Comments on: Fahrenheit 9/11 http://www.aflux.net/fahrenheit-911/ Mon, 06 Feb 2012 14:04:48 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Eu http://www.aflux.net/fahrenheit-911/comment-page-1/#comment-411 Eu Fri, 08 Oct 2004 22:37:48 +0000 http://www.aflux.net/wordpress/?p=289#comment-411 I said: <i>Taking down Saddam was because of the overwhelming evidence international intelligence provided that said he was pursuing WMD. And the overwhelming history he has had in supporting terrorism. These two factors made him a threat to the US and the world because he had the resources.</i> Hick said: <i>sadam sponsored terrorist in Israel and Gaza by paying each bombers family 10,000</i> etc. And both of us have already made reference to the violation of UN Sanctions by Iraq. What a coincidence these countries were the most vocal against invading Iraq. :roll: France, Russia, etc. should all be ashamed of themselves. They underminded sanctions that were meant to help the oppressed Iraqi people out of their own greed for money. So what did Saddam need all of these weapons and supplies for anyway? Lawn decorations? :roll: (movie, talk about the movie) I said:
Taking down Saddam was because of the overwhelming evidence international intelligence provided that said he was pursuing WMD. And the overwhelming history he has had in supporting terrorism. These two factors made him a threat to the US and the world because he had the resources.

Hick said:
sadam sponsored terrorist in Israel and Gaza by paying each bombers family 10,000

etc.

And both of us have already made reference to the violation of UN Sanctions by Iraq. What a coincidence these countries were the most vocal against invading Iraq. :roll:

France, Russia, etc. should all be ashamed of themselves. They underminded sanctions that were meant to help the oppressed Iraqi people out of their own greed for money.

So what did Saddam need all of these weapons and supplies for anyway? Lawn decorations? :roll:

(movie, talk about the movie)

]]> By: Ben http://www.aflux.net/fahrenheit-911/comment-page-1/#comment-410 Ben Fri, 08 Oct 2004 21:26:40 +0000 http://www.aflux.net/wordpress/?p=289#comment-410 Also sounds like we should invade France too: http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=1802&e=8&u=/washpost/a16142_2004oct7 Also sounds like we should invade France too:

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=1802&e=8&u=/washpost/a16142_2004oct7

]]> By: Ben http://www.aflux.net/fahrenheit-911/comment-page-1/#comment-409 Ben Fri, 08 Oct 2004 21:18:54 +0000 http://www.aflux.net/wordpress/?p=289#comment-409 Julie/TexasHick, why did Bush/Cheney/Powell use 9/11 as a reason to go to war with Iraq? Julie/TexasHick, why did Bush/Cheney/Powell use 9/11 as a reason to go to war with Iraq?

