News-Record.com

"This is fact."

I'm waiting for Ed Cone's very necessary question, "Where did you get that information from? What is your source?"

I'll add my question, "Is it a good source, a reliable source, a verifiable source or is it something you just believe because you want to?"

I'll wait for an answer to those questions...or the usual "you're a liberal" reply by those who didn't write the letter.

Aw, Dave, are those big bwad wiberals saying things you don't wike again? Are they questioning facts that appear to be plucked from your colon (or some right-wing blog with no hint of objectivity?)

I agree with you, Dave. Liberals just need to shut up- America will be better once we all march in lockstep, without tolerating dissent, and with a stark black-or-white, my-team-versus-your-team attitude. We're already on our way.

Bill Clinton,John Kerry,and Teddy (chappaquiddick kid) Kennedy are idols in this little blue island in a sea of red,Dave,hence the anti-Bush letters from the LIEberals.

Get over it, Dave. He lied and he still lies.

Dave dubya won - get over it - clinton is not pres any more - dubya has screwed up - get over it -- dubya has to take the blame for Iraqnam - he is the President - it's his fault Dave get used to it. If you were stupid and gullible enough to vote for him - get used to it Dave - dubya lied and we are paying for his lies with the blood of our brave, valient soldiers.

Hey Yard Dung listen up:

Hey dubya whatta ya say
How high will gas go today

Mr Watkins,

You said, "Liberals just need to shut up"

LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL at your blatant stupidity! You are the scum of this great country.

No we liberals will definately NOT shut up because we see dumbya destroying our country!

It's people like you that are convincing me to become a teacher and spread the word of love and anti-war to our children.

Dave,

You and people like you are the mealy-mouths. At some point we have to try to make peace in this world. Do you want to keep fighting forever?

Like i said Dave, an island of liberalism.

Yallerstreak,
Hey hey whattya say?
spit on any GIs today?

It seems that all the Dave's of this country who voted for Dubya are becoming desperate to validate their support for a president whom has lied and continues to lie about the war in Iraq. Sorry Dave, this country is getting fed up with your lying president,which increasingly includes those of you who voted for him.

I find the responses to this letter very interesting in light of what is going on on the Gulf Coast and Los Angeles in the last few days.

First, the situation in New Orleans or any of the other towns and cities hit by the hurricane.

What has happened is a Muslim terrorists dream. Just suppose that a group of them were able to assemble and set off a dirty nuclear event in the bowl that is New Orleans. You would have almost the same situation that is playing out. Granted you would not have the destruction of the roadways. But, there would be the exact same problems with clearing out the city. The dead, injured and survivors. But add to that, the area effected would not be able to be rebuilt as is being talked about now. The whole place would be condemned and never occupied again.

That kind of event is what President Bush has, thus far, managed to protect our country from. That is the kind of event that we are fighting a war to stop from happening. That is why we are in Iraq and Afghanistan and other places that we are not told about. This is why we are spending our troops lives and the wealth of our country. We are trying to protect an American town from this kind of destruction. What you are seeing and hearing in the news is what would happen if OLB and his like kind are successful in implementing their plans.

On top of that we now have four home grown terrorists who had some very extensive plans to start the process in Los Angeles. They have been stopped. They have been stopped by the current administration of our country. How about a "Thank You" for President Bush and the other people in our government who are being successful in defending us?

I’m very, very disappointed, again, Allen.

Although the N&R has shown its willingness to sometimes edit letters and its willingness to sometimes append letters with editors' comments, this letter demonstrates once again that the N&R policy for doing so is inconsistent and that the N&R is willing to allow complete fabrications to be presented as fact on its letters page.

This example is especially egregious since the writer is allowed to state unchallenged and uncorrected "This is a fact."

Bill Clinton did not "[R]efuse to take Osama Bin Laden in [sic] custody when offered by Sudan." According to the 9/11 Commission Report, Sudan discussed expelling Bin Ladin with the Saudis, but they declined to take him. The commission found "no credible evidence" that the Sudan ever offered Bin Laden to the US.

These are real facts as documented by an authoritative source (The 9/11 Commission Report -- pp. 109 - 110) unlike Mr. Derence's unsubstantiated claims.

