Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Bush Missed Chance To Get Al-Zarqawi  
User currently offlineTbar220 From United States of America, joined Feb 2000, 7013 posts, RR: 26
Posted (8 years 7 months 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 1946 times:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4431601/

NBC News has learned that long before the war the Bush administration had several chances to wipe out his terrorist operation and perhaps kill Zarqawi himself — but never pulled the trigger.

In June 2002, U.S. officials say intelligence had revealed that Zarqawi and members of al-Qaida had set up a weapons lab at Kirma, in northern Iraq, producing deadly ricin and cyanide.

The Pentagon quickly drafted plans to attack the camp with cruise missiles and airstrikes and sent it to the White House, where, according to U.S. government sources, the plan was debated to death in the National Security Council.

“Here we had targets, we had opportunities, we had a country willing to support casualties, or risk casualties after 9/11 and we still didn’t do it,” said Michael O’Hanlon, military analyst with the Brookings Institution.

Four months later, intelligence showed Zarqawi was planning to use ricin in terrorist attacks in Europe.

The Pentagon drew up a second strike plan, and the White House again killed it. By then the administration had set its course for war with Iraq.

“People were more obsessed with developing the coalition to overthrow Saddam than to execute the president’s policy of preemption against terrorists,” according to terrorism expert and former National Security Council member Roger Cressey.

In January 2003, the threat turned real. Police in London arrested six terror suspects and discovered a ricin lab connected to the camp in Iraq.

The Pentagon drew up still another attack plan, and for the third time, the National Security Council killed it.

Military officials insist their case for attacking Zarqawi’s operation was airtight, but the administration feared destroying the terrorist camp in Iraq could undercut its case for war against Saddam.

The United States did attack the camp at Kirma at the beginning of the war, but it was too late — Zarqawi and many of his followers were gone. “Here’s a case where they waited, they waited too long and now we’re suffering as a result inside Iraq,” Cressey added.


***

So how do you defend this one? Despite all the tough talk from the president about the war on terror, and all the tough talk about Bin Laden and Zarqawi, we see he has failed in another measure in this so called "war on terror". Makes me doubt his intentions when all the American people hear about is how we're fighting to destroy terrorism and protect our freedoms.

And the same people who butcher Clinton to this day for allegedly missing a chance to get Bin Laden, how do you propose to spin this one in a way to not make it negative for the Bush administration?


NO URLS in signature
51 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineJetjack74 From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 7437 posts, RR: 50
Reply 1, posted (8 years 7 months 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 1936 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Tbar220 (Thread starter):
So how do you defend this one? Despite all the tough talk from the president about the war on terror, and all the tough talk about Bin Laden and Zarqawi, we see he has failed in another measure in this so called "war on terror". Makes me doubt his intentions when all the American people hear about is how we're fighting to destroy terrorism and protect our freedoms.

All of these were before the March 17th invasion. And all the intel would've been moot anyway, becuase we would've had to have gone before the UN Security Council, which would've alerted Zarqawi that an attack was iminent anyway. Furthermore, the coalition forces were only authorised to patrol the No-Fly Zone, not conduct air to ground operations unless coalition aircraft were fired upon. We can't just go in and mow down fields unless a war resolution is passed. Clinton sent some cruise missiles into Afghanistan, and Sudan in 1998 in an "alleged" retaliation for the US Embassy bombings in Africa without resolutions, and the US was condemned by the UNSC. It's no-win situation for the US. Catch my drift?

Quoting Tbar220 (Thread starter):
The Pentagon drew up still another attack plan, and for the third time, the National Security Council killed it.



Quoting Tbar220 (Thread starter):
The Pentagon drew up a second strike plan, and the White House again killed it.

Ya know Tbarr, there are lots of opponents of Bush that work on the National Security Council and that work at the Pentagon. That's a weak argument by MSNBC.



Made from jets!
User currently offlineCfalk From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (8 years 7 months 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 1935 times:

Quoting Tbar220 (Thread starter):
So how do you defend this one?