]]> By: Eu http://www.aflux.net/fahrenheit-911/comment-page-1/#comment-408 Eu Fri, 08 Oct 2004 20:57:09 +0000 http://www.aflux.net/wordpress/?p=289#comment-408 As Hick already said, the Bush Administration NEVER said the pursuit for Saddam was specifically linked to 9/11. We all know that 9/11 was Al Qaeda and bin Laden. Taking down Saddam was because of the overwhelming evidence international intelligence provided that said he was pursuing WMD. And the overwhelming history he has had in supporting terrorism. These two factors made him a threat to the US and the world because he had the resources. Kerry AND Edwards voted for the Iraq war based on the SAME INTELLIGENCE Bush and Cheney had. This is the SAME intelligence Tony Blair had that led to the UK joining us as Allies. The information this week has been that there was no evidence of WMD, however according to the same report in regards to Oil-for-Food and UN-French-Russian corruption he was seeking components for the WMDs. Infact, in APRIL before we officially attacked Iraq, Russia was fulfilling a large missile order... two of these missiles were actually used by the Iraqis and we've been wondering -- where the heck did those come from? Now we know, and I think the three most vocal countries against our Iraq war have alot of explaining to do... Saddam managed to corrupt the sanctions and as time was passing the snowball was getting bigger and bigger. So does this justify the war? Well its all hindsight. Just over a week ago Kerry said he would regret the war <i>depending how it turns out</i>. Now he's condeming it because of the recent report. BUT HE KNEW THE SAME INFORMATION BUSH AND CHENEY KNEW TO START IT AND HE VOTED FOR IT. He voted against it the second time, but that had to do with the amount of money to go for it (or was it to look against the war like Dean & Clark?) which in turn one can say is why our troops aren't better equipped. and by the way -- we didn't know about the concentration camps till the war was almost over and we were already defeating the Germans. Like I said earlier, we can go on forever for the war or against it and I lost my passion for online debates after the 2000 election :) The fact of the matter is, Moore's "documentary" as he calls it distorts the truth. There are pages and pages about what is misrepresented and there is a new movie out called Fahrenhype 9/11. If parts of your movie are untrue, the critical viewer will dismiss the movie as garbage than have to sort through what's true and what's not. As Hick already said, the Bush Administration NEVER said the pursuit for Saddam was specifically linked to 9/11. We all know that 9/11 was Al Qaeda and bin Laden. Taking down Saddam was because of the overwhelming evidence international intelligence provided that said he was pursuing WMD. And the overwhelming history he has had in supporting terrorism. These two factors made him a threat to the US and the world because he had the resources.

Kerry AND Edwards voted for the Iraq war based on the SAME INTELLIGENCE Bush and Cheney had. This is the SAME intelligence Tony Blair had that led to the UK joining us as Allies. The information this week has been that there was no evidence of WMD, however according to the same report in regards to Oil-for-Food and UN-French-Russian corruption he was seeking components for the WMDs. Infact, in APRIL before we officially attacked Iraq, Russia was fulfilling a large missile order… two of these missiles were actually used by the Iraqis and we’ve been wondering — where the heck did those come from? Now we know, and I think the three most vocal countries against our Iraq war have alot of explaining to do… Saddam managed to corrupt the sanctions and as time was passing the snowball was getting bigger and bigger.

So does this justify the war? Well its all hindsight. Just over a week ago Kerry said he would regret the war depending how it turns out. Now he’s condeming it because of the recent report. BUT HE KNEW THE SAME INFORMATION BUSH AND CHENEY KNEW TO START IT AND HE VOTED FOR IT. He voted against it the second time, but that had to do with the amount of money to go for it (or was it to look against the war like Dean & Clark?) which in turn one can say is why our troops aren’t better equipped.

and by the way — we didn’t know about the concentration camps till the war was almost over and we were already defeating the Germans.

Like I said earlier, we can go on forever for the war or against it and I lost my passion for online debates after the 2000 election :)

The fact of the matter is, Moore’s “documentary” as he calls it distorts the truth. There are pages and pages about what is misrepresented and there is a new movie out called Fahrenhype 9/11. If parts of your movie are untrue, the critical viewer will dismiss the movie as garbage than have to sort through what’s true and what’s not.

]]> By: Chris http://www.aflux.net/fahrenheit-911/comment-page-1/#comment-407 Chris Fri, 08 Oct 2004 20:35:53 +0000 http://www.aflux.net/wordpress/?p=289#comment-407 I don't mean this question as offensive but was this movie made for profit? I guess in the end this would be my deciding factor on renting it or not. Meaning is it a non-profit film made soley for public knowledge? Or is it just an expensive modern day political campaign tactic? I don’t mean this question as offensive but was this movie made for profit? I guess in the end this would be my deciding factor on renting it or not. Meaning is it a non-profit film made soley for public knowledge? Or is it just an expensive modern day political campaign tactic?

