriot Act, Gitmo etc etc.

I wish you folks would come up with a counter proposal to ensure the
security of the US, all the while taking money from the HUMINT side of
the equation, and solutions that do not violate (allegedly) someones
rights.

If you dont have any solutions..then you are part of the problem.

I think that you need a broader view, we could have more security as a
totalitarian nation. It worked for years for other dictators and
despots but we have a constitution which our leaders are sworn to
defend as the basis for our society.
Their oath makes the point of defending our constitution from enemies
foriegn and domestic. I am of the belief that the patriot act and John
Ashcroft are both threats to our way of life and the constitution.
Not to worry, it really isn't in our economic interest to have peace
in the world as we are the largest arms merchant. We manage to sell
more arms in the world marketplace than Russia, China, Great Britain ,
France, and Germany added together. Our leaders won't suffer as the
death and dying and destruction will be mostly among the masses while
they grow profits and power.
If your only solution is the end of our constitution and a shift
towarrds totalitarianism then I have to choose between staying in the
battle or an exit visa.
Your solutions are the problem.


Im still waiting for suggestions. Your commentary is noted and
disregarded.

Gunner

No 220-pound thug can threaten the well-being or dignity of a 110-pound
woman who has two pounds of iron to even things out. Is that evil?
Is that wrong? People who object to weapons aren't abolishing violence,
they're begging for the rule of brute force, when the biggest, strongest
animals among men were always automatically "right". Guns end that,
and social democracy is a hollow farce without an armed populace to make
it work.
- L. Neil Smith
  #34   Report Post  
Gunner
 
Posts: n/a
Default Pearl Harbor

On 8 Dec 2003 08:03:26 -0800, jim rozen
wrote:

In article , Gunner says...

again..the actions are demonized as violations of the Constitution and
Civil Rights..witness Patriot Act, Gitmo etc etc.


Now could you please explain exactly why your view of the
BOR is a single, unitary amemdment - the second, of
course. And you will move heaven and earth to see to
it that the second is upheld verbatim, and stamp and
holler if anyone who supports it is denigrated.


Cites? We have the ACLU watching over the rest of them (their ignoring
the 2nd is notable btw)

Yet the adminstration can **** all over the rest of the
BOR and you seem to jump for joy. Part of me wants to
see Ashcroft do something that would drive you nuts,
something crazy like calling in all private weapons
in the US, under the guise of the patriot act. *Then*
you might take off the blinders and see that those
guys are not your friends. If they **** on part of
the BOR, they **** on the WHOLE THING. Including
the second.

Jim


Jim, once again, you failed to answer the question or read/think
particularly deeply. The comment was made, that we should/could have
prevented 9/11 etc. The only way we could, particularly in the face of
the cutting of funding for HUMINT (human intelligence sources) would
be to tighten the screws and set up a police state. The Lefties and
the ignorant weep and wail about the failure, never realizing the
alternative IS a police state.

When they DO get part of their wish, the Patriot Act etc...suddenly
they start wailing about the result.

Sorry guys...this is an either/or situation.

There is NO way to prevent terrorism, or acts of terrorism, without
stepping on peoples toes, or their Rights. Period. Full stop, end
program.

I of all people, a libertarian, and activist, am fully aware of the
issues. I don't live in the warm comfortable Cave of Apathy.

Hence my request of alternative suggestions. So far..all I see are
knee jerk responses with no value to the situation at hand.

Again I ask..how would YOU handle the situation. What means would you
use to ferret out whom is a Tango, whom is funding them, where the
money comes from, whom belongs to a sleeper cell, whom funnels money
to unfriendly groups whose goals are death and destruction to both the
US and our allies? Remember..you cannot take any steps that will
restrict or harm anothers rights, no matter if they are a Citizen or
not.