So now you are saying Bush should have attacked Iraq sooner? What about getting UN approval and all that?


User currently offlineTbar220 From United States of America, joined Feb 2000, 7013 posts, RR: 26
Reply 3, posted (8 years 7 months 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 1932 times:

Quoting Cfalk (Reply 2):
So now you are saying Bush should have attacked Iraq sooner? What about getting UN approval and all that?

Nope, I'm saying that Zarqawi should have been either killed or captured. Apprehending one man and his minions doesn't require the invasion of a country.



NO URLS in signature
User currently offlineMDorBust From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (8 years 7 months 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 1922 times:

Can we accept this as an admission by the left that there were terrorist operations in Iraq?

User currently offlineAndesSMF From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (8 years 7 months 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 1919 times:

Quoting Tbar220 (Reply 3):
Apprehending one man and his minions doesn't require the invasion of a country.

Which means going into a sovereign country w/o that countries approval, thereby violating its sovereignty and eliciting another 'concern' from you regarding this administration. Catch my drift?


User currently offlineJetjack74 From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 7437 posts, RR: 50
Reply 6, posted (8 years 7 months 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 1919 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Tbar220 (Reply 3):
Nope, I'm saying that Zarqawi should have been either killed or captured. Apprehending one man and his minions doesn't require the invasion of a country.

No, but taking military action does require a UN resolution, not to mention the blessings and the wisdom of UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan according to those on the looney left.



Made from jets!
User currently offlineAeroWesty From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 20822 posts, RR: 62
Reply 7, posted (8 years 7 months 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 1912 times:

This pretty much deflates the sails in the argument from the right that Clinton should have taken Bin Laden out when he was spotted by Predator drones in sovereign Afghanistan in 2000.


International Homo of Mystery
User currently offlineAndesSMF From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (8 years 7 months 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 1910 times:

Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 7):
This pretty much deflates the sails in the argument from the right that Clinton should have taken Bin Laden out when he was spotted by Predator drones in sovereign Afghanistan in 2000

Yes it does. But it strenghtens the rights argument that Clinton should have accepted the Sudanese offer to take him in 1996, remember that?


User currently offlineAeroWesty From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 20822 posts, RR: 62
Reply 9, posted (8 years 7 months 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 1903 times:

Quoting AndesSMF (Reply 8):
remember that?

Sure do!

http://www.newshounds.us/2006/05/03/...ing_bin_laden_to_clinton_again.php



International Homo of Mystery
User currently offlineANCFlyer From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (8 years 7 months 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 1886 times:

Quoting MDorBust (Reply 4):
Can we accept this as an admission by the left that there were terrorist operations in Iraq?

 faint 

Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 7):
This pretty much deflates the sails in the argument from the right that Clinton should have taken Bin Laden out when he was spotted by Predator drones in sovereign Afghanistan in 2000.

No it doesn't.

Should have hit them both . . . period.


User currently offlineAndesSMF From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 11, posted (8 years 7 months 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 1886 times:

What about this?

http://www.sudan.net/news/press/postedr/58.shtml

Please understand that I blame no one for the lapses that led to 9/11. I merely realize that humans do not live in the future and cannot correctly predict the future. But if we start blaming Bush for Zarqawi, then we can blame Clinton for Bin Laden.

And I do think that it is misstated that he was offered for extradition, the attached story gives another explanation.


User currently offlineJetjack74 From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 7437 posts, RR: 50
Reply 12, posted (8 years 7 months 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 1874 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 9):
Sure do!