]]> By: Ben http://www.aflux.net/fahrenheit-911/comment-page-1/#comment-406 Ben Fri, 08 Oct 2004 18:42:41 +0000 http://www.aflux.net/wordpress/?p=289#comment-406 Furthermore, the report can best be summarized as it has been up on MSNBC: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6191353/ "...A final report from the chief U.S. weapons hunter in Iraq concluded that Saddam Hussein had no stockpiles of chemical or biological weapons, had no programs to make either them or nuclear bombs, and had little ability — or immediate plans — to revive those programs...." This summary of the report is the truth, anything else is rhetoric. Furthermore, the report can best be summarized as it has been up on MSNBC:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6191353/

“…A final report from the chief U.S. weapons hunter in Iraq concluded that Saddam Hussein had no stockpiles of chemical or biological weapons, had no programs to make either them or nuclear bombs, and had little ability — or immediate plans — to revive those programs….”

This summary of the report is the truth, anything else is rhetoric.

]]> By: Ben http://www.aflux.net/fahrenheit-911/comment-page-1/#comment-405 Ben Fri, 08 Oct 2004 18:10:02 +0000 http://www.aflux.net/wordpress/?p=289#comment-405 how else can I say this...k..., how about this, Nazi's..., we went to help with the Nazi's and Germany because Hitler Germany was conducting Genocide of the Jewish People, Secondly they threatened world Domination. Dont' sit there and tell me that Saddam did either of those. He was not angel, not by a LONG shot, but we did not have just cause to RUSH to war! The fact that years before, terrorists were tracked to Iraq does not mean 1)they had WMD, 2) they had the R&D moving forward for WMD. In fact, post 1998 Iraq did not post the threats that BUSH lied to us about!! This is twisting of the facts by Cheney/Bush to try to make a case that indeed at some point, in the future, not now, but someday out there, they might again start building up WMD. But at this time, they had none, and were not making any quick progress toward WMD. I'm so tired of people inferring otherwise with their half-truths. Kosovo was also a case of Genecide, (again, like the Nazi's), we as an american people I THOUGHT were united about stopping Genocide, obviously I am very clearly mistaken, however, when a remote chance comes that says a terrosist was once in Iraq? Hell, lets obliterate the countryside!!! Yay! Deaht to anything that moves in iraq, yay!!! (jesus) I think I've heard that Texas has WMD, TexasHick. I may have to report that to bush (sigh) how else can I say this…k…, how about this, Nazi’s…, we went to help with the Nazi’s and Germany because Hitler Germany was conducting Genocide of the Jewish People, Secondly they threatened world Domination. Dont’ sit there and tell me that Saddam did either of those. He was not angel, not by a LONG shot, but we did not have just cause to RUSH to war! The fact that years before, terrorists were tracked to Iraq does not mean 1)they had WMD, 2) they had the R&D moving forward for WMD. In fact, post 1998 Iraq did not post the threats that BUSH lied to us about!! This is twisting of the facts by Cheney/Bush to try to make a case that indeed at some point, in the future, not now, but someday out there, they might again start building up WMD. But at this time, they had none, and were not making any quick progress toward WMD. I’m so tired of people inferring otherwise with their half-truths. Kosovo was also a case of Genecide, (again, like the Nazi’s), we as an american people I THOUGHT were united about stopping Genocide, obviously I am very clearly mistaken, however, when a remote chance comes that says a terrosist was once in Iraq? Hell, lets obliterate the countryside!!! Yay! Deaht to anything that moves in iraq, yay!!! (jesus)

I think I’ve heard that Texas has WMD, TexasHick. I may have to report that to bush (sigh)

