Report: Saddam and Al Qaeda Enemies, Not Collaborators
Report: Saddam and Al Qaeda Enemies, Not Collaborators
On Sept. 11, 2001, Bush articulated the so-called Bush Doctrine: “We will make no distinction between the terrorists who committed these acts and those who harbor them.” Declassified portions of the Senate Intelligence Committee’s Phase II report released Friday make definitively clear that Iraq never qualified for inclusion in the Doctrine.
Al Qaeda was responsible for the 9/11 terrorist acts. Key portions of the new Intel Committee report indicate that Bush attacked an Iraqi regime that not only lacked an operational relationship with al Qaeda, but was hostile toward the terrorist network. By making the strategic mistake of attacking Iraq, Bush’s policy accomplished the goals of the al Qaeda network. Here’s what the report says:
[Bin] Ladin generally opposed collaboration [with Baghdad]. (p. 65)
According to debriefs of multiple detainees — including Saddam Hussein and former Deputy Prime Minister Tariq Aziz — and capture documents, Saddam did not trust al-Qa’ida or any other radical Islamist group and did not want to cooperate with them. (p. 67)
Aziz underscored Saddam’s distrust of Islamic extremists like bin Ladin, stating that when the Iraqi regime started to see evidence that Wahabists had come to Iraq, “the Iraqi regime issued a decree aggressively outlawing Wahabism in Iraq and threatening offenders with execution.” (p. 67)
Another senior Iraqi official stated that Saddam did not like bin Ladin because he called Saddam an “unbeliever.” (p.73)
Conclusion 1: … Postwar findings indicate that Saddam Hussein was distrustful of al-Qa’ida and viewed Islamic extremists as a threat to his regime, refusing all requests from al Qa’ida to provide material or operational support. Debriefings of key leaders of the former Iraqi regime indicate that Saddam distrusted Islamic radicals in general, and al Qa’ida in particular… Debriefings also indicate that Saddam issued a general order that Iraq should not deal with al Qa’ida. No postwar information suggests that the Iraqi regime attempted to facilitate a relationship with bin Ladin. (p. 105)
Conclusion 5:… Postwar information indicates that Saddam Hussein attempted, unsuccessfully, to locate and capture al-Zarqawi and that the regime did not have a relationship with, harbor, or turn a blind eye toward Zarqawi. (p. 109)
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
This treasonous government was letting Osama have access to a dialysis machine on 11 Sep 2001. This same treasonous government removed all rubble from WTC to China to avoid its analysis. This same treasonous government sent a Tomahawk into the side of the Pentagon.
The terrorists are over here, operating freely in the White House!
September 10th, 2006 at 8:53 pmBush is 100% crazy and his so-called “War on Terrorism” is phony! He has not even bothered to capture or kill Osama bin Laden for past 5 years!
September 10th, 2006 at 8:55 pmIf you start a war for no good reason do you qualify as a war criminal?
September 10th, 2006 at 8:57 pmCan someone just blow this guy so that we can go ahead and impeach him already? Hell, I’ll do it if it gets him out of office!
September 10th, 2006 at 8:58 pmAmerica’s Least Wanted
Ah, considering what’s on TV tonite, and info like this article – any surprises about the degree of abject lying going on?
September 10th, 2006 at 9:09 pmWhen it comes to George W. Bush, it seems like every time he’s been faced with a choice, he’s made the wrong choice. And not only the wrong choice, but the most wrong choice.
People die every single day because of this fool’s choices.
September 10th, 2006 at 9:15 pmHell, I’ll do it if it gets him out of office!
OK, budpaul,
We’ve all agreed.
September 10th, 2006 at 9:36 pmYOU do it!
Are you watching this ABC cr*p?
Janet Jackson’s nipple is obscene, and this isn’t???
September 10th, 2006 at 9:41 pmHi, true and zoo. So, whats the story tonight? :)
September 10th, 2006 at 9:46 pmtest
September 10th, 2006 at 9:47 pmKoppel’s show on Discovery is very interesting. There is a town hall discussion on security in America.