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mansoor_Ijaz
Bin Laden & Sudan
Commencing in 1996, Ijaz had a series of meetings with Sudan's president, Lt. Gen. Omar Hassan Bashir and the Islamic leader, Hassan Turabi and with Clinton administration officials including Sandy Berger. Both the United Nations and the U.S. Congress had imposed sanctions against the Sudanese government over the continued operation of terrorist groups on it soil. In February 1996 the U.S. government ordered the withdrawal of all its Embassy staff based on concerns about their security. (There were differences of opinion on how real the security threat was). [17] (http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&contentId=A61251-2001Oct2)

Ijaz argued the U.S. should adopt a policy of "constructive engagement" [18] (http://www.fas.org/irp/congress/1997_hr/h970610i.htm) with Sudan and, in return for providing intelligence data on the terrorist groups and deporting Osama bin Laden to Saudi Arabia, ease the sanctions. Saudi Arabia refused to accept bin Laden. The U.S. government believed there were no legal grounds under which he could be indicted in U.S. courts at the time. On May 18 1996, under pressure from the U.S. government, the government of Sudan deported bin Laden. He then made his way to Afghanistan. [19] (http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&contentId=A61251-2001Oct2)

Subsequently, Sudan made further overtures via Ijaz in July 1996 and April 1997 to the U.S. offering counter-terrorism assistance and access to intelligence data. In September 1997 the Secretary of State Madeleine K. Albright announced she was sending a team of U.S diplomats back to Sudan, a decision reversed a few days later.

In the aftermath of the September 11, 2001 attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon Ijaz and others accused the Clinton administration of having bungled an opportunity to catch bin Laden. [20] (http://www.benadorassociates.com/article/568) The accusations have been rejected by Clinton administration officials including Sandy Berger and Susan Rice.

The following year, others, such as the conservative website NewsMax and Fox News's Sean Hannity, went further than Ijaz and claimed that Sudan had offered to extradite bin Laden direct to the United States. [21] (http://www.newsmax.com/cgi-bin/showinside.pl?a=2002/8/10/230919) [22] (http://mediamatters.org/items/200406220008)[23] (http://mediamatters.org/items/200407230005) The National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States (also known as the 9/11 Commission), stated that "former Sudanese officials claim that Sudan offered to expel Bin Ladin to the United States. Clinton administration officials deny ever receiving such an offer. We have not found any reliable evidence to support the Sudanese claim." [24] (http://www.9-11commission.gov/staff_statements/staff_statement_5.pdf)


Give it up, guys, nobody's going to win this argument. Wikipedia, nor is Media Hounds a credible source to legitimise this argument.
However, the firing of missile's into Afghanistan and Sudan was conducted without approval from the UN, produced zero results, and hit the Chinese Embassy in Sudan(Bin Laden apparently left the alleged terror camp days before the missile strikes).Clinton Administration officials disclosed, they had us OLD MAPS of Khartoum(a'hem, faulty intel). The Chinese Government blasted the US following this disclosure.



Made from jets!
User currently offlineSchoenorama From Spain, joined Apr 2001, 2440 posts, RR: 25
Reply 13, posted (8 years 7 months 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 1870 times:

Quoting MDorBust (Reply 4):
Can we accept this as an admission by the left that there were terrorist operations in Iraq?

Northern Iraq wasn't controlled by Saddam, remember?



Utinam logica falsa tuam philosophiam totam suffodiant!
User currently offlineANCFlyer From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 14, posted (8 years 7 months 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 1868 times:

Quoting Schoenorama (Reply 13):
Northern Iraq wasn't controlled by Saddam, remember?

Well, he sure gassed the hell out of 'em now didn't he?

He damn sure had control after THAT little escapade.


User currently offlineFalcon84 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 15, posted (8 years 7 months 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 1859 times:

Quoting Jetjack74 (Reply 1):
All of these were before the March 17th invasion

So? Bush had already issued his doctrine of preemtive strikes. Still butt-kissing, Jack, as usual. Here is a guy who apparently HAD WMD-unlike Iraq itself, and the administration couldn't get it up? Uh, OK.

Quoting Jetjack74 (Reply 1):
And all the intel would've been moot anyway, becuase we would've had to have gone before the UN Security Council, which would've alerted Zarqawi that an attack was iminent anyway.

And now you use the U.N., which most of the time you want to contemptuously ignore, as a crutch and a miserable excuse for kissing Bush? Uh, OK.

