So why did Al Queda attack us on 9/11?

John Lee





At 11:17 AM 10/7/04 -0500, Mosalie Rignon wrote:

>I'm not waiting for an answer.
>Bush believes that Islam is out to "conquer civilisation".
>
>Didn't you hear him after 911 going on about a "crusade"?
>Didn't you hear him tell that crowd of "elite" supporters at the dinner that
>they were his "base".
>His own Al Qaida.
>He believes he is a Christian with a divine mission.
>He believes that the Good Lord brought him back from the cliff-edge of
>alcoholism to do great things.
>
>I believe he is a pea-brained fundmentalist puppet. Ask Ariel Sharon.
>
>Go to the Halliburton web site and click on the link where its says Investor
>Relations.
>Keep clicking till you come to the share price, then choose to display the 3
>year graph.
>Last time I checked the share price had risen from around $15 per share to
>$32.
>
>Still waiting for answers ?
>
>Mosalie.
>
>
>
>
>
>"Michael Baier" <[log in to unmask]> a écrit dans le message de
>news:76SdnQ8D3es7z_ncRVn-qg@fidnet.com...
>> >I think the press has an agenda.  I am less and less inclined to
>> >agree with anything published.  Previously, I have been of the opinion
>> >that the mainstream press simply used selective reporting to further
>> >it's agenda, but after Rathergate, it looks like they cannot be trusted
>> >to report only the truth that suits them, but now have to invent things.
>>
>> Brice,
>>
>> what reason would the US (not UN but the US) chief weapons inspector have
>> not to tell the truth?
>> The complete report will be made public if it not already is.
>> This guy is the second inspector that the Bush adminstration appointed and
>> he came to the same conclusion as the first.
>> The real question is: When so many questioned the intelligence, why was
>> Bush so eager to invade instead of double/tripple-checking his intel?
>> Almost everybody is waiting for this answer.
>> All warnings were ignored. People even Generals got fired/retired whenever
>> they didn't agree or questioned.
>> So, whats the real reason for the invasion?
>> Oil, the threat against Bush senior, ignorance or .....?
>>
>> WASHINGTON (AFP) - Iraq had no active chemical, biological or nuclear
>> programs at the time of the US-led invasion in 2003 having given up its
>> weapons of mass destruction in 1991, the chief US weapons inspector
>> concluded in a report.
>>
>> Charles Duelfer, head of the US Iraq Survey Group, found that Iraq's
>> nuclear capability, far from being reconstituted as the United States had
>> insisted before the war, was "decaying rather than being preserved" and
>> would have taken years to rebuild, an official familiar with the report
>> said.
>>
>> The few chemical munitions found were made before 1991, and were decaying.
>> He said it would have taken one to two years to re-establish chemical
>> warfare production and "months" to resume production of biological agents.
>>
>> The nuclear program was was setback by "years," he said.
>>
>> "They would have had to do a lot. It's a big infrastructure they would
>have
>> had to recreate. Certainly not starting from scratch, not starting from
>> scrath. They had a lot of the talent," he said.
>>
>> Although Saddam tried to keep teams of nuclear scientists together, the
>> official said, "He was further away in 2003 than he was in 1991."
>>
>> "So the nuclear program was decaying rather than being preserved," he said
>>
>> * To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
>> * etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *
>>
>
>* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
>* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *
>

* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *