The so-called NSA Archive is a site from George Washington University, a far-left institution so the opinions contained therein must be viewed through a liberal lens.
Yes, Mule. This is archived NSA material that has been declassified, back in 2009, that shows the WMD story was concocted by Saddam Hussein to make Iran think he had WMDs. To further strengthen the story he kept the inspectors out of Iraq so Iran would not know he was bluffing.
The interviews were conducted by the FBI from January thru March of 2004.___________________________________________________________________________
The archived NSA material that has been declassified is not what the link goes to, it is an opinion piece that pulls selected data from the NSA archive to fit the political agenda of the writer. While the interviews were conducted by the FBI what is written in piece is not a transcript of those interviews but is the opinion of the writer.
The opinion piece also fails to mention 100,000 plus Kurds murdered by Saddam Hussein's use of chemical weapons.
We also know from Obama’s failed attempt to secure the chemical weapons used on the Syrians that those chemicals matched exactly the signatures of Saddam Hussein’s that were shipped to Syria at the beginning of the Iraq war.
To this day, one of Saddam Hussein’s mobile chemical weapons trucks is stored at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory in Tennessee.
Remember the media reports of the U.S. soldiers finding the now degraded Iraq WMD s and their efforts to secure them before ISIS got them? Those media reports stopped fast after the Obama administration denied the Pentagon reports. How convenient.
The no WMD, Bush lied scenario comes from the left and their lapdogs in the media.
If you read what the military and professionals have said you will find vastly different facts.[Edited on 1/23/2016 by Muleman1994]
The link I posted goes directly to the NSA archives. Are you talking about the link gondicar posted?
_____________________________________________________________________
Your link which does not go to NSA anything. It is named the "National Security Archive" for the purpose of making people think it is legitimate. It is deceptive on purpose as it is a liberal spin site.
I could tell easily after reading the opinion piece that comes up when clicking on your link.
Check it out for yourself:
1.) Go to your link.
2.) click on "Home"
3.) Read.
You got hosed.
[Edited on 1/24/2016 by Muleman1994]
Why do you think that? The link takes you to the National Security Archives where some declassified documents are posted. It's not the National Security Administration, if that's what you were thinking.
The archives are real. The transcripts are from the interviews with Saddam Hussein by the FBI. The interviews are not opinion pieces.
_______________________________________________________________________
Your link goes to an opinion site of left-wingers. They designed the site to give the illusion that you are going to an actual National Security Archive. The proof is right on the site:
1.) Go to your link.
2.) 2.) click on "Home" then click on “About”
3.) Read.
Or go directly:
http://nsarchive.gwu.edu/nsa/the_archive.html
Another indicator is in the link: "gwu.edu"
You got hosed.
Again Mule, no, I didn't, nor has anyone else who has followed the link. There is nothing that leads you to believe that it's a site for the National Security Agency, unless you mistakenly believe that's what the NSA in it's title means.
I am led to believe that you haven't read the interviews, just saw that George Washington University hosted the site and decided it was a "leftist" opinion. The opening post is a synopsis of the interviews, nothing opinion based anywhere in there. As Sgt. Joe Friday would say, "just the facts", nothing more.
The so-called NSA Archive is a site from George Washington University, a far-left institution so the opinions contained therein must be viewed through a liberal lens.
Yes, Mule. This is archived NSA material that has been declassified, back in 2009, that shows the WMD story was concocted by Saddam Hussein to make Iran think he had WMDs. To further strengthen the story he kept the inspectors out of Iraq so Iran would not know he was bluffing.
The interviews were conducted by the FBI from January thru March of 2004.___________________________________________________________________________
The archived NSA material that has been declassified is not what the link goes to, it is an opinion piece that pulls selected data from the NSA archive to fit the political agenda of the writer. While the interviews were conducted by the FBI what is written in piece is not a transcript of those interviews but is the opinion of the writer.
