只用一本书提高英语听力能力!重温经典名著双语阅读小编推荐:跟着纪录片学英语不背单词和语法,轻松学英语
返回列表 回复 发帖

[I&A] 【整理】【In and Around News】萨达姆有罪吗?-1

提高英语听力能力 找对方法很重要!
user posted image

Saddam: Innocent or Guilty?

The trial of Saddam turned out to be some kind of a carnival after all. Except the codefendants, people around them cynically or fatally come and go. So what is under the spotlight and who is the laughingstock after the world experiencing all these pandemoniums?

user posted image



【电信用户1】在线播放和下载

MP3

【电信用户2】下载
MP3

【电信用户3】下载
MP3

【电信用户4】下载
MP3

【电信用户5】下载
MP3


【网通/教育网用户】在线播放和下载
MP3

transcript:

The Intelligence Committee of the United States Senate has declared that Saddam Hussein never gave any support to Al-Qaeda, and that he had no relationship with the Al-Qeada leader in Iraq Abu Musab al-Zarqawi. Old news to many people perhaps but in Washington it's still very much a live critical issue because members of the Bush administration including the president himself have so often implied that such links did exist. Our Washington correspondent Justin Webb reports.

Many, many Americans believe that when he was in power Saddam Hussein was friendly with Al-Qaeda. What the Senate Committee decided was that he wasn't and the Intelligence Community knew that he wasn't and told the president that he wasn't. Democratic Senator Carl Levin said the information had been suppressed.

'The accurate pre-war intelligence assessments didn't stop the administration from making many faults and misleading statements trying to link Saddam Hussein with Al-Qaeda.'

The difficulty for the White House is that various senior members of the Bush team are on record in no uncertain terms suggesting links between Al-Qaeda and Saddam. This was Colin Powell, the then Secretary of State addressing the UN Security Council in the run-up to the war.

'Iraq today harbors a deadly terrorist network headed by Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, an associate and collaborator of Osama bin Laden. Zarqawi returning to Afghanistan in 2000 oversaw a terrorist training camp. One of the specialties of this camp is poisons. When our coalition ousted the Taliban, the Zarqawi network helped to establish another poison and explosive training center camp in northeastern Iraq.'

In fact, according to the committee reports, Saddam not only didn't harbor Zarqawi, the Al-Qaeda leader killed earlier this year by the US, but had even tried to arrest him. Jay Rockefeller, another Democratic Senator spelled it out.

'There was no credible information that Iraq was complicit then or had full knowledge of the September 11th attack or any other Al-Qaeda strike anywhere. The committee also found that Iraq did not provide chemical or biological weapons training or any material or operational support to Al-Qaeda prior to the war. '

It's worth stressing that this report is not an attack on the Intelligence Community. It is an attack directly on the administration for not saying what it knew to be true. Does any of this matter now politically? Does it reopen old wounds in a way that could damage the Bush administration? Probably not. Those Americans who think the president lied will feel themselves further vindicated; those who trust him are unlikely to change their minds this late in the game. The White House said this report was old news. Many Americans would agree, even if they wish, the news was different.


user posted image
Vocabulary

vindicate verb
[transitive] formal
to prove that someone or something is right or true
ᅳsynonym justify
The decision to advertise has been vindicated by the fact that sales have grown.
...............................................................................

We must live through all time, or die by suicide!


And God said, Let there be English: and there was English.
And I saw the English, that it was good.
The Intelligent Community of the United States said it to was clear that Saddam Hussein never get any support via Al Qaeda.And he had no relationship with Al Qeada leader in Iraq Abu Musab al-Zarqawi.Old news to many people perhaps but in Washington is still very much live critical issue because members of the Bush administration including the President himself have so off to imply that such links DID exist.Our Washington correspondent Justin Web reports.

Many many Americans believe that when he was in power Saddam Hussein was friendly with Al Qaeda.What the sentence community decided was that he wasn't and the Intelligence Community knew that he wasn't.And told the President that he wasn't.Democratic senator Carl.Levin said the information had been suppressed.The accurate pre-war intelligence assessments didn't stop the administration for making many faults and misleading statements trying to link Saddam Hussein with Al Qaeda.

The difficult of the White House is that very a senior members of the Bush team are on record in no uncertain terms suggesting links between Al Qaeda and Saddam.This was calling pal that a secretary of a state address that the UN Security Council in the run up to the war.Reck today harbors are deadly terrorists network headed by Abu Musab al-Zarqawi,an associate colaborator of Osama Bin Laden.Zarqawi,returning in Afghanistan in 2000 oversaw a terrorist training camp.One of the specialty of this camp is poisons.When our coalition ousted the Taliban.The Zarqawi network helped to established another poison and explosive training center camp in north eastern Arab.In fact according to the commity report that Saddam not only didin't harbor Zarqawi,the Al Qaeda leader killed earlier this year by the US but even try to arrest him. J.R.F another democratic senator spelled the doubt.