September 10th, 2006 at 9:48 pmI wasn’t home for the first part, am catching up now. I was going to watch the replay of MTP (with Darth Cheney) but I may stay with this.
If the ABC/Disney GOP funded phony docu-drama gets low viewership tonight, then that will send a signal to them that Americans have gotten wiser, but if it gets massive viewership, then Americans have remained gullible to Bush Regime propaganda crap!
September 10th, 2006 at 9:53 pmDisney will probably do a musical version next of the phony docu-drama, and then an animated cartoon kids version, so boycott them before they do that crap please!
September 10th, 2006 at 9:56 pmThe “controversial” Scene
Just finished watching the “controversial” scene from Path to 9-11. It is obvious that it was based on the following parts of the 9-11 commission report: “The CIA Develops a Capture Plan” and “Kandahar May 1999″.
http://www.9-11commission.gov/report/911Report_Ch4.htm
The CIA Develops a Capture Plan
Initially, the DCI’s Counterterrorist Center and its Bin Ladin unit considered a plan to ambush Bin Ladin when he traveled between Kandahar, the Taliban capital where he sometimes stayed the night, and his primary residence at the time, Tarnak Farms. After the Afghan tribals reported that they had tried such an ambush and failed, the Center gave up on it, despite suspicions that the tribals’ story might be fiction. Thereafter, the capture plan focused on a nighttime raid on Tarnak Farms.17
A compound of about 80 concrete or mud-brick buildings surrounded by a 10-foot wall, Tarnak Farms was located in an isolated desert area on the outskirts of the Kandahar airport. CIA officers were able to map the entire site, identifying the houses that belonged to Bin Ladin’s wives and the one where Bin Ladin himself was most likely to sleep. Working with the tribals, they drew up plans for the raid. They ran two complete rehearsals in the United States during the fall of 1997.18
By early 1998, planners at the Counterterrorist Center were ready to come back to the White House to seek formal approval. Tenet apparently walked National Security Advisor Sandy Berger through the basic plan on February 13. One group of tribals would subdue the guards, enter Tarnak Farms stealthily, grab Bin Ladin, take him to a desert site outside Kandahar, and turn him over to a second group. This second group of tribals would take him to a desert landing zone already tested in the 1997 Kansi capture. From there, a CIA plane would take him to New York, an Arab capital, or wherever he was to be arraigned. Briefing papers prepared by the Counterterrorist Center acknowledged that hitches might develop. People might be killed, and Bin Ladin’s supporters might retaliate, perhaps taking U.S. citizens in Kandahar hostage. But the briefing papers also noted that there was risk in not acting. “Sooner or later,” they said, “Bin Ladin will attack U.S. interests, perhaps using WMD [weapons of mass destruction].”19
In Washington, Berger expressed doubt about the dependability of the tribals. In his meeting with Tenet, Berger focused most, however, on the question of what was to be done with Bin Ladin if he were actually captured. He worried that the hard evidence against Bin Ladin was still skimpy and that there was a danger of snatching him and bringing him to the United States only to see him acquitted.24
On May 20, Director Tenet discussed the high risk of the operation with Berger and his deputies, warning that people might be killed, including Bin Ladin. Success was to be defined as the exfiltration of Bin Ladin out of Afghanistan.28 A meeting of principals was scheduled for May 29 to decide whether the operation should go ahead.