Im waiting

Gunner


================================================= =
please reply to:
JRR(zero) at yktvmv (dot) vnet (dot) ibm (dot) com
================================================= =


No 220-pound thug can threaten the well-being or dignity of a 110-pound
woman who has two pounds of iron to even things out. Is that evil?
Is that wrong? People who object to weapons aren't abolishing violence,
they're begging for the rule of brute force, when the biggest, strongest
animals among men were always automatically "right". Guns end that,
and social democracy is a hollow farce without an armed populace to make
it work.
- L. Neil Smith
  #35   Report Post  
Gunner
 
Posts: n/a
Default Pearl Harbor

On Mon, 08 Dec 2003 16:40:10 GMT, Mark
wrote:



Gunner wrote:




Then when we tighten up security and make sure it doesnt happen
again..the actions are demonized as violations of the Constitution and
Civil Rights..witness Patriot Act, Gitmo etc etc.

I wish you folks would come up with a counter proposal to ensure the
security of the US, all the while taking money from the HUMINT side of
the equation, and solutions that do not violate (allegedly) someones
rights.

If you dont have any solutions..then you are part of the problem.




Here's something it seems most people (at least the Dubya Dogmatics)
have missed: Pre 911 there were rules and procedures already in place
but the rules were not being followed and procedures were not being done.


No ****..and who was in charge of this during the 8 yrs prior to 9/11?
Whom refused to fund HUMINT sources both foreign and domestic?

It sure wasn't Dubya.

Wife works for the local University. They were suppose to track foreign
students. Did they? Sort of but not really. Since 911 their suppose to
track these foreign students. Are they? Sort of but not really. Pre 911
I suspect they didn't force compliance because it may have caused these
students to take their money to a more friendly institution. Post 911,
at last report, the software wasn't working properly. There may be other
reasons.


I strongly suggest you take a look at the Administrations of those
Universities..and ask them what their take on the matter was. Those
bastions of Liberal thinking were refusing to follow those steps as
being harmful to the rights of those students. Want the cites


Another problem lies in Government Agencies. Agencies have their piece
of the pie and their intent on keeping as much of their territory as
they can. Worse, each department within each agency has it's own piece
of the pie and their intent on holding onto as much as they can.

Absolutely correct. I notice that most of them are still run by
Clinton appointees. However..since Homeland Security was formed to
address this issue..the Left is Still screaming.

As long as all these people work at getting and keeping as much power as
each of them possibly can we don't stand a chance.

Of course..politicians are politicians.

Please don't insult us by saying these people are here for our good,
these people in positions of power are there for their own good, and any
good that comes out of it for us is incidental.


Some are, some arnt. 9/11 changed our outlook and the playing field.

Creation of the Patriot act and it's accompanying agency only created
more beaurocracy where people could vie for more power and in the
process reduced our rights.


And your suggestions are?


What really bothers me is the way people want their illusions, they
prefer form over substance. And the people in office are more than happy
to create illusion.

Budda Bing! Good call. Sorta like 'what the meaning of "is" is, huh?
The alternative is cold harsh reality..and then folks really start to
wail. See my previous post.

I find this all very distressing.


No ****, ya think? So how would YOU handle it?

Gunner

No 220-pound thug can threaten the well-being or dignity of a 110-pound
woman who has two pounds of iron to even things out. Is that evil?
Is that wrong? People who object to weapons aren't abolishing violence,
they're begging for the rule of brute force, when the biggest, strongest
animals among men were always automatically "right". Guns end that,
and social democracy is a hollow farce without an armed populace to make
it work.
- L. Neil Smith


  #36   Report Post  
jim rozen
 
Posts: n/a
Default Pearl Harbor

In article , Gunner says...

Jim, once again, you failed to answer the question


No. That was your question and it's the wrong
question. My *statement* is the EXACT same
statement that you made in another thread about
two weeks ago, namely that I get very unhappy
when the constitiution gets a screwing.

And I will continue to stand by that statement.