There was no credible information that Iraq was / or had full knowledge of .The September 11th Attack was any other Al Qaeda strike..uuh..anywhere the commity also found that Iraq did not provide chemical or biological weapons training or any material or operational support to Al Qaeda prier to the war.It worth of stressing that this report is NOT an attack on the Intelligence Community.It is an attack directly on the administration for not saying what is new to be true.Does any of this matter now politically does it reopen old wounds and where could damage to Bush's administration?Probably not.Those American who think that the President lied will feel themselve further vindicated.Those who trust him,are unlikely to change their mind this late in the game.The White House said this report was old news.Many Americans will agree , if they wish , the news was different.
Sa랑은어렵Da
立即获取| 免费注册领取外教体验课一节
提示: 作者被禁止或删除 内容自动屏蔽
实现无障碍英语沟通
on sharonsinobegreat


The Intelligence Committee of the United States senate was to clear that Saddam Hussein never gave any support to Al Qaeda, and that he had no relationship with Al Qeada leader in Iraq Abu Musab al-Zarqawi.Old news to many people perhaps but in Washington is still a very much live critical issue because members of the Bush administration including the President himself have so often imply that such links DID exist.Our Washington correspondent Justin Web reports.

Many many Americans believe that when he was in power Saddam Hussein was friendly with Al Qaeda.What the Senate Committee decided was that he wasn't and the Intelligence Community knew that he wasn't and told the President that he wasn't.Democratic senator Carl.Levin said the information had been suppressed.The accurate pre-war intelligence assessments didn't stop the administration for making many faults and misleading statements trying to link Saddam Hussein with Al Qaeda.

The difficulty of the White House is that very a senior members of the Bush team are on record in no uncertain terms suggesting links between Al Qaeda and Saddam.This was Colin Paul the then Secretary of / States addressing the UN Security Council in the run up to the war.Iraq today harbors a deadly terrorists network headed by Abu Musab al-Zarqawi,an associate colaborator of Osama Bin Laden.Zarqawi,returning to Afghanistan in 2000 oversaw a terrorist training camp.One of the specialty of this camp is poison.When our coalition ousted the Taliban.The Zarqawi network helped to established another poison and explosive training center camp in north eastern Iraq.In fact according to the committee reports, / Saddam not only didin't harbor Zarqawi,the Al Qaeda leader killed earlier this year by the US, but even try to arrest him. J.R.F another democratic senator spelled the doubt.

There was no credible information that Iraq was in quest or had full knowledge of .the September 11th Attack or any other Al Qaeda strike..uuh..anywhere the committee also found that Iraq did not provide chemical or biological weapons training or any material or operational support to Al Qaeda prier to the war.It's worth / stressing that this report is NOT an attack on the Intelligence Community.It is an attack directly on the administration for not saying what is new to be true.Does any of this matter now politically does it reopen old wounds and the way that could damage to Bush's administration?Probably not.Those Americans who think that the President lied will feel themselve further vindicated.Those who trust him,are unlikely to change their mind this late in the game.The White House said this report was old news.Many Americans will agree , if they wish , the news was different.
口译专员推荐—>口译训练软件IPTAM口译通
最好将report中的某些实况录音和播音员的播音稿分开。 smile.gif
QUOTE(seansxf @ Sep 11 2006, 09:09 AM)
user posted image

Saddam: Innocent or Guilty?

The trial of Saddam turned out to be some kind of a carnival after all. Except the codefendants, people around them cynically or fatally come and go. So what is under the spotlight and who is the laughingstock after the world experiencing all these pandemoniums?

user posted image



Download mp3
[right][snapback]801623[/snapback][/right]

on jobkiller

================

The Intelligence Committee of the United States Senate has declared that Saddam Hussein never gave any support to Al Qaeda, and that he had no relationship with the Al Qeada leader in Iraq Abu Musab al-Zarqawi.Old news to many people perhaps but in Washington it is still a very much live political issue because members of the Bush administration including the President himself have so often implied that such links DID exist. Our Washington correspondent Justin Web reports.

Many many Americans believe that when he was in power Saddam Hussein was friendly with Al Qaeda.What the Senate Committee decided was that he wasn't and the Intelligence Community knew that he wasn't and told the President that he wasn't. Democratic senator Carl Levin said the information had been suppressed. The accurate pre-war intelligence assessments didn't stop the administration from making many fault/ and misleading statements trying to link Saddam Hussein with Al Qaeda.