Quoting Jetjack74 (Reply 1):
Ya know Tbarr, there are lots of opponents of Bush that work on the National Security Council and that work at the Pentagon.

 rotfl   rotfl   rotfl 

What a crock of bull cookies that is. That's hysterical!

Quoting Cfalk (Reply 2):
So now you are saying Bush should have attacked Iraq sooner?

No, no one is saying that, but if Bush wanted to follow his own doctrine, he should have, at least by the way conservatives think nowadays.

Quoting MDorBust (Reply 4):
Can we accept this as an admission by the left that there were terrorist operations in Iraq?

And? So?

Terrorists in Iraq were not the reason for going to war in Iraq, was it? Your point has no historical substance.

Quoting Jetjack74 (Reply 6):
No, but taking military action does require a UN resolution,

Gee, I thought the U.N. was to be scorned, ridiculed and ignored-except, I guess, when making excuses for Bush not taking out a terrorist when he had the chance.  rotfl 

Amazing!

Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 7):
This pretty much deflates the sails in the argument from the right that Clinton should have taken Bin Laden out when he was spotted by Predator drones in sovereign Afghanistan in 2000.

Stop making the righties on here squirm. It's fun, but they may need some Preparation H pretty soon to stop the itch.  Big grin

Quoting AndesSMF (Reply 8):
Yes it does. But it strenghtens the rights argument that Clinton should have accepted the Sudanese offer to take him in 1996, remember that?

Another old, stale, worn-out right-wing falsehood, that has been refuted many times.

Quoting AndesSMF (Reply 11):
But if we start blaming Bush for Zarqawi, then we can blame Clinton for Bin Laden.

Not if the latter is completely false, can we?


User currently offlineJetjack74 From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 7437 posts, RR: 50
Reply 16, posted (8 years 7 months 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 1846 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Falcon84 (Reply 15):
And now you use the U.N., which most of the time you want to contemptuously ignore, as a crutch and a miserable excuse for kissing Bush? Uh, OK.

I still think the UN is irrelevant. But we're talking in the context of covert/special ops to take out Zarqawi, not Saddam Hussien. MSNBC is pointing out that an attack could've taken place. But IF!!! we had gone ahead and done that, we would've faced a condemnation vote on the floor of the UNSC, for going without passing a UN resolution which in the process would've compromised an operation, no longer making it a secret operation, thus jeopardising the special forces involved. We did propose a resolution to use force in Iraq, and it passed, The UNSC just voted against the timing, and our reasons for going ahead, when we did.

Quoting Falcon84 (Reply 15):
Gee, I thought the U.N. was to be scorned, ridiculed and ignored-except, I guess, when making excuses for Bush not taking out a terrorist when he had the chance.

Falcon, Bush went to the UN, several times. It's convenient you've forgotten that

Quoting Falcon84 (Reply 15):
So? Bush had already issued his doctrine of preemtive strikes. Still butt-kissing, Jack, as usual. Here is a guy who apparently HAD WMD-unlike Iraq itself, and the administration couldn't get it up? Uh, OK.

This thread has little to do with Saddam Hussien.

Quoting Falcon84 (Reply 15):
What a crock of bull cookies that is. That's hysterical!

So you think that everyone who works at the Pentagon, the CIA, the NSA, is appointed by the current administration? Boy Falcon, you have alot to learn about the people who work at the Pentagon. With the exception of the military staff assigned, positions held at the places in question are there until they either quit, retire or are terminated. Many of the staffers there, including ones on the planning committees are usually holdovers from the past, previous administrations, and new blood gets slowly cycled through as people voluntarily move on.



Made from jets!
User currently offlineMDorBust From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 17, posted (8 years 7 months 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 1845 times:

Quoting Falcon84 (Reply 15):
And? So?

Terrorists in Iraq were not the reason for going to war in Iraq, was it? Your point has no historical substance.

It was one of many reasons cited, and a favorite talking point of some lefties to attempt to claim that Iraq didn't have terrorist links.