The opinion piece also fails to mention 100,000 plus Kurds murdered by Saddam Hussein's use of chemical weapons.
We also know from Obama’s failed attempt to secure the chemical weapons used on the Syrians that those chemicals matched exactly the signatures of Saddam Hussein’s that were shipped to Syria at the beginning of the Iraq war.
To this day, one of Saddam Hussein’s mobile chemical weapons trucks is stored at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory in Tennessee.
Remember the media reports of the U.S. soldiers finding the now degraded Iraq WMD s and their efforts to secure them before ISIS got them? Those media reports stopped fast after the Obama administration denied the Pentagon reports. How convenient.
The no WMD, Bush lied scenario comes from the left and their lapdogs in the media.
If you read what the military and professionals have said you will find vastly different facts.[Edited on 1/23/2016 by Muleman1994]
The link I posted goes directly to the NSA archives. Are you talking about the link gondicar posted?
_____________________________________________________________________
Your link which does not go to NSA anything. It is named the "National Security Archive" for the purpose of making people think it is legitimate. It is deceptive on purpose as it is a liberal spin site.
I could tell easily after reading the opinion piece that comes up when clicking on your link.
Check it out for yourself:
1.) Go to your link.
2.) click on "Home"
3.) Read.You got hosed.
[Edited on 1/24/2016 by Muleman1994]
Why do you think that? The link takes you to the National Security Archives where some declassified documents are posted. It's not the National Security Administration, if that's what you were thinking.
The archives are real. The transcripts are from the interviews with Saddam Hussein by the FBI. The interviews are not opinion pieces.
_______________________________________________________________________
Your link goes to an opinion site of left-wingers. They designed the site to give the illusion that you are going to an actual National Security Archive. The proof is right on the site:
1.) Go to your link.
2.) 2.) click on "Home" then click on “About”
3.) Read.
Or go directly:
http://nsarchive.gwu.edu/nsa/the_archive.html
Another indicator is in the link: "gwu.edu"
You got hosed.
Again Mule, no, I didn't, nor has anyone else who has followed the link. There is nothing that leads you to believe that it's a site for the National Security Agency, unless you mistakenly believe that's what the NSA in it's title means.
I am led to believe that you haven't read the interviews, just saw that George Washington University hosted the site and decided it was a "leftist" opinion. The opening post is a synopsis of the interviews, nothing opinion based anywhere in there. As Sgt. Joe Friday would say, "just the facts", nothing more.
________________________________________________________________________
The sites own "about page" proves that this is a left-wing political activist site.
Read:
http://nsarchive.gwu.edu/nsa/the_archive.html
They selectively cherry pick pieces of declassified documents and interviews and write an opinion piece.
i suggest picking up some brisket from Brooks and reading their own admissions.
[Edited on 1/26/2016 by Muleman1994]
Funny, I read that entire about page and nowhere did it say that it was a far left website. But then again, Eric Cantor went to GWU, so maybe it is all left wingers.
Funny, I read that entire about page and nowhere did it say that it was a far left website. But then again, Eric Cantor went to GWU, so maybe it is all left wingers.
__________________________________________________________________________
The site, as its about page states, was started by and run by journalists. They have selected snippets of documents and interviews to push the liberal rhetoric of "there was no WMD" which has been proven to be crap.
George Washington University is a far-left institution. The main campus is two blocks from my office and two of their administrators sit on our Board of Governors. i know these people well.
Political whack-jobs.
The deception they use to make their site appear to be associated with some "official" National Security organization is sad. In order to snare some people they employ tactics common in the liberal media. When the truth doesn't fit your ideology, intentionally distort the facts.
Funny, I read that entire about page and nowhere did it say that it was a far left website. But then again, Eric Cantor went to GWU, so maybe it is all left wingers.
__________________________________________________________________________
The site, as its about page states, was started by and run by journalists. They have selected snippets of documents and interviews to push the liberal rhetoric of "there was no WMD" which has been proven to be crap.