The principals did not meet. On May 29, “Jeff” informed “Mike” that he had just met with Tenet, Pavitt, and the chief of the Directorate’s Near Eastern Division. The decision was made not to go ahead with the operation. “Mike” cabled the field that he had been directed to “stand down on the operation for the time being.” He had been told, he wrote, that cabinet-level officials thought the risk of civilian casualties-”collateral damage”-was too high. They were concerned about the tribals’ safety, and had worried that “the purpose and nature of the operation would be subject to unavoidable misinterpretation and misrepresentation-and probably recriminations-in the event that Bin Ladin, despite our best intentions and efforts, did not survive.”29
Impressions vary as to who actually decided not to proceed with the operation. Clarke told us that the CSG saw the plan as flawed. He was said to have described it to a colleague on the NSC staff as “half-assed” and predicted that the principals would not approve it. “Jeff ” thought the decision had been made at the cabinet level. Pavitt thought that it was Berger’s doing, though perhaps on Tenet’s advice. Tenet told us that given the recommendation of his chief operations officers, he alone had decided to “turn off” the operation. He had simply informed Berger, who had not pushed back. Berger’s recollection was similar. He said the plan was never presented to the White House for a decision.30
Kandahar, May 1999
It was in Kandahar that perhaps the last, and most likely the best, opportunity arose for targeting Bin Ladin with cruise missiles before 9/11. In May 1999, CIA assets in Afghanistan reported on Bin Ladin’s location in and around Kandahar over the course of five days and nights. The reporting was very detailed and came from several sources. If this intelligence was not “actionable,” working-level officials said at the time and today, it was hard for them to imagine how any intelligence on Bin Ladin in Afghanistan would meet the standard. Communications were good, and the cruise missiles were ready. “This was in our strike zone,” a senior military officer said. “It was a fat pitch, a home run.” He expected the missiles to fly. When the decision came back that they should stand down, not shoot, the officer said, “we all just slumped.” He told us he knew of no one at the Pentagon or the CIA who thought it was a bad gamble. Bin Ladin “should have been a dead man” that night, he said.173
Working-level CIA officials agreed. While there was a conflicting intelligence report about Bin Ladin’s whereabouts, the experts discounted it. At the time, CIA working-level officials were told by their managers that the strikes were not ordered because the military doubted the intelligence and worried about collateral damage. Replying to a frustrated colleague in the field, the Bin Ladin unit chief wrote: “having a chance to get [Bin Ladin] three times in 36 hours and foregoing the chance each time has made me a bit angry…. [T]he DCI finds himself alone at the table, with the other princip[als] basically saying ‘we’ll go along with your decision Mr. Director,’ and implicitly saying that the Agency will hang alone if the attack doesn’t get Bin Ladin.”174 But the military officer quoted earlier recalled that the Pentagon had been willing to act. He told us that Clarke informed him and others that Tenet assessed the chance of the intelligence being accurate as 50-50. This officer believed that Tenet’s assessment was the key to the decision.175
September 10th, 2006 at 9:58 pmHi, true and zoo. So, whats the story tonight? :)
Comment by Juan C
Next thread down, Juan. This one is too important…
September 10th, 2006 at 10:00 pm#16, Juan,
Down one….. ;-)
September 10th, 2006 at 10:01 pmWhile America debates ABC’s lack of principles, VP Cheney gets a whole hour on Meet the Press to blame the “intelligence” for his utter and absolute failure in the Middle East. Remind me again how many of those who gave the White House their intelligence were fired? Cheney was also on Meet the Press to explain in a way that only he can that the GOP has nothing for voters in November. The man clearly has no conscious–that’s why it’s so easy for him to lie to America so easily.
September 10th, 2006 at 10:03 pmOh boy now we get written scenes from the ABC/Disney phony docu-drama on here > see post 15 > warning: reading it might cause brain cancer > lol.
September 10th, 2006 at 10:06 pmI watched part of the Film, it’s a joke..it’s so far removed from reality as to be not a docudrama, but a soap opera.
September 10th, 2006 at 10:06 pmI believe the “Invasion of the Body Snatchers” has taken place in America and all the Bush lovers are replicas of people > call them pod vegetables > lol.
September 10th, 2006 at 10:09 pmWhile America debates ABC’s lack of principles, VP Cheney gets a whole hour on Meet the Press to blame the “intelligence†for his utter and absolute failure in the Middle East.
==
But they gave Tenet and Bremer the Presidential Medal of Freedom for their screwups? cmon.
