Jordans King, WMD's came from Syria. Hmmmm...

[Mr.Vicchio]

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2004/4/...17/141224.shtml

Jordan's King Abdullah revealed on Saturday that vehicles reportedly containing chemical weapons and poison gas that were part of a deadly al Qaeda bomb plot came from Syria, the country named by U.S. weapons inspector David Kay last year as a likely repository for Iraq's weapons of mass destruction.

"It was a major, major operation. It would have decapitated the government," King Abdullah told the San Francisco Chronicle. Jordanian officials estimated that the death count could have been as high as 20,000 - seven times greater than the Sept. 11 attacks.

Interesting, According to other reports, the plot to bomb the hotel involved crude devices and none make mention of anything to do with WMD to be used in the attack.

There is also a reported attempt to poison a water supply, but no mention is made in article about how they intended to do it.

But in any case, NewsMax is not what I would call a reliable source, here's why in this case:

What NewsMax say:
"Jordan's King Abdullah revealed on Saturday that vehicles reportedly containing chemical weapons and poison gas that were part of a deadly al Qaeda bomb plot came from Syria, the country named by U.S. weapons inspector David Kay last year as a likely repository for Iraq's weapons of mass destruction.

"It was a major, major operation. It would have decapitated the government," King Abdullah told the San Francisco Chronicle. Jordanian officials estimated that the death count could have been as high as 20,000 - seven times greater than the Sept. 11 attacks."

NewsMax quote the SF Chronicle, but here's what the SF Chronicle actually reported:
"The monarch said his security services had followed the trail of the suspects and captured five trucks packed with 17.5 tons of high explosives, which apparently were intended for an attack on the Jordanian prime minister's office and the intelligence ministry.

"It was a major, major operation," Abdullah said. "It would have decapitated the government."

Casualties would have been "in the thousands," he added. "It couldn't have been more sinister."
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?...MNGLO66QRH1.DTL

Note the none too subtle differcences.


So, believe whatever you want. But be wary of news sites that sell action hero dolls of Bush and Coulter. And do give some thought to checking what sites like that claim are facts. NewsMax is about one step behind Coulter IMHO.

[Mr.Vicchio]

The question is, if Newsmax is lying, and the King never said that, where is the media attack on them for lying. If the King indeed said that, why isn't the media all over it trying to leanr the truth?

[PatrickHenry]

Mr Vicchio, your story from newsmax.com was also reported in the San Francisco Chronicle, without the sensationalistic spin against Syria.
Chronicle story here:
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?...MNGLO66QRH1.DTL
I have been accused in this forum of posting "tabloid" sources. SF Chronicle is recognized as a leading newspaper.

Yes Al-Qaeda still stalks...

Where is the media outrage? Lol, don't even bother, why was there no media outrage about Rice lying under oath? Where was the media outrage about the out and out lies of Bush? Where was the media outrage when Bush carefully and selectively quoted the evidence provided by Hussein Kamal on the Iraqi WMD and programs? Where was the media outrage when California was being price gouged during the energy crisis and Cheney claimed it wasn't happening. Now that there are prosecutions, why haven't the media displayed suitable outrage?

Goodness, I could go on and on. Get the idea?

[Mr.Vicchio]

Rice lied under oath? Sorry must have had my "Bush hater" ear phones off.

Rice, under oath claimed the infamous PDF was a historical document and contained no threat warnings. We are now well aware that the document was not simply historical and certainly contained threat warnings.

Feel free to read her testimony, the questions she was asked versus the answers she gave. Don't take my word for it, just don't be blind. And quite bluntly, don't keep your blinkers on.

One doesn't need to hate Bush, Rice or the US to see the perfectly obvious. Where's the media outrage? Busy blaming Ben what's his handle for asking *partisan* questions. Horsedoodoo.