If the N&R is going to allow fantasy to be presented as fact, its editors should completely cease to add corrections and commentary to any letter. The occasional editor correction gives the erroneous impression that any letter not notated must be factually correct. As we see again today, that is not so.

startrek,

Do we want to keep fighting forever?

Well duh! It is the goal of fanatical Islam to take over the world. Damn right we will keep fighting forever. Unless the nut case Ragheads are wiped out the war will go on forever or you and I, our families and friends will be, A. Converting to Islam or B. Dead.

Hey Brian Harper,

Did you read my entire post? Could you reread it for me?

*hint: I'm on your side*

Congrats, BTW on going back to school.

"Do we want to keep fighting forever?

Well duh!"

We've ALWAYS been at war with Eastasia!!

We must kill every single Islamic person before they nuke our cities and pervert our children!!

I suggest you look into a fascintating church I've been hearing about, the Westboro Baptist church over in Topeka, Kansas- you'd fit right in there.

I'm not a liberal, and I'm not a Bush hater. I simply don't trust Bush at all. He hasn't demonstrated that he's worthy of being trusted.

Say, why has he merited this kind of loyalty and trust? I mean, what has he done to deserve it?

And I don't understand why it is that some people seem willing to sacrifice their firstborn for sake of George W. Bush, as if he were the greatest thing God had put on this earth. I've heard some supporters of the Iraq war say very much this exact thing.

So if lying is an evil thing in the eyes of the Lord, would or would not Bush be considered righteous in the sight of God? Remember it's not that he has fallen - we all have done that - but rather is Bush repentant of his lying at all?

Oh yes Roch. We all know how much credibility the 9/11 Commission has, LOL! Between Berger stuffing documents in his pants to Gorelick insuring her "Able Danger" fiasco was not seen by the commission, of course they don't admit that Clinton has multiple chances to get UBL! The commission is as credible as the Clinton cronies allowed them to be, LOL!

I see J.C.

Have you read the report? It has copious footnotes that substantiate its findings. (Quite unlike Mr. Darence's fabrications).

My guess, you haven't read it and will gladly accept Dave Darrence as a greater authority simply because doing so means you don't have to question your views.

J.C. Burcham,

I've read posts in these LTE blogs from people using the 9/11 Commission Report to substantiate that there was a connection between Al Qaeda and Iraq, in order to support that justification for our attacking Iraq.

You seem to discount the validity of the report's point mentioned by Roch101.

My question is: who's right? Is the report valid? It is being used to both attack and suppport peoples' view on both sides, it seems.

In Richard Clarke's book "Aganist All Enemies" he states (as THE leading authority on terrorism and a registered republican) Clinton gave the OK to assinate OBL. The Pentagon refused to carry out that assignment, claiming they couldn't find him.

Now, I don't know about you guys, Mac, yard dog, Dave and JC, but I was not there to dispute this. So I believe Clarke because he was supportive of Bush until Bush proved himself untrustworthy.

My question is: If those of us who are expressing our disapproval of this war are aiding and abetting the enemy, why do every one of you who support the war swear the enemy is out to kill us all regardless of what we say? Seems to me if they are hell bent on their mission nothing we say would mean beans to them.

Yvonne, of course Clinton wanted to take Bin Laden out. Those who decry the non-existent opportunity to take him from the Sudanese ignore that Clinton did authorize a cruise missle attack against Bin Laden which was derided at the time as an attempt to draw attention away from the impending impeachment.

There were many, many other plans and attempts to neutralize Bin Laden under the Clinton administration. Anybody who chooses to discuss this subject and has not read the 9/11 Report is operating without a wealth of available information and thus, their opinions and conclusions are diminished.

Well folks, I am not per se a "Bush Hater," as much as I just do not care for him as a leader. Just as others have stated, I feel he is not trustworthy, his lies have led me to this conclusion.

I am a peace-loving, peacemaker, anti-war person. I despise ALL war, regardless of who, what, when, where, how's of same. If some choose to despise me for this, that is their inalienable right to do so. I will strive to have war ceased. I will speak, protest, etc. to have the peace message heard.