The difficulty for the White House is that various senior members of the Bush team are on record in no uncertain terms suggesting links between Al Qaeda and Saddam.This was Colin Paul the then Secretary of States addressing the UN Security Council in the run up to the war. Iraq today harbors a deadly terrorists network headed by Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, an associate and colaborator of Osama Bin Laden. Zarqawi, returning to Afghanistan in 2000 oversaw a terrorist training camp. One of the specialties of this camp is poisons. When our coalition ousted the Taliban.The Zarqawi network helped to established another poison and explosive training center camp in north eastern Iraq. In fact according to the committee reports, / Saddam not only didin't harbor Zarqawi,the Al Qaeda leader killed earlier this year by the US, but he'd even tried to arrest him. J. R another democratic senator spelled it out.

There was no credible information that Iraq was complacent in or had full knowledge of the September 11th Attack or any other Al Qaeda strike..uuh..anywhere. The committee also found that Iraq did not provide chemical or biological weapons training or any material or operational support to Al Qaeda prior to the war. It's worth stressing that this report is NOT an attack on the Intelligence Community. It is an attack directly on the administration for not saying what it knew to be true. Does any of this matter now politically? Does it reopen old wounds in a way that could damage / the Bush/ administration? Probably not. Those Americans who think that the President lied will feel themselve further vindicated.Those who trust him,are unlikely to change their mind this late in the game.The White House said this report was old news.Many Americans will agree , even if they wish , the news was different.
实现无障碍英语沟通
on wangmin
---------------------------

The Intelligence Committee of the United States Senate has declared that Saddam Hussein never gave any support to Al-Qaeda, and that he had no relationship with the Al Qeada leader in Iraq Abu Musab al-Zarqawi.Old news to many people perhaps but in Washington it is still a very much alive political issue because members of the Bush administration including the President himself have so often implied that such links DID exist. Our Washington correspondent Justin Webb reports.

Many many Americans believe that when he was in power Saddam Hussein was friendly with Al-Qaeda.What the Senate Committee decided was that he wasn't and the Intelligence Community knew that he wasn't and told the President that he wasn't. Democratic Senator Carl Levin said the information had been suppressed.

The accurate pre-war intelligence assessments didn't stop the administration from making many faults and misleading statements trying to link Saddam Hussein with Al-Qaeda.

The difficulty for the White House is that various senior members of the Bush team are on record in no uncertain terms suggesting links between Al-Qaeda and Saddam.This was Colin Powell the then Secretary of States addressing the UN Security Council in the run up to the war.

Iraq today harbors a deadly terrorists network headed by Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, an associate and colaborator of Osama bin Laden. Zarqawi, returning to Afghanistan in 2000 oversaw a terrorist training camp. One of the specialties of this camp is poisons. When our coalition ousted the Taliban.The Zarqawi network helped to establish/ another poison and explosive training center camp in north eastern Iraq.

In fact according to the committee reports, Saddam not only didn't harbor Zarqawi,the Al-Qaeda leader killed earlier this year by the US, but he'd even tried to arrest him. Jay Rockefeller, another Democratic Senator spelled it out.

There was no credible information that Iraq was complacent in or had full knowledge of the September 11th Attack or any other Al-Qaeda strike..uuh..anywhere. The committee also found that Iraq did not provide chemical or biological weapons training or any material or operational support to Al-Qaeda prior to the war.

It's worth stressing that this report is NOT an attack on the Intelligence Community. It is an attack directly on the administration for not saying what it knew to be true. Does any of this matter now politically? Does it reopen old wounds in a way that could damage the Bush administration? Probably not. Those Americans who think / the President lied will feel themselve further vindicated.Those who trust him,are unlikely to change their mind this late in the game.The White House said this report was old news.Many Americans will agree , even if they wish , the news was different.
艾尔米拉。

Never_complain_never_explain.
普特听力大课堂
jackiemissing


The Intelligence Committee of the United States Senate has declared that Saddam Hussein never gave any support to Al-Qaeda, and that he had no relationship with the Al Qeada leader in Iraq Abu Musab al-Zarqawi. Old news to many people perhaps but in Washington it is still a very much alive political issue because members of the Bush administration including the President himself have so often implied that such links did exist. Our Washington correspondent Justin Webb reports.

Many many Americans believe that when he was in power Saddam Hussein was friendly with Al-Qaeda. What the Senate Committee decided was that he wasn't and the Intelligence Community knew that he wasn't and told the President that he wasn't. Democratic Senator Carl Levin said the information had been suppressed.

The accurate pre-war intelligence assessments didn't stop the administration from making many faults and misleading statements trying to link Saddam Hussein with Al-Qaeda.

The difficulty for the White House is that various senior members of the Bush team are on record in no uncertain terms suggesting links between Al-Qaeda and Saddam. This was Colin Powell the then Secretary of States addressing the UN Security Council in the run-up to the war.