]]> By: TexasHick http://www.aflux.net/fahrenheit-911/comment-page-1/#comment-403 TexasHick Fri, 08 Oct 2004 06:38:14 +0000 http://www.aflux.net/wordpress/?p=289#comment-403 kosovo was not a threat to us or anyone else that is why we should not have been there you just said sadam was a threat....what do you propose to do about it wait for the UN to remove the sanctions after being bribed by sadam allowing him to restart his WMD programs then go after him? again the quotes by kerry, clinton, albright, pelosi, edwards, kennedy and the rest of the peanut gallery are clear they believed sadam had WMDS just as Bush did and they believed he was looking to obtain nukes......THEY SAID IT WITH THEIR OWN MOUTHS.....they would be bashing Bush to no end right now if he had FAILED to remove sadam with the evidence THE WORLD believed in Bush and Cheney NEVER said sadam was linked to 9-11 (as stated by factcheck.org) what they said was that sadam was linked to terrorist including al quada......they are similar statements but VERY differant although in my opinion they both require the same course of action the removal of sadam if you had a house and harbored an aquaintance that you knew was involved in and planning terror and you turned a blind eye to it and they went out and committed a terrorist act then you were not directally rsponsible or a participant in that specific act, but you have culpability.....sadam allowed ansar al islam to train in northern iraq and even use an old 707 body to train in for taking over planes....sadam harbored and sponsored terrorist as cleary spelled out by the 9-11 commission.....he needed to go it is also clear in the 9-11 report the #2 of al queda was in bagdad several times in the years prior to 9-11 kosovo posed no terrorist threat to the USA neither did somolia (an action thats failure EMBOLDENED bin laden as his own words described)....sudan poses no threat to the USA........yet kerry and edwards are ready to go there unilateraly tomorrow if they could....neither did liberia....yet the world and ALL liberal democrats wanted us to go there...in the middle of the "underfunded under trooped iraq war".....funny we dont have enough troops in afganistan or iraq but the libs want some sent to a third world africa shithole:?::roll::roll: lets get the stroy straight here :roll: kerry and edwards are ready to conquer any halfassed non-threat that comes their way but when a clear terrorist that poses a threat to the USA directally and to our allies comes along they want to turn tail and run...great leadership save the world from liberia and sudan and somolia but ignore sadam....makes sense to me.....NOT kosovo was not a threat to us or anyone else that is why we should not have been there

you just said sadam was a threat….what do you propose to do about it wait for the UN to remove the sanctions after being bribed by sadam allowing him to restart his WMD programs then go after him?

again the quotes by kerry, clinton, albright, pelosi, edwards, kennedy and the rest of the peanut gallery are clear they believed sadam had WMDS just as Bush did and they believed he was looking to obtain nukes……THEY SAID IT WITH THEIR OWN MOUTHS…..they would be bashing Bush to no end right now if he had FAILED to remove sadam with the evidence THE WORLD believed in

Bush and Cheney NEVER said sadam was linked to 9-11 (as stated by factcheck.org) what they said was that sadam was linked to terrorist including al quada……they are similar statements but VERY differant although in my opinion they both require the same course of action the removal of sadam

if you had a house and harbored an aquaintance that you knew was involved in and planning terror and you turned a blind eye to it and they went out and committed a terrorist act then you were not directally rsponsible or a participant in that specific act, but you have culpability…..sadam allowed ansar al islam to train in northern iraq and even use an old 707 body to train in for taking over planes….sadam harbored and sponsored terrorist as cleary spelled out by the 9-11 commission…..he needed to go

it is also clear in the 9-11 report the #2 of al queda was in bagdad several times in the years prior to 9-11

kosovo posed no terrorist threat to the USA neither did somolia (an action thats failure EMBOLDENED bin laden as his own words described)….sudan poses no threat to the USA……..yet kerry and edwards are ready to go there unilateraly tomorrow if they could….neither did liberia….yet the world and ALL liberal democrats wanted us to go there…in the middle of the “underfunded under trooped iraq war”…..funny we dont have enough troops in afganistan or iraq but the libs want some sent to a third world africa shithole:?::roll::roll: lets get the stroy straight here :roll:

kerry and edwards are ready to conquer any halfassed non-threat that comes their way but when a clear terrorist that poses a threat to the USA directally and to our allies comes along they want to turn tail and run…great leadership

save the world from liberia and sudan and somolia but ignore sadam….makes sense to me…..NOT