George Washington University is a far-left institution. The main campus is two blocks from my office and two of their administrators sit on our Board of Governors. i know these people well.
Political whack-jobs.The deception they use to make their site appear to be associated with some "official" National Security organization is sad. In order to snare some people they employ tactics common in the liberal media. When the truth doesn't fit your ideology, intentionally distort the facts.
More popcorn please!!
Funny, I read that entire about page and nowhere did it say that it was a far left website. But then again, Eric Cantor went to GWU, so maybe it is all left wingers.
__________________________________________________________________________
The site, as its about page states, was started by and run by journalists. They have selected snippets of documents and interviews to push the liberal rhetoric of "there was no WMD" which has been proven to be crap.
George Washington University is a far-left institution. The main campus is two blocks from my office and two of their administrators sit on our Board of Governors. i know these people well.
Political whack-jobs.The deception they use to make their site appear to be associated with some "official" National Security organization is sad. In order to snare some people they employ tactics common in the liberal media. When the truth doesn't fit your ideology, intentionally distort the facts.
More popcorn please!!
________________________________________________________________________
If you are looking for a hand-out talk to Obama.
Funny, I read that entire about page and nowhere did it say that it was a far left website. But then again, Eric Cantor went to GWU, so maybe it is all left wingers.
__________________________________________________________________________
The site, as its about page states, was started by and run by journalists. They have selected snippets of documents and interviews to push the liberal rhetoric of "there was no WMD" which has been proven to be crap.
George Washington University is a far-left institution. The main campus is two blocks from my office and two of their administrators sit on our Board of Governors. i know these people well.
Political whack-jobs.The deception they use to make their site appear to be associated with some "official" National Security organization is sad. In order to snare some people they employ tactics common in the liberal media. When the truth doesn't fit your ideology, intentionally distort the facts.
More popcorn please!!
________________________________________________________________________
If you are looking for a hand-out talk to Obama.
With extra butter!!
More popcorn please!!
With extra butter!!
And FULL GMO please !
More popcorn please!!
With extra butter!!
And FULL GMO please !
____________________________________________________________________
Very creepy.
Food should be grown in the fields, not in a laboratory.
Not to worry. Labeling is not required.
http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/01/iraq-war-wmds-donald-rumsfeld-new-report-213530
I know, I know, left-wing source blah blah blah - but this has been in the news the last few days.....
http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/01/iraq-war-wmds-donald-rumsfeld-new-report-213530
I know, I know, left-wing source blah blah blah - but this has been in the news the last few days.....
_________________________________________________________________________
Donald Rumsfeld's new game, Churchill Solitaire, is based on the specific version of solitaire played by wartime Prime Minister Winston Churchill.
The games teaches critical thinking and is not for the simple, untrained mind.
Sorry, you won't get it.
That sure has a lot to do with the topic - something you won't get.............. sorry.
That sure has a lot to do with the topic - something you won't get.............. sorry.
_________________________________________________________________________
From your post dumba$$.
That sure has a lot to do with the topic - something you won't get.............. sorry.
_________________________________________________________________________
From your post dumba$$.
Which has nothing to do with a video game stolen by Rumsfeld..... dumba$$ troll
That sure has a lot to do with the topic - something you won't get.............. sorry.
_________________________________________________________________________
From your post dumba$$.
Which has nothing to do with a video game stolen by Rumsfeld..... dumba$$ troll
_________________________________________________________________________
This coming from the original WP troll.
Do you have difficulty following a thread or do you just have difficulties?
You should play the game. You obviously need to learn critical thinking techniques.
Am I the only one that thinks it is hilarious that Jerry posted the link to this site to try to show that the Bush admin was in the right about WMD because even thought there was no WMD they were duped by Saddam into thinking there was, and mule is saying the site "pushes the liberal rhetoric of "there was no WMD" which has been proven to be crap."
This is the best thread around here in ages!