Yeh makes sense to me, give them a medal of freedom for being good dupes, then blame them for 9/11 when George ignored the PDBs…”Heres a medal for freedom for giving us bad intelligence”
September 10th, 2006 at 10:10 pmThis film is showing what the reagan freedom fighters are saying out in the desert to each other..like ABC infiltrated and recorded what was said magically, they now ‘know’ what was spoken in BFE..What a terrible unrealistic soap opera.
How much did they spend on this rag of a film?
September 10th, 2006 at 10:14 pmT]he DCI finds himself alone at the table, with the other princip[als] basically saying ‘we’ll go along with your decision Mr. Director,’ and implicitly saying that the Agency will hang alone if the attack doesn’t get Bin Ladin.â€174 But the military officer quoted earlier recalled that the Pentagon had been willing to act. He told us that Clarke informed him and others that Tenet assessed the chance of the intelligence being accurate as 50-50. This officer believed that Tenet’s assessment was the key to the decision.175
Comment by sytrek
==
Its a soap opera ding a ling..are you one of those people that also go around talking like a soap opera actor is family?
Yeh I hear you guys all the time — “So and so is having an affair with an alcoholic, and killed his mistress for her..”
I hear this in the offices and stop, concerned and ask,”Someone got killed?” Oh yes they say on Days of our Lives!
I turn and walk away…you can’t talk to people who see TV as reality..
September 10th, 2006 at 10:18 pmPost 23 > supposedly 40 million was spent on it, but most of the money must have been used to bribe ABC to show the damn thing!
September 10th, 2006 at 10:19 pmThis soapeopera just called Osama and the other ‘reagan freedom fighters’ “SAUDI TERRORISTS” ,hmm, so much for the Iraqi ties, the ABC movie the “real truth” just said so!
So much for this soapoperamentary
“Is GOD proud of you Mr Bush?
Is GOD prooud of you Mr Bush?
I don’t think so. Saudi Terrorists. Mr Bush, SAUDI
LEMME SPELL THAT for your bush trolls that missed that in the ABC real ‘truth’ S-A-U-D-I- terrorists.
Now the agents are drunk in a bar…..no wonder they quit this movie..
September 10th, 2006 at 10:29 pmPost 23 > supposedly 40 million was spent on it, but most of the money must have been used to bribe ABC to show the damn thing!
Comment by Jay Randal
==
Huh, so 40 million for this movie and 45 million for attack ads..none for charity or those innocent children that have been burned or maimed by bush bombs?
Figures, these cold callous reptiles would spend nearly 90 million to spread lies and smear..Way to go GOP.
September 10th, 2006 at 10:31 pmYes Dick Dastardly and the GOP probably stole the money from the Social Security Trust Fund to make the phony docu-drama > I need a barf bag!
Tomorrow night should be interesting with the phony docu-drama conclusion and Dubya Dunce Decider Despot giving an address too!
September 10th, 2006 at 10:39 pmJay/Dick:
The “written scene” and “soap opera” you are requoting, is a verbatim cut and paste from the 9-11 commission report.
Do not take my word for it. You may want to try reading it.
http://www.9-11commission.gov/report/911Report_Ch4.htm
Since it does not fit your view of the world, I can understand why it is difficult for you to process the information on it and be afraid that it may cause brain cancer. But I suggest you maybe, just maybe, reconsider the process by which you form your opinions.
September 10th, 2006 at 10:54 pmsytrek > I do not watch or read propaganda, but you can believe whatever > lol.
September 10th, 2006 at 10:57 pm90 million for smear and none going to charitable causes..yeh that’s compassionate conservatism alright..
Thousands of our Soldiers families could use some assistance, and what does the Bush/cabal do? Min wage workers got nothing and congress gives themselves a raise, then they spend 90 million on trash talk TV…
Compassionate and conservative..yeh, right.
==
Tomorrow night should be interesting with the phony docu-drama conclusion and Dubya Dunce Decider Despot giving an address too!
Comment by Jay Randal
I have watched part of it, I turned it off after a bit, there is nothing ‘new’ in this film and all the talking points that they think are in it are easily refuted by factual history.