If more people who felt this way would make their voices heard, the force to be reckoned with would be a mighty army of supporters. Until that time, peace-loving anti-war people will be viewed as a political disitent who is against the current president/administration. The anti-war movement goes much deeper than that.

Shalom

" It's people like you that are convincing me to become a teacher and spread the word of love and anti-war to our children......You are the scum of this great country. "
how many people out there want this person teaching your children ? it appears if you do not agree or have a differing opinion, you automatically become scum. imagine what kind of grade your child would receive if they had a backbone and voiced an opposing viewpoint to this teacher....ouch !

“The commission found "no credible evidence" that the Sudan ever offered Bin Laden to the US.”

So let me ask you Roch, let’s suppose that it was on tape, right out of Clinton’s own mouth that he turned down OBL, who then is more credible, Clinton or the 9/11 Omission?

“My guess, you haven't read it and will gladly accept Dave Darrence as a greater authority simply because doing so means you don't have to question your views.”
My guess is that you will not even bother listening to the recording because it means you will have to question your views.

"LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL at your blatant stupidity! You are the scum of this great country."

Hmm sorry but I have to comment on this! Way too funny. Maybe you should try comprehending what you read before typing.

"It's people like you that are convincing me to become a teacher and spread the word of love and anti-war to our children."

Yeah you have to spread the word to conservative children since it seems like liberals abort their's at a higher rate. You are the perfect example of why our kids continue to get stupider and stupider. You are more worried about getting your “agenda” out instead of teaching the kids. Not to mention that it seems like you can’t even read yourself. And people wonder what is going on in our schools. Perfect example in you Brian Harper.

"how many people out there want this person teaching your children"

Not many Buz, that is why Brian Harper better be an alias or hopefully he is planning on teaching outside Guilford County.

No need to guess, Trish. I've heard the recording to which you refer and find nothing that contradicts the findings of the 9/11 Commissin Report. One can parse Clinton's words to infuse them with a meaning that is counter to the facts, but I'm not much for conspiracy theories.

How about you? Have you read the Commission's findings on the steps Bush took to stop Bin Laden?

Trish
To focus on one point here which is your comment about how the liberals are having more abortions.
Tm Russert of Meet the Press had Jerry Falwell on to discuss the social ills of our country. When the topic of abortion came up Tim pointed out to him that the highest rate of abortion is taking place in the good old southern conservative bible belt(good old southern bible belt are my words). Falwell not only did not refute this point but only added that "it shows we have alot of work to do".

Tim asked him did he know which state in America had the lowest rate of abortion. Falwell did not know the answer. ANSWER: Kerrys home state Mass.

It's unfortunate that almost four years after the attacks of Sept. 11th that we have once again fully devolved into this constant partisan "he said, she said" where so many are more interested in being right then solving problems.

I am especially concerned about the comments made by the gentleman who spoke of becoming a teacher. I would hope that if and when you become a teacher you teach your students how to keep an open mind and think things through for themselves.

We already have too many mindless fanatics in this world.

"scum", "ragheads", etc. Goodness people, it is a shame that folks on both sides of this debate cannot keep it civil! What have we become? What has happened to our Country? The anger,the mistrust, the outright hatred...it saddens me greatly.

It makes me wonder, are we headed for another war? This time among ourselves?

Craig:
I agree with your post. It's very sad how we turn hate, fear and contempt upon each other.

All of the labels and stereotypes that we use to discredit each other do nothing but weaken us as a nation.

Sue and Roch101, which planet have you been on?
This is well documented, search for yourself and see.

"Saddam supported terrorists worldwide and paid families of Palestine homicide bombers. He sheltered al-Qaida members and terrorist training sites in his country before and after Sept. 11. This is fact."

Mr. Derence is right on the money.

My bad Mr Watkins, I mis-comprehended your post. I apologize.

Trish, I was kidding about becoming a teacher. Not enough pay to have to deal with brats all day long. Yes, I jumped into that post without understanding it, but you give me the SAT and you give Bush the same test, I'll put $500 on the table that I'll outscore him.

Of course you'd bring up a liberal abortion rate thing. I've only known 2 people that got abortions and both voted for Bush. I just don't see your point there.