Nope, you're not the only one who finds it hilarious. One of our conservative posters provides a link to prove a conservative position and Mules comes on and argues that the link has a liberal bias. The irony is beautiful.
Am I the only one that thinks it is hilarious that Jerry posted the link to this site to try to show that the Bush admin was in the right about WMD because even thought there was no WMD they were duped by Saddam into thinking there was, and mule is saying the site "pushes the liberal rhetoric of "there was no WMD" which has been proven to be crap."
This is the best thread around here in ages!
__________________________________________________________________________The only people “duped by Saddam” were the IAEA, the liberal media and the left-wingers so easily led by nose.
Am I the only one that thinks it is hilarious that Jerry posted the link to this site to try to show that the Bush admin was in the right about WMD because even thought there was no WMD they were duped by Saddam into thinking there was, and mule is saying the site "pushes the liberal rhetoric of "there was no WMD" which has been proven to be crap."
This is the best thread around here in ages!
![]()
No, I saw that as well. This and the BBQ thread are hysterical. Normally you have to pay for this type of entertainment. We get it for free. 
Am I the only one that thinks it is hilarious that Jerry posted the link to this site to try to show that the Bush admin was in the right about WMD because even thought there was no WMD they were duped by Saddam into thinking there was, and mule is saying the site "pushes the liberal rhetoric of "there was no WMD" which has been proven to be crap."
This is the best thread around here in ages!
![]()
No, I saw that as well. This and the BBQ thread are hysterical. Normally you have to pay for this type of entertainment. We get it for free.
_________________________________________________________________________
Have you yet figured out the difference between a framework agreement and a treaty yet?
Do you even know what the requirements are for The U.S. to enter into a Treaty?
Am I the only one that thinks it is hilarious that Jerry posted the link to this site to try to show that the Bush admin was in the right about WMD because even thought there was no WMD they were duped by Saddam into thinking there was, and mule is saying the site "pushes the liberal rhetoric of "there was no WMD" which has been proven to be crap."
This is the best thread around here in ages!
![]()
No, I saw that as well. This and the BBQ thread are hysterical. Normally you have to pay for this type of entertainment. We get it for free.
_________________________________________________________________________
Have you yet figured out the difference between a framework agreement and a treaty yet?
Do you even know what the requirements are for The U.S. to enter into a Treaty?
OOOOOOOH I used the wrong word and you got me. But, what you forgot is that you said Bush never set a date for the withdrawal of US troops. You were wrong. i used the wrong word. You got caught lying. I'll take my mistake over you misanthropic attitude any day.
Am I the only one that thinks it is hilarious that Jerry posted the link to this site to try to show that the Bush admin was in the right about WMD because even thought there was no WMD they were duped by Saddam into thinking there was, and mule is saying the site "pushes the liberal rhetoric of "there was no WMD" which has been proven to be crap."
This is the best thread around here in ages!
![]()
No, I saw that as well. This and the BBQ thread are hysterical. Normally you have to pay for this type of entertainment. We get it for free.
_________________________________________________________________________
Have you yet figured out the difference between a framework agreement and a treaty yet?
Do you even know what the requirements are for The U.S. to enter into a Treaty?
OOOOOOOH I used the wrong word and you got me. But, what you forgot is that you said Bush never set a date for the withdrawal of US troops. You were wrong. i used the wrong word. You got caught lying. I'll take my mistake over you misanthropic attitude any day.
_______________________________________________________________________
I didn't think you could figure it out.
Anyone with the most rudimental understanding if civics knows the answer.
Sorry you missed that day in 8th grade... assuming you made it that far.
Am I the only one that thinks it is hilarious that Jerry posted the link to this site to try to show that the Bush admin was in the right about WMD because even thought there was no WMD they were duped by Saddam into thinking there was, and mule is saying the site "pushes the liberal rhetoric of "there was no WMD" which has been proven to be crap."
This is the best thread around here in ages!
![]()
No, I saw that as well. This and the BBQ thread are hysterical. Normally you have to pay for this type of entertainment. We get it for free.