Jim

==================================================
please reply to:
JRR(zero) at yktvmv (dot) vnet (dot) ibm (dot) com
==================================================

  #37   Report Post  
jim rozen
 
Posts: n/a
Default Pearl Harbor

In article , Gunner says...

Now could you please explain exactly why your view of the
BOR is a single, unitary amemdment - the second, of
course. And you will move heaven and earth to see to
it that the second is upheld verbatim, and stamp and
holler if anyone who supports it is denigrated.


Cites? We have the ACLU watching over the rest of them (their ignoring
the 2nd is notable btw)


A CITE? I don't need a cite for my opinion. This is
what you look like, to me.

There is NO way to prevent terrorism, or acts of terrorism, without
stepping on peoples toes, or their Rights. Period. Full stop, end
program.


This is what ashcroft would have you believe. I had hoped you
were wiser than that. If you are willing to destroy the
constitition to save it, then I guess this part of the discussion
comes to a close.

Jim

==================================================
please reply to:
JRR(zero) at yktvmv (dot) vnet (dot) ibm (dot) com
==================================================

  #38   Report Post  
Stuart Wheaton
 
Posts: n/a
Default Pearl Harbor

Gunner wrote:

On Sun, 07 Dec 2003 22:09:33 -0500, Stuart Wheaton
wrote:


They weren't anywhere where they posed an immediate threat. Nobody used
one, not the fedyin, not the republican guards, they didn't have them on
the front lines to be found when we over-ran their positions, none were
released as we shelled them, no resistance fighter has had any access to
them, Uday and Qusay didn't have any.



This was on CBS News last night, with an interview by al-Dabbagh


Al-Dabbagh said cases containing chemical or biological warheads were
delivered to front-line units, including his own, in late 2002, the
paper reported. He said they were designed to be launched by hand-held
rocket-propelled grenades, and did not know what exactly the warheads
contained.


Snip

“Forget 45 minutes, we could have fired these within half an hour,”
al-Dabbagh added. He said the weapons were not used because most of
the Iraqi army did not want to fight for Saddam.


Yes, they didn't want to fight for Saddam, but it seems nobody wanted to
ingratiate themselves with the invaders by saying "Here, see what I
have, here's those nasty chemical weapons you are looking for!!!" And
not one person in all those front line units was fanatical enough to use
one? And nobody has found any of these weapons that were dispersed into
the forward areas...To me this exceeds believability. A former Iraqi
commander, probably a Baathist, no physical evidence, making incredible
statements not supported by logic. Why should I trust him?

If you bought this line of BS I can't say that your reasoning skills
impress me. Can't you see the holes in this story? If you were the
interviewer are there other questions you would have asked? And the big
question still remains, where are the weapons?


  #39   Report Post  
Eastburn
 
Posts: n/a
Default Pearl Harbor

If you all remember in the early or first day - I think second or third
-
the train of tanks heading in to 'town' came across an ammo dump that
had
rockets.

They showed some on the TV - and the bodies were hollow - e.g. nothing
to
explode with.

In my opinion, those were gas canister holders. Slide in this cylinder,
screw on the bottom - shoot and slam it into something - and the G's
on impact outgas the lot. It was even pointed out in a later TV shot.

Just no gas was found. I suspect a different hole that wasn't found.

Martin
--
Martin Eastburn, Barbara Eastburn
@ home at Lion's Lair with our computer
NRA LOH, NRA Life
NRA Second Amendment Task Force Charter Founder
  #40   Report Post  
Eastburn
 
Posts: n/a
Default Pearl Harbor Historical details witin

PERSONNEL KILLED

Navy 2001
Marine Corps 109
Army 231
Civilian 54

PERSONNEL WOUNDED

Navy 710
Marine Corps 69
Army 364
Civilian 35

SHIPS

Sunk or beached 12
Damaged 9

AIRCRAFT

Destroyed 164
Damaged 159


Pearl Harbor, on the Island of O'ahu, Hawaii,
(then a territory of the United States) was
attacked by the Japanese Imperial Navy, at
approximately 8:00 A.M., Sunday morning,
December 7, 1941. The surprise attack had
been conceived by Admiral Isoroku
Yamamoto. The strking force of 353
Japanese aircraft was led by Commander
Mitsuo Fuchida. There had been no formal
declaration of war.

Approximately 100 ships of the U.S. Navy
were present that morning, consisting of
battleships, destroyers, cruisers and various
support ships.

USS Arizona (BB39) Battleship
USS West Virginia (BB48) Battleship
USS California (BB44)Battleship
USS Oklahoma (BB37) Battleship
USS Nevada (BB36) Battleship
USS Pennsylvania (BB38) Battleship (in dry dock #1)
USS Tennessee (BB43) Battleship
USS Maryland (BB46) Battleship
USS Vestal (AR4) Repair ship
USS Neosho (AO23) Oiler
USS Detroit (CL8) Light cruiser
USS Raleigh (CL7) Light cruiser
USS Utah (AG16) Target Ship
USS Tangier (AV8) Seaplane Tender

Two destroyers, the USS Cassin (DD372)
and the USS Downes (DD375) were in dry
dock #1 (with the USS Pennsylvania) and the
destroyer USS Shaw (DD373) was in floating
dry dock #2, approximately two hundred
yards to the west. The USS Ogala (CM-4)
was moored next to the USS Helena (CL50)
near the "1010" dock, Naval Ship yard. Two
heavy cruisers, the USS New Orleans (CA32)
and the San Francisco (CA38) were in the
Navy Yard Repair Basin

Over half the U.S. Pacific fleet was out to
sea, including the carriers.

Simultaneously, nearby Hickam Field was
also the victim of the surprise attack by the
Japanese.
18 Army Aircorps aircraft including bombers
and fighters and attack bombers were
destroyed or damaged on the ground. A few
U.S. fighters struggled into the air against the
invaders and gave a good account of
themselves.





Time line Pearl Harbor

59 Years Ago
December 7, 1996 Anniversary Remembrance


0342 Minesweeper CONDOR sights periscope off Honolulu Harbor
....notifies patrol destroyer WARD to investigate. 0458
Minesweeper CROSSBILL and CONDOR enter Pearl Harbor... defective
submarine net remains open.

0600 - 200 miles south of Oahu carrier ENTERPRISE launches 18 aircraft
to scout ahead...then to land at Ford Island, Pearl Harbor...ETA 0800.

0610 - 220 miles north of Oahu Admiral Nagumo orders launching of 1st
wave of 183 aircraft off three carriers...2 are lost during takeoff.

0630 Destroyer WARD again notified of submarine sighting this time by
supply ship ANTARES off Pearl Harbor entrance...
Navy patrol plane (PBY) dispatched to the scene.

0645 WARD opens fire on target hitting conning tower...as she closes
in drops depth charges..air attack by PBY follows.

0653 WARD'S commander Captain Outerbridge sends message to Commandant
14th Naval District:
"We have attacked, fired upon and dropped depth charges upon submarine
operating in defensive sea area".

0700 Commander Fuchida flying towards Oahu directs his pilots to home
in on local radio station.

0702 Private's Lockhard and Elliott of Opana Radar Station pick up
what appears to be a flight of unidentified aircraft bearing in 132
miles north of Oahu...
discussion follows.

0706 Private Elliott phones switchboard operator Joseph McDonald at
Information Center, Ft. Shafter, telling of a large formation of
aircraft approaching the Island.

0715 Capt. Outerbridge's attack message, delayed in decoding is
delivered to duty officer, 14th Naval District, and to Admiral Kimmel's
duty officer...
Japanese launch 2nd wave of 168 assault aircraft...