User currently offlineAeroWesty From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 20822 posts, RR: 62
Reply 18, posted (8 years 7 months 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 1829 times:

Quoting Jetjack74 (Reply 12):
However, the firing of missile's into Afghanistan and Sudan was conducted without approval from the UN, produced zero results, and hit the Chinese Embassy in Sudan(Bin Laden apparently left the alleged terror camp days before the missile strikes).Clinton Administration officials disclosed, they had us OLD MAPS of Khartoum(a'hem, faulty intel).

Sure was faulty intel if Khartoum is in Yugoslavia!  rotfl 



International Homo of Mystery
User currently offlineJetjack74 From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 7437 posts, RR: 50
Reply 19, posted (8 years 7 months 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 1820 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 18):
Sure was faulty intel if Khartoum is in Yugoslavia!

They hit the Chinese Embassy, and not the intended target.



Made from jets!
User currently offlineAeroWesty From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 20822 posts, RR: 62
Reply 20, posted (8 years 7 months 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 1818 times:

Quoting Jetjack74 (Reply 19):
They hit the Chinese Embassy, and not the intended target.

Yes, I'm aware, the one in Yugoslavia, not Sudan.



International Homo of Mystery
User currently offlineJetjack74 From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 7437 posts, RR: 50
Reply 21, posted (8 years 7 months 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 1814 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 20):
Yes, I'm aware, the one in Yugoslavia, not Sudan.

However, the firing of missile's into Afghanistan and Sudan was conducted without approval from the UN, produced zero results, and hit the ->.............<- in Sudan(Bin Laden apparently left the alleged terror camp days before the missile strikes).Clinton Administration officials disclosed, they had us OLD MAPS of Khartoum(a'hem, faulty intel).
Insert ->Asprin factory<- where Chinese Embassy was



Made from jets!
User currently offlineFalcon84 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 22, posted (8 years 7 months 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 1803 times:

Quoting Jetjack74 (Reply 16):
So you think that everyone who works at the Pentagon, the CIA, the NSA, is appointed by the current administration?

Anyone with any stripes is appointed by the administration in power. To that degree, yes. If you don't believe that, you're nuts.


Quoting MDorBust (Reply 17):
It was one of many reasons cited

Wrong. It was one of the post-facto, "oops-there's-no-WMD-excuses", not a reason cited. That's just GOP revisionist history.

Just reinforces the opinion of many on here that there are more than a few who will excuse anything Bush does, and try to shrug it off. If it weren't so damned pitiful, it might be funny.


User currently offlineANCFlyer From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 23, posted (8 years 7 months 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 1795 times:

Quoting Falcon84 (Reply 22):
Just reinforces the opinion of many on here that there are more than a few who will excuse anything Bush does, and try to shrug it off. If it weren't so damned pitiful, it might be funny.

JUST as pitiful as those that find it necessary to blame Bush for everything that occurs . . . no matter the circumstance and no matter the situation . .

Pot, Kettle, Black . . in a big way.


User currently offlineJetjack74 From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 7437 posts, RR: 50
Reply 24, posted (8 years 7 months 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 1791 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting ANCFlyer (Reply 23):
Pot, Kettle, Black . . in a big way.

(Falcon)