_________________________________________________________________________
Have you yet figured out the difference between a framework agreement and a treaty yet?
Do you even know what the requirements are for The U.S. to enter into a Treaty?
OOOOOOOH I used the wrong word and you got me. But, what you forgot is that you said Bush never set a date for the withdrawal of US troops. You were wrong. i used the wrong word. You got caught lying. I'll take my mistake over you misanthropic attitude any day.
_______________________________________________________________________
I didn't think you could figure it out.
Anyone with the most rudimental understanding if civics knows the answer.
Sorry you missed that day in 8th grade... assuming you made it that far.
OOOOOOOH!!!! Keep them coming, big boy. Watching you flail around is hysterical.
Have you figured out that you are arguing with a conservative yet? Jerry has very similar beliefs as you have. However, he knows how to present and discuss them.
Who are you supporting for president? What's the matter? Are you afraid to defend something? 😛
To go back to the point of this thread the main problem with the invasion of Iraq was that it was totally unnecessary. There was no logic in attacking Iraq if the reason was to avenge 9/11. The majority of the hijackers were Saudis. bin Laden was a Saudi. All of the religious ideas of bin Laden were simply a deviation of Wahhabi, the archaic form of Islam practiced in Saudi Arabia. The madrassas in Pakistan, which served as a training ground for would be terrorists, were funded mostly by rich Saudis.
In addition the reason for abandoning the pursuit of bin Laden was to attack Iraq. Why did Bush shift the brunt of the war from Afghanistan to Iraq? That should be the question. North Korea represented a far greater threat in terms of nuclear armament at the time. Because of Bush's distraction with Iraq North Korea has become a nuclear power. Due to Bush's dangerous negligence the Middle East was destabilized and a totally new nuclear threat emerged in Asia.
Iraq, was the biggest foreign policy blunder in the history of the USA. 5000 US soldiers dead, scores more wounded, over 1 million innocent iraqi citizens killed or maimed, and it cost the US taxpayers over 3 trillion dollars. it also de-stabilized the region. all made possible by cheney/bush presidency.
[Edited on 1/27/2016 by pops42]
__________________________________________________________________________
pops you parrot the chicken-sh!t liberal line well.
Of course we had to go into Iraq due to the failures of the Clinton administration to fight back against terrorism.
You truly are the poster child on the low-info voter.
Iraq, was the biggest foreign policy blunder in the history of the USA. 5000 US soldiers dead, scores more wounded, over 1 million innocent iraqi citizens killed or maimed, and it cost the US taxpayers over 3 trillion dollars. it also de-stabilized the region. all made possible by cheney/bush presidency.
[Edited on 1/27/2016 by pops42]
__________________________________________________________________________
pops you parrot the chicken-sh!t liberal line well.
Of course we had to go into Iraq due to the failures of the Clinton administration to fight back against terrorism.You truly are the poster child on the low-info voter.
Facts are Facts, and you are too dumb to comprehend this. pity the poor imbecile. 🙁
_________________________________________________________________________
How many times did Al Qaeda attack the U.S. during the Clinton administration?
When did the 9/11 Terrorists come to the U.S. and, overstaying their visas, train for their mission?
I’ll wait for you to look the answer up…
Iraq, was the biggest foreign policy blunder in the history of the USA. 5000 US soldiers dead, scores more wounded, over 1 million innocent iraqi citizens killed or maimed, and it cost the US taxpayers over 3 trillion dollars. it also de-stabilized the region. all made possible by cheney/bush presidency.
[Edited on 1/27/2016 by pops42]
__________________________________________________________________________
pops you parrot the chicken-sh!t liberal line well.
Of course we had to go into Iraq due to the failures of the Clinton administration to fight back against terrorism.You truly are the poster child on the low-info voter.
Facts are Facts, and you are too dumb to comprehend this. pity the poor imbecile. 🙁
_________________________________________________________________________
How many times did Al Qaeda attack the U.S. during the Clinton administration?