The bush folks will have nothing tommorrow, or the next day that this film proves, in fact, it calls the Terrorists Saudis,which doesn’t surprise me and it also shows the infamous PDB bush ignored in night two and many other missteps by the Bush cabal
September 10th, 2006 at 11:02 pmThis is more permanently damaging to learn today than any recruiting to the side of lies and untruth that the fake flick on the tube tonight might generate. This is “truth”; that was fiction. I believe that the people know the difference. They certainly know when they’re taken for fools.
September 10th, 2006 at 11:07 pmAnd, I presume it was a total flop since I haven’t seen anything here about it yet. No one I know watched it so I can’t even call someone who did. It will serve it’s own purpose and that may be “enlightenment of the masses” to see to what lengths this administration has and would potentially go to press their agenda and interpretation of reality….(wink, wink)….9/11 truth?
Stay tuned because it should right around the corner.
September 10th, 2006 at 11:09 pm10,000 Black Men Named George (2002) (TV)
Writing credits (WGA)
Cyrus Nowrasteh (written by)
Plot Outline: Union activist Asa Philip Randolph’s efforts to organize the black porters of the Pullman Rail Company in 1920s America.
==
I think I will check out this movie of Nowrastrash..BTW this should go over well with the Anti-Union Bush trolls, put this one in your troll-o-dex folks =) ….
Bush Troll; “Path to 9/11 was real truth!”
Me: “Yeh so was that movie, ‘10,000 black men called George’, was real truth” =]
September 10th, 2006 at 11:12 pmAnd, I presume it was a total flop since I haven’t seen anything here about it yet.
September 10th, 2006 at 11:14 pm==
you didn’t miss anything sunshine, the actual 9/11 report is a better read than this nowrastrash movie..
10,000 Black Men Named George
Now that nowrastesh is Funny!
Reality has a liberal bias, yes?
September 10th, 2006 at 11:17 pmBut I do enjoy taking their own words, and stories..
Betsy Giffen Nowrasteh, is also a well connected screenwriter.
Her contribution to modern cinema and literature is a movie called ‘Bad Day on the Block’.
It is about a decorated Los Angeles firefighter who saved a baby’s life in a crack-house fire but left the baby’s mother to die in the fire because he believed any mother who takes a baby into a crack-house is an unfit mother.
==
Oh Joy..
Allow me to alter this a bit for Rush Limbaughs sake =)
It is about a decorated Los Angeles firefighter who saved a babies life in a limbaugh oxycontin druggie house-fire but left the racist limbaugh pundit father to die in the fire because he believed any racist limbaugh pundit father who takes a baby into a oxycontin crack-house is an unfit limbaugh pundit druggie.
September 10th, 2006 at 11:25 pmThe facts can be – and are – repeated with increasing frequency, yet when Cheney and Rice boldly deny them, they just become lost.
When an attack occurs, the first response is usually to secure the perimeter. We were attacked 5 years ago and our perimeter borders and ports remain unsecured. We chased an enemy, bombed his country, killed its civilians, but he escaped, after we pulled our forces from there, to begin a fabricated war in another country.
September 10th, 2006 at 11:29 pmToday, we are not safer, we have lost freedoms and more are threatened, OBL is still at large. Two years ago Bush said he doesn’t think about him much any more – more recently, he has remembered him (for political expediency).
The phony war has created a haven for those who sympathize with those who attacked us on 9/11. The country we bombed to the stone age is slipping into anarchy. The country we occupy has slipped into civil war, with us in the middle.
Yet, Cheney said he would follow the same behavior today.
There is something terribly wrong with them in the White House.
Can we get an organized boycott going of ABC/Disney? Maybe the liberal blogs can run something together? Set up a website and have people sign in to protest and then have tips on what products, shows, toys etc to avoid buying?
Now that the movie has run with the outright lies – it’s proved to be a complete republican hack job … so let’s do something.
September 10th, 2006 at 11:44 pmannburns > the boycott is in the works on ABC and Disney! Americans must all join together to punish them!
