🚀 go-pugleaf

"BOOKLEARNED!!!!!" wrote....
> We've had the war on terrorism, Looks like everyone went along with it.

Of course.

> How ever I've still not seen any of this "over whelming" evidence that
> pinned 9/11/1 on Osama.

A lot of it has been reported, not the least of which is videotape of Osama
himself taking credit.  I suppose you see only what you want to see.

> The "co-alition" did a good job at bombing a third world country into the
> dust, (whooo dumping bombs on already oppressed people)

When the al-Qa'ida/Taliban (different arms of the same organization)  bombed
the Marine barracks in Saudi Arabia, the Americans held back - otherwise
innocent Afghani civilians could be killed.

When they killed scores of innocent bystanders with truck bombs at embassies
in Africa, the Americans held back for the same reason.  (They sent some
tomahawk cruise missiles to al-Qa'ida camps that were already evacuated.)

When they killed a 17 Americans with an attack on the USS Cole, the
Americans held back for the same reason.

And on September 11, 2001, we found out the price of holding back.  So, the
Americans bombed the air defenses and what military targets they could find,
went in on foot and removed the al-Qa'ida/Taliban.  It was impossible to do
it without innocent bystanders being killed, but what else could they do?

> They managed to kill a bunch of Canadian Soldiers with out any
> accountability (None, nothing, If a cop shot a bunch of protesters after
> being told not to open fire, would they be held accountable).

Where did you get a stupid idea like this?  The pilots in question and their
commanders have been essentially in court ever since, and will likely face a
court-martial.

> Now they have a president that If memory serves me correct sent the most
> people to death when he was in charge of Texas in that state's history

While I think he has an awful record on this front too, it's hardly relevant
to what's happening in the middle-east.

> The whole time the "war on terrorism" was going on I haven't heard
anything
> that Iraq has done to anyone or anything that would warrant such and
attack.

If you weren't in a cave somewhere, you might have heard about poison gas
attacks on his own people.  You might have heard about the approx. 1 million
people who died when he invaded Iran.  You might have heard about his
invasion of Kuwait and attacks on Saudi Arabia.  You might have heard about
his attempts to drag Israel into the gulf war by launching missiles at them.

He's used weapons of mass destruction on his own people, he's declared his
intent to do the same with the US, and he's putting together the weapons to
do so.  Ignoring him would be a Really Stupid Thing To Do.

> Isn't there already a trade embargo on this country? (does this include
oil
> as well?)

Yup, one which ends when he allows weapons inspections, as he agreed to do
after the gulf war.  The embargo does little to stop his weapons
development.

> Has anyone spoken to anyone in Iraq to see if they have perhaps heard
> anything?

Reporters do it all the time.  But of course some people will assume that
anyone who has anything bad to say about Saddam must be biased....

> 1. What happened to the pilot who dropped the bomb on the Canadian
Soldiers?

See above.

> 2. With the embargo on Iraq, does the US still buy oil from them?

Wouldn't surprise me.  But if I'm not mistaken, most of their oil doesn't
even come from the middle-east, let alone Iraq.  (Think Venezuela, Alaska,
Canada, etc....)

> 3. What has Iraq "supposed" to have done to Warrant some mass destruction
of
> their cities and murder of their civilians?

No-one is planning mass destruction of their cities and murder of their
civilians.

> 4. Where was the overwhelming proof that  "Osama" was behind 9/11, Even if
> it was Osama, why was Afghanistan Attacked?

See the attacks on Americans and others listed above.  Osama's Al-Qa'ida and
the Taliban are different arms of the same organization, and they were the
government of Afghanistan.  (Osama even married a daughter of the head of
the Taliban, to strengthen the ties.)  After each attack, the government of
Afghanistan refused to hand over Osama and friends.

> 5. Do you think that there is any connection with all the recent
"corporate
> accounting scams" to the 9/11 as well?

Why would there be?

> 6. Weren't Iraq, and Afghanistan allies of the states in the 80's?

They weren't outright enemies with Iraq like they are now.  Which means
there were diplomatic ties, business dealings, etc.  But hardly allies.
Afghanistan was controlled by the Soviet Union.  (Or so they tried....)

btw...   There are other sources of oil in the world besides Iraq.  With all
the reasons listed above, not to mention the lack of oil in Afghanistan (and
for that matter, Serbia), the "it's all about oil" conspiracy theory is more
than a bit tired.

> PPS.. Thanks in advance.

You're welcome.