When did the 9/11 Terrorists come to the U.S. and, overstaying their visas, train for their mission?
I’ll wait for you to look the answer up…
And this has "what" to do with cheney/bush invading iraq? 😛 simpleton
He still thinks that Iraq was responsible for 9/11. You can point out the truth to him, but he isn't smart enough to understand it.
My goodness, mule is even more clueless than I thought.
I love this thread.
My goodness, mule is even more clueless than I thought.
I love this thread.
You mean the topic you said you were done with on January 22?
Did Bush Lie?
Is this a rhetorical question?
In other words, you haven't read the transcripts, or the various national news reports.
(edit for spelling)[Edited on 1/18/2016 by Jerry]
I've read a lot if things. And one thing that has been made crystal clear to me from all of that reading is that presidents lie. All of them. And people lie about the lies. All the time. Sometimes it is done in the name of national security, sometimes it is politics. Sometimes it is criminal, and sometimes it is inconsequential. But in any case, the answer to your question is yes.
So, you are willing to concede that in the point of the Iraqi WMD case Bush went with what was believed to be true and didn't, as so many who oppose him say 'Bush lied and people died"? Have you also found the answer as to who actually started that chain of events and why?
(Trying to stay on topic of the WMDs)
Not sure why you think I would or why it even matters so much to you. But if you are trying to make a case for something, just make it already. I've read the "article" at the main link but I'm not about to go thumbing through more than a dozen old news stories searching for whatever smoking gun you think you've found. Tell us exactly what you are driving at or move on.
That said, I'll play along to this extent...let's just pretend for a minute that Bush never said anything he didn't believe was 100% true. That would mean that he was convinced/duped into believing a false pretext for committing this country to an invasion and war...is that some kind of exoneration in your eyes? If he didn't lie his way into invading Iraq, then the alternative is that he presided over a massive foreign policy blunder, perhaps the biggest in the history of our country...thousands of US service men and women killed, tens of thousands of Iraqis killed (many of not most of them non-combatants), an entire country turned upside down, and of course billions and billions of US taxpayer dollars spent first destroying and then trying to rebuild a foreign country while sending our own into a financial black hole. So take your pick, he either lied or f*cked up but either way the disastrous results are the same and we, along with the rest of the world, are still paying the price and will be for years to come.
[Edited on 1/19/2016 by gondicar]
With what you wrote, it sounds like you only read the "header" for the website. The information is in the interviews, and condensed versions are in the news articles. All the information is there, but it seems that you don't want to learn what, and who, caused the chain of events that led up to the WMD decisions.
If you had decided to look further, you would have found the information that Saddam Hussein himself started the dis-information about the WMDs and stopped the inspectors from checking the sites because he didn't want Iran to find out the WMDs did not exist. Saddam used the fake WMD story to hopefully keep Iran from invading Iraq.
If you wish to get the "Cliff Books" version of the interviews, click on the top link to the Washington Post article.
What I see is you connecting dots to support what you want to believe.
What I want to believe doesn't matter. What I know is that Saddam himself gave the interview and explained why he started the 'dis-information" about the WMD.
What I wish is that people whom I had been led to believe were somewhat intelligent and sensible would take the facts as presented and use those rather than some made up jingle.
ps. got rid of a lot of the "quote" descriptions to keep the text from being scrunched up.
I actually just went and read the first link and I'm now more convinced than ever the the Bush admin would have said/done anything to justify invading Iraq, and they trumped up the WMD cover in order to justify it. So thanks for confirming that!
[Edited on 1/21/2016 by gondicar]
The only questions I can ask right now are, Which "first link" are you referring to, and what in that link made you feel this way?
The "top link" Post article that you referenced, and it's no one thing in the article.
I'm done with this topic, feel free to debate yourself if you want but as far as I'm concerned this is all old news and not very interesting at this point.
Yeah, this one?