September 10th, 2006 at 11:50 pmSaddam and Al Qaeda Enemies, Not Collaborators
Although at some point in the not-too-distant past, both Bin Laden and Saddam were collaborating with the Republicans in charge, no?
September 11th, 2006 at 12:10 amJay Randal
Yeah, I’m already boycotting, but I think it would help if we could get an organized, coordinated effort going between the progressive blogs. (Put up a combined post for example.) And someone with more web savvy than me could start a website for the boycott.
September 11th, 2006 at 12:17 amAnd in the news today the same right-wing fascists who are using the 9/11 intelligence report to slam their political enemies are conveniently picking and choosing which facts to include or ignore when they also claim that Hussein and bin Ladin were workign together and Iraq had WMD.
This is not the truth. This is politics.
This is a desparate ploy from a crumbling party that is alienating its own base by reconstructing the worst parts of vietnam in a part of the world that hasn’t seen peace in thousands of years.
Screw 9/11. What has Bush done with the massive leeway America gave him for five years since then?
Burned a trail on either side of Iran for a pipeline, that’s all.
September 11th, 2006 at 1:15 amQuestion: If this was true before 9/11, doesn’t that mean it would be true after? Why can’t the MSM, rightwing politicians and so many others grasp this concept?
This is not “news” to anyone who knew anything about the region, it’s politics and religions back in 2001. And I hope that my dumb ass isn’t better informed than the folks running our country and our press.
Of course, what’s worse, A country run be ignorant fools or a country run by vicious lying killers? Sadly we have the later.
September 11th, 2006 at 1:32 amtesting…
September 11th, 2006 at 1:39 am“By making the strategic mistake of attacking Iraq, Bush’s policy accomplished the goals of the al Qaeda network.”
We told you so. That was obvious to most antiwar people prior to invasion. Why wasn’t it obvious to the media and the Democrats? And Tony Blair and John Howard?
September 11th, 2006 at 1:58 amThis treasonous government was letting Osama have access to a dialysis machine on 11 Sep 2001. This same treasonous government removed all rubble from WTC to China to avoid its analysis. This same treasonous government sent a Tomahawk into the side of the Pentagon.
The terrorists are over here, operating freely in the White House!
Comment by Cheney/Voldemort 2008 Campaign HQ — September 10, 2006 @ 8:53 pm
The darth lord himself on MTP. Still denying they lied about the justification for war. I have to admit in the face of everything saying there was no connection you either have to have really large balls, or just completely flippin insane to still say there was a connection between AlQaeda and Iraq. We knew there was no connection before we went there and three years later they are still trying the same old line. Oh yeah I’ve found tons of WMD’s in the 8 months I’ve been over here too. They’re everywhere. There is a requirment for every neighborhood to have one of those mobile labs. But they must disguise them really well, because all I’ve seen is rubble, pissed off people, blown up HMMWVs, and sand.
September 11th, 2006 at 3:03 amyou know what would be REALLY nice Faiz;
we need to post as many of the items that shows this intel was given to the president PRIOR to his attack…anyone can call some of this hindsight and we need to find the items that prove he was told
for instance, Clark telling the president attacking Iraq would harm America and would create more terrorism
I know he said that, but is that part of this report?…is if official?
I know it’s now part of the report that tenet said he was forced to change his assessment to suit the administration, that’s GREAT to show, we need more of those
I hope you can also post a compilation of ALL the statements are demonstrated FALSE
I LOVE showing Chaney CONTINUING to make believe zarqawi and saddam had a relationship, he actually said he didn’t see the report, and then CONTINUED to make the claim EVEN THOUGH timeh informed him otherwise
good work, looking forward to more…as I said, it’s more important to show the items the president knew before hand…like tenet being forced to change his report…things like that
September 11th, 2006 at 3:36 amThis country will absolutely slip into total fascism and there is nothing that any of us can do about it but make plans to look out for our own welfare and safety. It’s already well under way.