Oh, and hey, while you seem to wish to know why there is no media outrage about NewsMax's fallacious story, I might ask you why no other major media channels appear to be running this sensational story? Any ideas, why isn't it splashed all over Fox, CNN, ABC, CBS, the BBC? Care to explain why such a sensational story that clearly points to all the necon ramblings and excuses perhaps being true is not major headlines?

[Mr.Vicchio]

I read her answers.

I just wonder what PDB you read, I have read the whole thing. It mentioned POSSIBLE highjacking to gain the release of a prisoner in US Custody, said there were some reports of federal offices in NYC under survallience... and the rest WAS historical. Shall I go get it and quote form it for oyu? I think I will.

The *rest* was historical?

"Nevertheless, FBI information since that time indicates patterns of suspicious activity in this country consistent with preparations for hijackings or other types of attacks, including recent surveillance of federal buildings in New York."

I guess there's no point in my trying to play Jesus Christ and restore the sense of sight to the blind.

[Mr.Vicchio]

http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadA...le.asp?ID=13022

Jsut asking you to bother to read the article, I know the source might fill you with bile, but I think you should read it anyway.


Oh here it is... wondering where anything in here against Dr. Rice's testimony, one can find ANY grounds to claim, outside of just pure hate, that she lied. If you would please point out, using the PDB and her testimony where she "lied under oath" I would be more then glaad to look your evidence.
Clandestine, foreign government, and media reports indicate bin Laden since 1997 has wanted to conduct terrorist attacks in the US. Bin Laden implied in U.S. television interviews in 1997 and 1998 that his followers would follow the example of World Trade Center bomber Ramzi Yousef and "bring the fighting to America."

After U.S. missile strikes on his base in Afghanistan in 1998, bin Laden told followers he wanted to retaliate in Washington, according to a -- -- service.

An Egyptian Islamic Jihad (EIJ) operative told - - service at the same time that bin Laden was planning to exploit the operative's access to the U.S. to mount a terrorist strike.

The millennium plotting in Canada in 1999 may have been part of bin Laden's first serious attempt to implement a terrorist strike in the U.S.

Convicted plotter Ahmed Ressam has told the FBI that he conceived the idea to attack Los Angeles International Airport himself, but that in ---, Laden lieutenant Abu Zubaydah encouraged him and helped facilitate the operation. Ressam also said that in 1998 Abu Zubaydah was planning his own U.S. attack.

Ressam says bin Laden was aware of the Los Angeles operation. Although Bin Laden has not succeeded, his attacks against the U.S. Embassies in Kenya and Tanzania in 1998 demonstrate that he prepares operations years in advance and is not deterred by setbacks. Bin Laden associates surveyed our embassies in Nairobi and Dar es Salaam as early as 1993, and some members of the Nairobi cell planning the bombings were arrested and deported in 1997.

Al Qaeda members -- including some who are U.S. citizens -- have resided in or traveled to the U.S. for years, and the group apparently maintains a support structure that could aid attacks.

Two al-Qaeda members found guilty in the conspiracy to bomb our embassies in East Africa were U.S. citizens, and a senior EIJ member lived in California in the mid-1990s.

A clandestine source said in 1998 that a bin Laden cell in New York was recruiting Muslim-American youth for attacks.

We have not been able to corroborate some of the more sensational threat reporting, such as that from a ---- service in 1998 saying that Bin Laden wanted to hijack a U.S. aircraft to gain the release of "Blind Sheikh" Omar Abdel Rahman and other U.S.-held extremists.

Nevertheless, FBI information since that time indicates patterns of suspicious activity in this country consistent with preparations for hijackings or other types of attacks, including recent surveillance of federal buildings in New York.

The FBI is conducting approximately 70 full-field investigations throughout the U.S. that it considers bin Laden-related. CIA and the FBI are investigating a call to our embassy in the UAE in May saying that a group or bin Laden supporters was in the U.S. planning attacks with explosives.

[Mr.Vicchio]

Wha??

Hold on...