The Iraq Connection
Al Qaeda-Hussein Link Is Dismissed

By Walter Pincus and Dana Milbank
Washington Post Staff Writers
Thursday, June 17, 2004; Page A01

"The Sept. 11 commission reported yesterday that it has found no "collaborative relationship" between Iraq and al Qaeda.... a senior FBI official and a senior CIA analyst concurred with the finding."

I found those articles that insist there was a connection but they were opinions written by folks with an agenda. They quoted Bush, Cheney and other WH talking heads. What would you expect them to say, especially BEFORE the 9/11 Commission Report came out?

Sue and Roch101 asked for proof of Dave's "facts". If they have received an answer, by anyone, stating "facts" I have missed it.

Hayes,

Do you by chance have a link to support Tim Russert's claims? At first I would have agreed seeing as how Mass. has a high population of Catholics. However in looking around I find no evidence at all to support those claims. This 2000 report (which most agree neutral) shows the south low and Mass high (although not the highest, I think that is CA). But I would be real interested to see where he got his figures.

http://www.guttmacher.org/statecenter/sfaa.html

“One can parse Clinton's words to infuse them with a meaning that is counter to the facts, but I'm not much for conspiracy theories.”

Roch, I’m sorry I am a bit confused. Can you please tell me how someone can parse a direct quote? What do you think Clinton meant when he said:"The Sudanese wanted America to start dealing with them again. They released him [bin Laden]. At the time, '96, he had committed no crime against America, so I did not bring him here because we had no basis on which to hold him, though we knew he wanted to commit crimes against America.”
Also, let us not forget that a big Democrat fundraiser MONSOOR IJAZ stated he brokered the deal that Clinton turned down. By the way did you read his testimony in the report, as he did testify however the commission would not allow it to be public from what I know.

And no, I have not read the report. I personally feel (and felt) that the 9/11 commission was nothing but a big joke and I think Bush should have stuck to his guns and not had it. The commission had no real desire to find out how 9/11 happened or how to prevent another one. It was nothing but politics as usual. I believe that Able Danger has proven that.

"Trish, I was kidding about becoming a teacher."

Ah a joke, funny I didn't see that, seems more like a lie to me, but to each his own I guess.

Also, yeah I'm quite sure you didn't get the point I was making seeing has how you have a comprehension problem when it comes to reading.

"That kind of event is what President Bush has, thus far, managed to protect our country from. That is the kind of event that we are fighting a war to stop from happening."

What war is that, Mac? I thought the subject was Iraq.

“Sue and Roch101 asked for proof of Dave's "facts". If they have received an answer, by anyone, stating "facts" I have missed it.”

Well Sue and Roch do these prove Dave’s “facts”:
First up ”paid families of Palestine homicide bombers”:
”The hall was packed and the intake of breath was audible as a special announcement was made to the war widows of the West Bank - Saddam Hussein would pay $US25,000 ($47,000) to the family of each suicide bomber as an enticement for others to volunteer for martyrdom in the name of the Palestinian people. The men at the top table then opened Saddam's chequebook and, as the names of 47 martyrs were called, family representatives went up to sign for cheques written in US dollars.” http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2002/03/25/1017004766310.html

Now for“Saddam supported terrorists worldwide”:
Saddam gave sanuwary to these terrorist: Abdul Rahman Yasin, Abu Nidal and Abu Abbas just to name a few.

We also have this report: "On January 18, 1991, one day after the Gulf war began, an Iraqi terrorist posing as a day laborer managed to plant 26 sticks of TNT in a flower box below a window of the U.S. ambassador's residence in Jakarta, Indonesia. The dynamite wasn't completely buried, and a gardener found it before the bomb exploded. The following day in the Philippines, two Iraqis blew themselves up in a plot known to CIA veterans as Operation Dogmeat, a botched attempt to bomb the U.S. Information Service headquarters at the Thomas Jefferson Cultural Center in Manila. The failed attack on the U.S. government-run center received the active support of the Iraqi ambassador to the Philippines. Saddam Hussein openly encouraged these attacks. " http://63.247.134.60/~pobbs/archives/PDF/Saddam%20Hussein%20al%20Qaeda.pdf#search='botched%20attempt%20to%20bomb%20the%20U.S.%20Information%20Service%20headquarters'