With all the lying and deception that they have gotten away with, do any of you really expect them to be brought to justice. And do any of you really, REALLY think that it will make one bit of difference if Democrats gain any seats in the upcoming election? They are corrupted by the same lobbying interests as the Republicans are.
Most Americans are complete and utter idiots and will deserve what they will get… the loss of the country that they so loved. Even the most imbecilic moron should be able to study certain historic parallels and see what is in store. The US economy is in a very fragile state right now. Within 2 years the current economic policies will drive this country into hyperinflation and then they will use that as a pretext to take over completely. Unlike most idiot Americans, the Neocons have studied history and are duplicating past achievements with great success.
Enjoy your current lifestyle while you can. It will soon be gone.
September 11th, 2006 at 6:37 amThe darth lord himself on MTP. Still denying they lied about the justification for war. I have to admit in the face of everything saying there was no connection you either have to have really large balls, or just completely flippin insane to still say there was a connection between AlQaeda and Iraq.
Comment by RamadiSoldier — September 11, 2006 @ 3:03 am
Or maybe he’s just well aware of the fact that most Americans are complete idiots and will buy any crap that they see on TV.
September 11th, 2006 at 6:41 amsorry ot
Labour campaigners accuse Disney of using sweatshop factories
Deutsche Presse Agentur
Published: Sunday September 10, 2006
Hong Kong- Labour rights campaigners have protested outside Hong Kong’s Disney theme park accusing Disney of using sweatshop factories in China, a news report said Monday. Workers at three factories making Disney merchandise in China’s southern Guangdong province are being paid below the minimum wage and forced to work up to 14 hours a day, according to the protestors.
A report by the Hong Kong-based Students and Scholars Against Corporate Misbehaviour based on interviews with 50 workers claimed they were paid an hourly wage of 2.19 to 3.14 yuan (27 to 42 US cents) instead of the legal minimum of more than 4 yuan (50 US cents.
Some were forced to work up to 14 hours a day for 30 days a month and all of them are denied overtime pay, the group told Monday’s Hong Kong Standard newspaper.
In addition, the group claims, none of the factories offered workers insurance protection against occupational injury or medical and retirement benefits, the newspaper said.
Around 30 members of the action group protested and held up banners outside Hong Kong Disneyland on Sunday.
A Disneyland spokeswoman told the newspaper that none of the merchandise produced in the three factories was sold in Hong Kong but instead went to other Disney theme parks around the world.
Hong Kong’s Disney theme park, the first on Chinese soil, opened in September last year and has attracted more than five million visitors in its first 12 months.
September 11th, 2006 at 8:57 amYeah, but Cheney hasn’t read any of this so that means it doesn’t count.
September 11th, 2006 at 9:01 amAmerica’s Least Wanted
Re: No. 15. First off, the topic here, friend, is the Senate Intelligence Committee Report on the Saddam-al Qaeda connection, or lack thereof. Perhaps you want to address that topic, which is damning, to say the least.
But, if you must divert our attention with references to “The Path to 9/11,” I don’t see your point. The 9/11 Commission Report says there is uncertainty as to who made the decisions to stand down. The film, apparently, dispenses with that uncertainty and portrays, in an admittedly fictionalized (in fact, improvised) scene, the actual decision being made by specific individuals. That’s taking some, ahem, “artistic liberty” to say the least.
Back on topic: Obviously, we don’t expect the Republican controlled Senate Intelligence Committee to accuse Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld of lying outright, but it sure says they were flat out wrong about the Iraq-al Qaeda connection. If Bush had any humility whatsoever, he’d at least apologize for having been mistaken about one of the two reasons we went to war in Iraq. Um, and while he’s at it, he may want to apologize for the fact that the other reason – Iraq’s possession of WMD – was also proved wrong.
How about it, George? You don’t have to admit you lied, just that you were wrong and you’re sorry for having sent American troops to their deaths (not to mention 10’s of thousands of Iraqis) based on a mistaken understanding of the facts. Is that too much to ask?