]]> By: Ben http://www.aflux.net/fahrenheit-911/comment-page-1/#comment-402 Ben Fri, 08 Oct 2004 05:52:33 +0000 http://www.aflux.net/wordpress/?p=289#comment-402 You make a good point, TexasHick "sadam was paying the HIGHEST of french and UN and german officials to remove the santions on him and he surely would have started problems again he JUST stated that he was fixated on going after iran again" I believe you are correct here, that Saddam was a problem. HOwever, George W. Bush lead us to believe that Saddam had EVERYTHING to do with 9/11, and used it as justification to go invade IRAQ? The ignorance and blindness to bush's lies astounds me. Kosovo eh? YOu'd think our country would have learned by now eh TexasHick? 10 years later? and history is repeating? So, you're advocating stopping the repeition of a mistake? But, only...we can't, because...we've done it again, and this time, Bush/Cheney were on watch...Guess it's time for them to go... You make a good point, TexasHick

“sadam was paying the HIGHEST of french and UN and german officials to remove the santions on him and he surely would have started problems again he JUST stated that he was fixated on going after iran again”

I believe you are correct here, that Saddam was a problem. HOwever, George W. Bush lead us to believe that Saddam had EVERYTHING to do with 9/11, and used it as justification to go invade IRAQ?

The ignorance and blindness to bush’s lies astounds me.

Kosovo eh? YOu’d think our country would have learned by now eh TexasHick? 10 years later? and history is repeating? So, you’re advocating stopping the repeition of a mistake? But, only…we can’t, because…we’ve done it again, and this time, Bush/Cheney were on watch…Guess it’s time for them to go…

]]> By: TexasHick http://www.aflux.net/fahrenheit-911/comment-page-1/#comment-401 TexasHick Fri, 08 Oct 2004 04:24:33 +0000 http://www.aflux.net/wordpress/?p=289#comment-401 we could put a million troops looking for bin laden, but when he is hiding in pakastan we are at the mercey of pakastan a country that clinton allowed to go nuclear and that we would have ZERO support for invading even to get bin laden pakastan is hunting for him but it is going to be slow going their leader is having assination attempts on him daily, yet we need HIM in power because he is a much better alternative than anyoe who might take over the country and its nukes the world believed sadam had WMDs and was working towards nukes sadam sponsored terrorist in Israel and Gaza by paying each bombers family 10,000 Israel is the only free and stable government in the area and a strong ally regardless of how you feel about them in the territories sadam was paying the HIGHEST of french and UN and german officials to remove the santions on him and he surely would have started problems again he JUST stated that he was fixated on going after iran again even dumbass muslims say they are glad he was gone and he was a terrorist and a tyrant, but they dont like the way he was removed.....how the fuck do you remove a tyranical terrorist.....ask him pretty fucking please!!! he was offered exile and REFUSED...he was not going to leave and was going to continue to cause problems for THE WORLD and most importantly the USA!!:!::!::!:8) we could put a million troops looking for bin laden, but when he is hiding in pakastan we are at the mercey of pakastan a country that clinton allowed to go nuclear and that we would have ZERO support for invading even to get bin laden

pakastan is hunting for him but it is going to be slow going their leader is having assination attempts on him daily, yet we need HIM in power because he is a much better alternative than anyoe who might take over the country and its nukes

the world believed sadam had WMDs and was working towards nukes

sadam sponsored terrorist in Israel and Gaza by paying each bombers family 10,000

Israel is the only free and stable government in the area and a strong ally regardless of how you feel about them in the territories

sadam was paying the HIGHEST of french and UN and german officials to remove the santions on him and he surely would have started problems again he JUST stated that he was fixated on going after iran again

even dumbass muslims say they are glad he was gone and he was a terrorist and a tyrant, but they dont like the way he was removed…..how the fuck do you remove a tyranical terrorist…..ask him pretty fucking please!!!

he was offered exile and REFUSED…he was not going to leave and was going to continue to cause problems for THE WORLD and most importantly the USA!!:!::!::!:8)

]]>