We also have this showing how another Administration also stated ties to terrorist: Clinton's Justice Department prepared an indictment of al-Qaida's leader, Osama bin Laden, look for this passage located in the fourth paragraph reads:
"Al-Qaeda reached an understanding with the government of Iraq that al-Qaeda would not work against that government and that on particular projects, specifically including weapons development, al-Qaeda would work cooperatively with the government of Iraq."
By the way for those who just love the 9/11 commission see if you can find this testimony: “The U.S. attorney involved in preparing that indictment, Patrick Fitzgerald, told the federal 9/11 Commission that the intelligence surrounding the indictment came from one Jamal al Fadl, a former high-ranking al-Qaida leader who, before the Sept. 11 attacks, gave the U.S. its first real look at the terrorist organization. Fadl said an associate of bin Laden's, Mamdouh Mahmud Salim (Abu Hajer al Iraqi) "tried to reach a sort of agreement where they wouldn't work against each other – sort of 'the enemy of my enemy is my friend' – and that there were indications that within Sudan when al-Qaeda was there, which al-Qaeda left in the summer of '96, or the spring of '96, there were efforts to work on jointly acquiring weapons."

Or if you want something more recent we have memos found by a report for the Toronto Star: "The purpose of the trip was "to gain the knowledge of the message from bin Laden and to convey to his envoy an oral message from us to bin Laden," according to the final page of the Iraqi document, a handwritten letter dated Feb. 19, 1998." http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1051125568646

And if journalist and an US Attorney isn't good enough we have Russian President Putin said: "After Sept. 11, 2001, and before the start of the military operation in Iraq, the Russian special services ... received information that officials from Saddam's regime were preparing terrorist attacks in the United States and outside it against the U.S. military and other interests," Putin said. "Despite that information ... Russia's position on Iraq remains unchanged," he said in the Kazakh capital, Astana, after regional economic and security summits. He said Russia didn't have any information that Saddam's regime had actually been behind any terrorist acts. "It's one thing to have information that Saddam's regime is preparing terrorist attacks, (but) we didn't have information that it was involved in any known terrorist attacks," he said. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/3819057.stm

Last but not least we cannot leave out the UN: “Charles Deulfer, former Deputy Head, U.N. Special Commission for Iraq, told NPR, "There were lots of places in Iraq where training of non-Iraqis, or things, which by our lexicon would be considered terrorism, was taking place. That's why Iraq is on the terrorist list. Having a large aircraft, a 707, in a peninsula, completely visible from the air or from satellite, with no airline runways nearby, that's not there by accident."

But wait there is more, in case a President of a forgein county isn't good enough we have the good old US press of ABC that repored Iraq and Bin Laden had ties: http://www.rogerlsimon.com/mt-archives/2005/07/which_side_are_13.php

So Sue and Roch does that answer your concerns facts?

"F...the situation in New Orleans or any of the other towns and cities hit by the hurricane.

"What has happened is a Muslim terrorists dream."

I had this same sad vision of our Enemy celebrating in the caves as the levee's broke ...

Jeez...Trish is scary, isn't she?

Trish,

um, ok. whatever. You still holding on to Clinton conspiracy theories? LOL!

"Jeez...Trish is scary, isn't she?"

I'm sorry Tony, I fail to see what this has to do with anything. However do you have facts to discredit mine, if so then why not say so?

"um, ok. whatever. You still holding on to Clinton conspiracy theories? LOL!"

Aww well at least I can understand what I read before jumping in and looking like a fool.LOL! Not to mention I have no reason to lie, like well you, oh that's right you said you were joking, too bad nobody else got that joke.

Better yet since you claim to be so smart explain to me how I am holding on to Clinton conspiracy theories when in fact, I quoted Clinton word for word? Are you saying that Clinton himself started a conspiracy theory about himself?

Trish
You would probably have to pull up the transcripts from Meet the Press with the last meeting with Falwell. This was in July I think. Be careful the interview was only him, he was on the show with 3 other religious leaders about a month before so dont look at that show.