September 11th, 2006 at 12:07 pm[...] Last Friday, the Senate Intelligence Committee — chaired by Sen. Pat Roberts (R-KS), one of the President’s most loyal allies — concluded that there was absolutely no relationship between Saddam Hussein and al-Qaeda operative Abu Musab al-Zarqawi. Here’s the key quote from page 109: Saddam Hussein attempted, unsuccessfully, to locate and capture al-Zarqawi and…the regime did not have a relationship with, harbor, or turn a blind eye toward Zarqawi. [...]
September 12th, 2006 at 2:41 pm[...] for refusing to declassify key sections of last week’s Senate Intelligence Committee report on Iraq intelligence, despite the fact that a bipartisan majority of the committee said the White House secrecy was “without justification.” 11:19 am | Comment (0) [...]
September 14th, 2006 at 11:19 amcheney stated this last week on Meet the Press, Saddam would be such a threat with high oil prices. They must have gotten in a briefing to quell Iraq concerns for the fall elections. It makes good sound bite material on foxx and for the republican spin doctors. Most of my friends can hear this on radio a base there whole voting requirements with have half logic like this bull corn!
September 18th, 2006 at 12:34 amIf Bush ran the planes into the towers, made up evidence for Iraq, invaded Iraq, and then caused a giant disaster, what are his reasons? What is the MOTIVE? What does he really have to gain from all this? Saddam threatened his dad, so there’s a personal connection, but if that was all, Saddam would have mysteriously died or vanished.
Why??? Someone help me out, how is all this worth it to him?
September 18th, 2006 at 1:24 amDaniel, you must be very young to ask such a question. Or some sort of clever satirist!!!
But I will try and help you to open your eyes.
Look up the history of the Bush family, starting with prescott Bush. notice the ties to the Nazis and their activities.
Look up the connections between the “Military Industrial” complex and many many US politicians.
Look up the history of False Flag/Black Ops carried out by various and many US governments across the years. Look up Operations Northwood and Ajax, to name a few.
Google PNAC and READ “Rebuilding Americas Defences..” Read “Brave New World” Read the Geneva Convention.
READ THE US CONSTITUTION
Then look into your young heart and ask yourself “What do I know to be MORAL and RIGHT??
Bush and his ultra rich backers want control of the entire WORLD.
September 18th, 2006 at 8:11 amYou and your friends will give it to him, or kill (or be killed) countless people you don’t know anything about so that they can have It.
Please please please please get them all the f— out of the wihite house and into insame asylums…QUICK!!! Forget the white house BJ….these a$$holes don’t have dicks…. just bodies filled withe delusions of mass murder.
September 18th, 2006 at 12:51 pm[...] Just last month, the Senate Intelligence Committee — chaired by Bush-ally Sen. Pat Roberts (R-KS) — concluded that there was absolutely no relationship between Saddam Hussein and the late al-Qaeda operative Abu Musab al-Zarqawi. Nevertheless, in an interview with a South Bend, Indiana television station yesterday, Vice President Cheney falsely asserted that Zarqawi was proof of a connection between Iraq and al Qaeda. [...]
October 20th, 2006 at 8:50 pm[...] was right; Feith was wrong. The Senate Intelligence Committee’s Phase II report noted that Saddam Hussein “issued a general order that Iraq should not deal with al [...]
February 15th, 2007 at 10:33 am[...] attempted, unsuccessfully, to locate and capture al-Zarqawi and that the regime did not have a relationship with, harbor, or turn a blind eye toward [...]
April 5th, 2007 at 3:59 pm[...] the Senate Intelligence Committee concluded, Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11. Additionally, a new survey of military and diplomatic analysts concludes that “the [...]
April 10th, 2007 at 4:08 pm[...] A Senate Intelligence Committee report stated in Sept. 2006 that Saddam and Osama bin Laden were not collaborators, but rather [...]
March 17th, 2008 at 3:53 pm[...] numerous intelligence reports claiming that there was NO link between Saddam Hussein and al-Qaeda, including a brand new report recently released by the [...]
March 18th, 2008 at 10:07 pm