"Nevertheless, FBI information since that time indicates patterns of suspicious activity in this country consistent with preparations for hijackings or other types of attacks, including recent surveillance of federal buildings in New York"

Okay there is a broad "pattern" of actiivty.

Okay, what does that mean? What should have been done? It was on going.

Lets look at the last paragraph:

The FBI is conducting approximately 70 full-field investigations throughout the U.S. that it considers bin Laden-related. CIA and the FBI are investigating a call to our embassy in the UAE in May saying that a group or bin Laden supporters was in the U.S. planning attacks with explosives.

Hmm again more timely info in terms of historical vs. current...

so 2 out of 11 paragraphs are more recent info, so Doctor Rice lied saying it was mostly a "historical document"

Wow I just can't make that leap of logic, 9 out of 11 paragraphs show what HAD happened, info, and other such, 2 on "recent" as being anything BUT "mostly historical" I guess I am blind, but I think its I am blind to the hate, thats just me.

Sigh, don't even bother. I have read that article previously. How about you go and play with someone who might buy the line you are trying to foist, like those who can't read or write. P.T Barnum was right.

[Mr.Vicchio]

What line? 2 out of 11 paragrpahs wer on RECENT info per the date of the PDB.

9 out of 11 were historical.

You're the one trying to sell a line.

OMG OMG Dr. RICE called the PDB historical! But look look the last two paragraphs have recent stuff, she lied under oath!!!

www.democraticunderground.com Your kinda forum.

[Mia]

Mr,

One, the briefing said he "...liked the WTC as a target...

[Mia]

</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (PeterWolf,)


Oh, and hey, while you seem to wish to know why there is no media outrage about NewsMax's fallacious story, I might ask you why no other major media channels appear to be running this sensational story? Any ideas, why isn't it splashed all over Fox, CNN, ABC, CBS, the BBC? Care to explain why such a sensational story that clearly points to all the necon ramblings and excuses perhaps being true is not major headlines?<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'>


Good question. BUSH would be holding a press conference if he could implicate Syria in anything.

Mr.Vicchio,

I'm sorry, have you mistaken me for a liberal? I'm not actually. Nor am I a Democrat, in fact, I'm not an American.

And you can prattle all you want about Rice, her testimony speaks for itself. Oddly enough, you seem to be unable to identify the issues, perhaps you should read the questions Rice was answering more carefully. Who knows, maybe you simply don't wish to know.

I have no need to sell any "line" when the facts speak well for themselves.

Here's a couple of other clangers of Rice, the National Security Adviser, a very well edcated and successful woman, her speciality of course being mainly related to the Cold War nations and history. Try these though;

How is it possible a person in Rice's position could claim that "no one could have imagined" later revised with the now classic Bush Administratism, "I misspoke", to "I (Rice) couldn't have imagined" with regard to crashing airliners into buildings? Goodness me, you decide, is she lying or completely clueless? I trust I have no need to explain why, foiled plots by terrorists, media, intelligence and so on. Personally, I'd expect a National Security Advisor to have a clue, and to tell the truth, Rice fails on one or both counts.

The second is her interesting claim in her opening remarks about Iraq and its hostile intent by firing on US aircraft operating inside the no fly zones in Iraq. She claimed these aircraft were "enforcing UN security council resolutions". Were they?

Of course, if they weren't, then it becomes obvious that the US has been committing acts of aggression against Iraq, direct ones and Iraq was perfectly entitled to defend itself and was in fact, not the hostile party. Can you explain how a National Security Advisor can claim such?

Seriously, my advice is get some friends to help you. You aren't doing very well so far. You tried a simply wonderful NewsMax article that took less than 120 seconds to debunk, which you could have done but instead posted it. Now, why does that make me seriously suspect that you are doing little but trying to foist biased lines on people?

Oh, and I'd still like to hear why that wonderful NewsMax story, which if true would be a major headline, is not being headlined on major media outlets, in the US and Internationaly as such a story would warrant. Where's your outrage about this point and why hasn't it been widely published?

