March 13, 2008 2:44 PM

ABC News has requested and obtained a copy of the Pentagon study which shows Saddam Hussein had no links to Al Qaeda.

(READ THE FULL REPORT HERE.)

http://a.abcnews.com/images/pdf/Pentagon_Report_V1.pdf

It's government report the White House didn't want you to read: yesterday the Pentagon canceled plans

http://blogs.abcnews.com/rapidreport/20 … eport.html

to send out a press release announcing the report's availability and didn't make the report available via email or online.

Based on the analysis of some 600,000 official Iraqi documents seized by US forces after the invasion and thousands of hours of interrogations of former officials in Saddam's government now in US custody, the government report is the first official acknowledgment from the US military that there is no evidence Saddam had ties to al Qaeda.

The Bush administration apparently didn't want the study to get any attention. The report was to be posted on the Joint Forces Command website yesterday, followed by a background briefing with the authors. No more. The report was made available to those who asked for it, and was sent via overnight mail from Joint Forces Command in Norfolk, Virginia.

Asked yesterday why the report would not be posted online and could not be emailed, the spokesman for Joint Forces Command said: "We're making the report available to anyone who wishes to have it, and we'll send it out via CD in the mail."

Another Pentagon official said initial press reports on the study made it "too politically sensitive."

Gee, what a surprise.

Bush new there wasn't. At some point the American people are going to get tired of the lies and deceit by these useless politicans.

The New York Sun is reporting an article about Sadamn and his ties to terroist organziations and his intents with them. You just don't know who to believe anymore. As Jack Nicholsan said "The truth you don't wnt the truth".

I think the confusion comes from underminding the intelligence of the average American citizen. The generic term "terrorist" is the first culprit. By calling anyone who disagrees with you or your policy a "terrorist" will always create a cloudy picture.

For instance, to a Palestinian an Israeli soldier is a terrorist. To a "free choice" advocate an anti-abortionist is a terrorist. And on and on.

The dumbing of America began along time ago and its fruit has blossomed well. Americans need to demand clarity from the political pundits and insist that administrations stop jingoism as their breathen to explain themselves.

Al Qaeda is alleged to have been the responsible party for the 9/11 atrocity. The evidence supports that Saddam had no direct ties to Al Qaeda. However, it doesn't mean that Saddam was not on friendly terms with other political groups such as Hamas or the PLA. That in itself doesn't make him a supporter or complicit in their actions.

Just because the U.S. government was on friendly terms with the Musharraf government doesn't make us complicit in their dictatorship or government actions.

Thinking is a natural high!

John R...

We supported the Soviet Union during WWII. That doesn't mean we supported Stalin's terror tactics.
.
On the "Dumbing of America." I heard some collaborating evidence earlier. The DJ was calling people and asking them "How many three cent stamps are there in a dozen?" He called four people, and none of them got the right answer. One fellow said "Two dozen."

Well Mad Doc, that might be a little of a trick question. I think most people would initially consider the answer to be 4 but then would catch themself and correctly state 12.

:)
John R...

Robert, Saddam Hussein had well known ties to Palestinian groups that were sending suicide bombers into Israel - Hussein actually paid the families of some of the bombers. And, of course, he terrorized his own people with his own home-grown thugs

But he had no ties to Al Queda. This last report saying that there were no ties comes from the U.S. Military after studying more than 600,000 captured documents. The military first announced that they would publish the report on the internet - but then they were ordered not to.

As for Hussein's actual ties to terrorism, sure it made him a monster. But I would not invade Iraq or kill a single American soldier over 8 or 10 suicide bombers in another country. The folks actually involved had all the resources necessary to respond if they thought it appropriate.

Yes, we've discussed this before. How the public perceives someone depends on the names we assign them in the press and mostly by our government.

We use words like freedom fighters, terrorists, ethnic, extremists, sects, liberator, warlord, druglord, factions, dictators, and others very loosely. They seem to get assigned without any hesitation. We do not question them. We repeat them in the news and in conversations as if they are set in stone.

Bobbi

John R you think the al queda terrorists who attacke dthe U s on 9/11 were only alledged. You want to give them a full and fair trial giving them every right and more rights than the americans they murdered.
The ones who MURDER INNOENT PEOPLE in a market place in Iraq by placng an vehicle filled with high explosives and by remote control setting it off to kill and maim all those people . No doubt you think that is perfectly alright because it might bring Barack Hussien Obama into the white house with the words of his racist american hating preacher ringing in his ears.
As i said before Hussien not barack but Saddam had every reason to want to destroy the U S and he may yet do it even if he is dead . There is a good chance his candidate may be elected by the dems.

Geez! I was able to figure out,"How many three cent stamps are there in a dozen", with not much problem.

However, IM not having that easy of a time trying to figure out Duanes above post. Maybe I'll just watch a couple more episodes of Twilight Zone and read it again and it will come to me!