0720 Joseph McDonald finding Lt. Tyler in Information Center, calls
Opana and patches Lt. Tyler thru to Private Lockard who describes the
large flight picked up on radar and is told, "Well don't worry about
it." ( see Pvt.Joseph McDonald's account under the Survivor
Rememberances
"An Army Private is one of the 1st to know of the coming attack)"

0733 Important message from Gen Marshall from Washington to Short
received via RCA in Honolulu...cablegram has no indication of
priority...
messenger Tadao Fuchikami proceeds on normal route...

0735 Reconnaissance plane from cruiser CHIKUMA reports main fleet in
Pearl Harbor...

0739 Opana Station loses aircraft on radar 20 miles off coast of Oahu
due to "dead zone" caused by surrounding hills...

0740 1st wave sights North Shore of Oahu...deployment for attack
begins...

0749 Commander Fuchida orders attack...all pilots to begin assault on
military bases on Oahu...

0753 Fuchida radios code to entire Japanese Navy "TORA TORA TORA"
indicating success...maximum strategic surprise...
Pearl Harbor caught unaware...

0755 Island wide attack begins...Japanese dive bombers to strike
airfields Kaneohe, Ford Island, Hickam, Bellows, Wheeler, Ewa...
Aerial torpedo planes begin their run on ships in Pearl Harbor...

** ATTACK ERUPTS AT PEARL HARBOR**

Along Battleship Row, battlewagons feel the sting of the newly perfected
torpedoes specifically designed for the shallow waters of Pearl Harbor
At 1010 dock violent explosions rock light cruiser HELENA on her
starboard side crippling both her and minelayer OGLALA moored beside
her.. On the other side of Battleship row, Ford Island, target ship UTAH
also feels the sting of the torpedoes...and like the battleship OKLAHOMA
begins to capsize...

Light cruiser RALEIGH moored ahead of the UTAH takes measures to prevent
capsizing... Commander Logan Ramsey of Ford Island Command Center sends
out message
for all radiomen on duty to send out in plain English "AIR RAID PEARL
HARBOR THIS IS NO DRILL"...

2nd dispatch orders all patrol planes to seek out enemy...
Simultaneously the call for General Quarters echos throughout Pearl
Harbor...
each ship and their personnel in turn swing into action against the
attacking Japanese...
one quarter of all guns respond to the enemy...

0800 B-17's from the mainland reach Oahu after 14 hour
flight...Aircraft from carrier ENTERPRISE arrive Ford Island...both
caught between enemy and friendly fire...

0802 Machine guns on battleship NEVADA open fire on torpedo planes
approaching her port beam...two planes hit...
however one missile tears huge hole in ship's port bow...

0805 Repair ship VESTAL moored outboard of battleship ARIZONA opens
fire...
Admiral Kimmel arrives CINCPAC headquarters...
Battleship CALIFORNIA receives second torpedo "portside at frame 110"...
prompt action directed by Ensign Edgar M. Fain prevents ship from
capsizing...
High level bombers begin their run "on both bows" of battleship row...

0808 KGMB radio interrupts music calling for: "All Army, Navy, and
Marine personnel to report to duty"...
High level bombers unleash armour piercing, delayed action bombs from
altitude of 10,000 feet scoring hits on battleships...

0810 Forward magazines on battleship ARIZONA suddenly ignite resulting
in a tremendous explosion and huge fireball sinking the battleship
within nine minutes...
concussion of explosion blows men off repair ship VESTAL...

0812 General Short advises entire Pacific Fleet and Washington,
"Hostilities with Japan commenced with air raid on Pearl Harbor"

0815 KGMB interrupts music with 2nd call ordering all military
personnel to report for duty...

0817 USS HELM first of several destroyers to clear Pearl Harbor spots
a midget submarine struggling to enter harbor...
shots fired misses target...sub frees itself from reef and submerges...

0825 Using a Browning Automatic Rifle Lt. Stephen Saltzman and Sgt.
Lowell Klatt shot down enemy plane making strafing run on Schofield
Barracks...