Have fun now.

[Mr.Vicchio]

20/20 hindsight is a wonderful thing. Prior to 9/11 if you were the NSA and a report crossed your desk talking about "possible use of high jacked airliners" as suicide missles.

What would you have done? Hmmm?

Grounded all airliners? I know, racial profiling of all muslims!

Thats what I thought. You would have, prior to 9/11 without a real hard peice of intel, looked at that, and gone "Okay, riiight."

[Mia]

What is being said over and over is there was no one "shaking the trees". There was no one saying put this together, find anything that might relate, etc.

If they had put it all together, the guy taking lessons just to fly, etc., etc. there is a very good chance they could have interrogated him and others and ruined the plan.

Mr.Vicchio,

Hindsight is indeed a wonderful thing and I don't blame Bush or Rice for 911, on the question of whether or not they did everything they could to prevent the tragedy is and will probably always remain arguable, at least to some degree.

But it is apparent that the Bush administration certainly didn't give the same priority to terrorism, specifically Bin Laden and Al Qaeda, that the Clinton administration appears to have. Obviously, the same argument will be had about whether or not the Clinton administration could have done more.

What does concern me is the attitude of the Bush administration, their exploitation of 911 for war and political gain. I do believe they dropped the ball on things and were too happy to simply sit back and act more as spectators. Lying and deception are simply the stock in trade of the Bush administration, especially when it comes to butt covering time.

Well, the article has surfaced on FOX, though it's an AP article. Interestingly enough, they don't quote the SF Chronicle, it's now "anonymous officials close the investigation." The article also alleges that the King of Jordan has commented on it, not to the SF Chronicle, but in a letter of thanks to Jordanian Intelligence chief.

"Jordan's King Abdullah II said this week in a published letter of thanks to his intelligence chief, Gen. Saad Kheir, that the arrests of the terror cell members have "saved thousands of lives."

In his letter, Abdullah said that had the chemical bomb plot not been uncovered, Jordan would have seen "a crime that would have been unprecedented in the country in terms of the size of explosives mounted on the vehicles and the methods of carrying out the attacks or the civilian locations chosen."

Now that sounds interesting, but so far I haven't found the letter, but there is more of interest in the article that still sounds somewhat suspect. And of course, what the king is quoted as saying (explosives but not chemicals), we'll come back to that point, but more from the AP/Fox article here where things seem to get rather murky.

"Jordanian officials say the arrests occurred after suspected militants entered Jordan from neighboring Syria in at least three vehicles filled with explosives, detonators and raw material to be used in bomb-making."

No mention of chemicals. Interesting eh.

I did find an article in the Jordan Times on the plot, which quoted more of the king's letter, this is the complete article;

"AMMAN (JT) — His Majesty King Abdullah on Tuesday sent a letter to Director of the Public Intelligence Department General Saad Kheir, praising the work of security services that recently thwarted a terrorist attack on Jordan.
“The country has, for the past few days, gone through extremely critical times after we were informed of the dreadful plot targeting our faithful people planned by a group of terrorists... a crime that would have been unprecedented in the country in terms of the size of explosives used and the manner of execution...,” the King said in the letter.

The Monarch also lauded citizens' courage and exceptional cooperation with the security forces during the hunt for the suspects.

On April 10, security forces announced the arrest of several suspects and the detention of two cars laden with explosives and weapons outside Irbid.

Interrogations revealed that the suspects had planned to target several public and foreign institutions. General Kheir, who is also King's Adviser on Security Affairs and Director of the State Security Council, replied in a letter in which he vowed, on behalf of the security personnel, to remain alert to threats and safeguard the security and stability of the country and the people."

Not a mention of chemicals or chemical weapons. One should certainly retain a healthy level of suspicioc on this one.

References:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,117414,00.html
http://www.jordantimes.com/wed/homenews/homenews5.htm