Made from jets!
25 AeroWesty : Is that a Chinese or Yugoslavian Chevy? Oi, I've a headache now.
26 Post contains images ANCFlyer : It's Chevy, does it matter??
27 Post contains images AeroWesty : Short, sweet and
28 Jetjack74 : You're not alone.
29 Post contains images YOWza : YOWza
30 Post contains images ANCFlyer : Well said. Nuf Said . . . S2D2 . . .
31 Post contains images NWA742 : Definitely. -NWA742
32 Airlinerfreak : Bush missed the chance to possibly lessen or stop the attacks of September 11 Bush missed the chance to get our approval Bush missed the chance to be
33 Tbar220 : Next time anybody whines or bitches about Clinton not getting Bin Laden, those of you bitching about this thread won't have a toe to stand on. I guess
34 ANCFlyer : Oh, sure I will . . . I think Clinton should have taken Bin Laden when he had the chance and Bush should have nailed Al-Zarqawi right off. . . . I th
35 Mrmeangenes : I'm curious: I've read the NBC editorial (It's more opinion piece than news) and I see no mention of a Presidential Finding.Perhaps Tbar can fill us i
36 Post contains images MaverickM11 : Probably wouldn't have been necessary if Clinton killed/captured OBL when he had the chance .
37 Maury : I had no idea that terrorist-hunting was a tit-for-tat sport...but it is on a.net! Tbar relays a media report that claims Bush missed Al-Z. Soon enoug
38 MaverickM11 : You realize you ARE the problem.
39 Tbar220 : I'm glad you think so, and I noticed you mention that earlier. I don't doubt for a second that our special ops could have captured a single man and p
40 Schoenorama : The No-Fly zones were imposed AFTER he gassed the Kurds. Saddam basically lost control over the entire Northern (Kurdish) regions with the imposition
41 Post contains images ANCFlyer : Absolutely not . . . can't make a response if you haven't read the linked data . . . or at least you shouldn't . . . The horse is dead . . . another
42 Post contains links Mrmeangenes : I found this on the subject of Abu Musab: http://www.intelligence.org.il/eng/eng_n/zarqawi.htm NBC to the contrary, it does NOT appear there was any r
43 Post contains images Tbar220 : Ok, on one hand you call my thread another "boring ol' bush bashing thread"... and then on the other hand you says its something new and not old rhet
44 MaverickM11 : Simultaneously whining about the hypocrisy while perpetuating said hypocrisy helps no one. Your sole purpose is to perpetuate the whining:
45 Mrmeangenes : I'll apologize in advance for any spelling errors: I've been kind of busy fact-checking. 1. The sources cited are Michael O'Hanlon, who works for the
46 Post contains images MDorBust : " My second purpose today is to provide you with additional information, to share with you what the United States knows about Iraq's weapons of mass
47 Mrmeangenes : You neglected to mention this speech was given in February,2003. Just looking at the timeline here, the NBC story stinks. Beginning of 2001- Meets OB
48 MDorBust : The whole point of posting SecState's speech was to refute Falcons claim that the Terror aspect of the case for war was invented after the war when i
49 Bill142 : Bush has missed the chance to do a lot of things. Why should we be surprised by this?
50 Mrmeangenes : I suppose one should not be surprised by a little network disinformation. ( I'm assuming, from lack of other-than-political comment nobody has a real
51 Mrmeangenes : I see the one thing I didn't bother to check was the DATE of the NBC story: March 2,2004 ; so I suspect I was right: it was a political hit piece, eng
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Bust Missed Chance To Get Al-Zarqawi posted Fri May 19 2006 00:24:28 by Tbar220
How Army Medics Tried To Help Al-Zarqawi posted Sat Jun 17 2006 14:15:28 by Mrmeangenes
Bush Won...time To Get Naked posted Thu Nov 4 2004 07:39:40 by PropilotJW
Want To Get Even With Bush? Here's Your Chance posted Tue Apr 8 2003 22:41:26 by Matt D
Letter From Al-Zawahiri To Al-Zarqawi posted Fri Oct 14 2005 05:45:01 by Jetjack74
Top Lieutenant To Al Zarqawi Caught posted Tue Jan 25 2005 04:40:31 by Futureualpilot
Conspiracy To Get Bush posted Fri Oct 8 2004 22:20:37 by Dtwclipper
Is It That Hard To Get Soldiers In Germany? posted Thu Nov 9 2006 00:30:53 by Oly720man
Brits Believe Bush Is A Danger To World Peace posted Fri Nov 3 2006 08:07:13 by Cosec59
Any Easy Way To Get Video (VHS) To PC? posted Thu Nov 2 2006 15:27:43 by Thom@s