I can only say that Falwell did not refute the statitics and even confirmed the southern abortion rate by nodding his head as if he knew the numbers.

I just remember this moment because of how it pointed out that some the highest abortion rates are taking place in some of the most religious states in the country.

I fail to see how suicide-bombers in Palestine fit into the US military involvement in Iraq. So what if Hussein paid the family's money, even if it were in US dollars. Where does that tie into sending the military of one of the more powerful nations in the world to invade another soverign nation?

Now do not misunderstand me, I do not refute the fact, I just fail to see the tie of the two incidents. So, if that ignores any truth of the two, please show me precisely how so.

Shalom

Dave, Sue, Roch101 and I are STILL WAITING on your proof as to the validity of your facts. Thanks in advance.

Hayes,

Thanks for replying. I can't seem to find anything to back up Tim Russert, I think I might e-mail him, would be some good reading if I can find it. If you happen to see anything would you send it my way. Thanks

"So, if that ignores any truth of the two, please show me precisely how so."

Darryl,

It's called supporting terrorism, which was one of the many reasons given for the war. If he would pay the families of bombers to blow themselves up in Israel, what's to stop him from paying the families of bombers in the US?

There has been no suicide bombers in the US, so that logic is a fallacy. Saddam Hussein did not want a military confrontation with the US. He knew, whether admitted or not, that Iraq could not win a military conflict with the US.

The ties between Al-queida and Iraq are thin at the VERY least and NONE at best.

Yet, do not misunderstand my comments above. I am anti-war. I am a peace-loving, peacemaker. The current military situation in the Middle East is senseless. Countless lives have already been sacrifaced and more will come if the conflict is not resolved or the soldiers removed from harms way.

Make Love Not War!

Shalom

Dave,
Who was it that trained the terrorist that flew the planes into the WTC? We did not Saddam. Does that make us a training camp for terrorist?

"Does that make us a training camp for terrorist?"

Paul, are you saying that we trained pilots to fly planes into the WTC? I thought they were being trained to become pilots, I wasn't aware that our flight schools were teaching how to fly planes into buildings. Personally I thought they were teaching them how not to do that.

Do you see the difference? A terrorist training camp trained how to take over a plane. Our schools were teaching how to fly planes to become pilots not how to become terrorist, unless of course you know something that I might have missed.

Does it not seem to reason that the people who were trained to fly and then hijacked a plane had completed their "terrorist" training prior to coming to America. They needed the training to fly to take place in the country in which they were going to hijack the planes.

So, a rational person could surmise that the US had been a terrorist training ground due to the fact that the "terrorist" training had already been completed. I find little flaw in this thought.

If one checks out how CIA operatives function, the premise is there.

Let me state however, that I am not making the above comments in favor of such things.

Shalom

Darryl, I find a lot of flaw in your thought. I am a pilot myself, hence I have had flight training. How is my flight instructor supposed to know that I am a terrorist? Unless of course I am stupid enough to ask him/her what is the best way to hit a building?

Student pilots from the world over come to the US for flight training, as it is prohibitively expensive in most other countries. Unless we start doing "profiling" that gets libs and the ACLU in fits, then just about anyone can do flight training here.

Unless you know something about flying airplanes, please quit the ignorant guessing.

Dan, I believe the point of my post was missed. That is probably becase I posted it and it seems that I never post correctly for some. Take that to mean whatever anyone wishes, check the counter to many of my post and see whw writes those counterposts.

Nowhere in my post was it stated to ask flight students if they planned to hit a building. That is an inferred thought and somewhat out of place, not to mention rude.

And Dan has stated the main reason that flight training took place in the US, it is cheaper here! At least for those who have the funds to learn to fly it is cheaper! And since the terrorist have been funded by Americans (oil money), the terrorist have the money.

And my post context is totally missed when one looks at the counter to it as represented in the last comment; "Unless you know something about flying airplanes, please quit the ignorant guessing."

I never presumed to say that I knew anything about flying, I do not find that in my post.

Thanks for the kind words, "ignorant guessing." I will hold you in the Light as well Dan.

Shalom