0826 Honolulu Fire Department responds to call for assistance from
Hickam Field...3 firemen killed...6 wounded...

0830 3rd call out for military via local radio stations...

0835 Tanker NEOSHO half loaded with high octane aviation fuel moves
clear of Battleship Row and oil tanks on Ford Island...
Damage reported in city...Police warn civilians to leave streets and
return to their homes...

0839 Seaplane tender CURTISS sights midget sub in harbor and commences
to fire..Destroyer MONAGHAN heads for intruder at ramming speed...

0840 Submarine surfaces after sustaining damage...MONAGHAN hits sub
and drops depth charges as she passes...
1st explanation over local radio stations. "A sporadic air
attack...rising sun sighted on wing tips"...

0850 Lt. Commander Shimazaki orders deployment of 2nd wave over
military bases on Oahu...

0854 Attack run begins...54 high-level bombers hit Naval air stations,
78 dive bombers hit ships in Pearl, 36 fighters circle over harbor to
maintain air control...

0900 Crew of the Dutch liner JAGERSFONTEIN opens up with her guns, the
first Allies to join the fight...
Radios throughout the island crack out urgent messages "Get off roads
and stay off.. Don't block traffic...Stay at home...This is the real
McCoy"...

0930 Tremendous explosions rocks destroyer SHAW sending debris
everywhere... bomb falls near Governor's home...

1000 First wave arrives back on carriers, 190 miles north of Oahu...

1005 Governor Poindexter calls local papers announcing state of
emergency for entire territory of Hawaii

1030 Mayor's Major Disaster Council meets at city hall...Reports from
local hospitals pour in listing civilian casualties...

1100 Commander Fuchida circles over Pearl Harbor...assesses damage
then returns to carrier task force...All schools on Oahu ordered to
close...

1115 State of emergency announced over radio by Governor Poindexter...

1142 As per orders by Army local stations go off the air...General
short confers with Governor regarding martial law...

1146 First report of many false sightings of enemy troops landing on
Oahu...

1210 American planes fly north in search for enemy with negative
results...

1230 Honolulu police raid Japanese embassy...find them burning
documents...Blackout to begin at night ordered by Army...

1240 Governor confers with President Roosevelt regarding martial
law...both agree it necessary that the military take over the civilian
government...

1300 Commander Fuchida lands on board carrier AKAGI...discussion
follows with Admiral Nagumo and staff concerning feasibility of
launching 3rd wave...

1330 Signal flags on carrier AKAGI orders Japanese task force to
withdraw... Territorial director of civil defense orders blackout every
night until further notice...

1458 Tadao Fuchikami delivers message from Washington...
message decoded and given to General Short regarding ultimatum from
Japan to be given at 1300 Washington time...
"Just what significance the hour set may have we do not know, but be on
the alert accordingly"...

1625 Governor signs Proclamation...martial law put into effect...


Time line courtesy of Tri-City Chapter 31,
Pearl Harbor Survivors Association


For those still on the bottom, and those who made it to Punch Bowl and
home.

Martin

--
Martin Eastburn, Barbara Eastburn
@ home at Lion's Lair with our computer
NRA LOH, NRA Life
NRA Second Amendment Task Force Charter Founder
Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Harbor freight tools jim Metalworking 53 December 1st 03 02:38 PM
4 or 4 1/2 in. angle grinder from Harbor Freight jim Metalworking 14 November 29th 03 10:19 PM
Harbor freight has sale on Friday, day after thanksgiving jim Metalworking 2 November 26th 03 06:09 AM
Harbor Freight Catalogs -- So many! Patrick Metalworking 10 September 20th 03 03:20 PM
Harbor Freight # 39743-1VGA, looking for inexpensive basic shop B Thomas Metalworking 6 September 11th 03 10:40 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:14 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 DIYbanter.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about DIY & home improvement"