Iraq today harbors a deadly terrorist/ network headed by Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, an associate and collaborator of Osama bin Laden. Zarqawi, returning to Afghanistan in 2000 oversaw a terrorist training camp. One of the specialties of this camp is poisons. When our coalition ousted the Taliban, the Zarqawi network helped to establish another poison and explosive training center camp in northeastern Iraq.

In fact according to the committee reports, Saddam not only didn't harbor Zarqawi,the Al-Qaeda leader killed earlier this year by the US, but he'd even tried to arrest him. Jay Rockefeller, another Democratic Senator spelled it out.

There was no credible information that Iraq was complicit or had foreign knowledge of the September 11th Attack or any other Al-Qaeda strike..uuh..anywhere. The committee also found that Iraq did not provide chemical or biological weapons training or any material or operational support to Al-Qaeda prior to the war.

It's worth stressing that this report is not an attack on the Intelligence Community. It is an attack directly on the administration for not saying what it knew to be true. Does any of this matter now politically? Does it reopen old wounds in a way that could damage the Bush administration? Probably not. Those Americans who think the President lied will feel themselves further have indicated, those who trust him, are unlikely to change their minds this late in the game. The White House said this report was old news. Many Americans will agree, even if they wish, the news was different.
Great works are performed not by strength, but by perseverance.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
语法基础要加强
好栏目推荐之美国口语俚语
on benja

The Intelligence Committee of the United States Senate has declared that Saddam Hussein never gave any support to Al-Qaeda, and that he had no relationship with the Al Qeada leader in Iraq Abu Musab al-Zarqawi. Old news to many people perhaps but in Washington it is still a very much alive political issue because members of the Bush administration including the President himself have so often implied that such links did exist. Our Washington correspondent Justin Webb reports.

Many many Americans believe that when he was in power Saddam Hussein was friendly with Al-Qaeda. What the Senate Committee decided was that he wasn't and the Intelligence Community knew that he wasn't and told the President that he wasn't. Democratic Senator Carl Levin said the information had been suppressed.

The accurate pre-war intelligence assessments didn't stop the administration from making many faults and misleading statements trying to link Saddam Hussein with Al-Qaeda.

The difficulty for the White House is that various senior members of the Bush team are on record in no uncertain terms suggesting links between Al-Qaeda and Saddam. This was Colin Powell ,the then Secretary of States addressing the UN Security Council in the run-up to the war.

Iraq today harbors a deadly terrorist/ network headed by Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, an associate and collaborator of Osama bin Laden. Zarqawi, returning to Afghanistan in 2000 oversaw a terrorist training camp. One of the specialties of this camp is poisons. When our coalition ousted the Taliban, the Zarqawi network helped to establish another poison and explosive training center camp in northeastern Iraq.

In fact according to the committee reports, Saddam not only didn't harbor Zarqawi,the Al-Qaeda leader killed earlier this year by the US, but he'd even tried to arrest him. Jay Rockefeller, another Democratic Senator spelled it out.

There was no credible information that Iraq was complicit or had full knowledge of the September 11th Attack or any other Al-Qaeda strike..uuh..anywhere. The committee also found that Iraq did not provide chemical or biological weapons training or any material or operational support to Al-Qaeda prior to the war.

It's worth stressing that this report is not an attack on the Intelligence Community. It is an attack directly on the administration for not saying what it knew to be true. Does any of this matter now politically? Does it reopen old wounds in a way that could damage the Bush administration? Probably not. Those Americans who think the President lied will feel themselves further vindicated, those who trust him, are unlikely to change their minds this late in the game. The White House said this report was old news. Many Americans will agree, even if they wish, the news was different.

Stay Hungry, Stay Foolish
homework


Intelligence Committee of the United States Senate had declared that Saddam Hussein never gave any support to al-Qaeda and he had no relationship with the Al-Qaeda leader in Iraq [], old news to many people, perhaps. But in Washington it still very much lies political issue because the members of [] Bush administration, including the president himself, have [] implied such links did exist. Our Washington correspondent [] reports.

"Many many Americans believe that the wheeling was in past. Saddam Hussein was friendly with al-Qaeda. But a Senate committee decided it was that he wasn't, and the Intelligence Community knew that he wasn’t and told the president that he wasn't. Democratic senator [] said the information had been suppressed."

"The accurate prewar intelligence assessments didn't stop the administration for making many faults and misleading statements trying to link Saddam Hussein with al-Qaeda."

"The difficulty of the White House is that the various senior members of the Bush team are on record in no on certain terms suggesting links between al-Qaeda and Saddam. This was [] the Secretary of State addressing the UN Security Council in the run after the war."

"Iraq today harbors deadly terrorist network headed by [] and associated collaborately with []. [], returning to Afghanistan in 2000, oversaw a terrorist training camp. One of the specialties of this camp is poisons. When our coalition [] to the Taliban, [] network helped establish another poison and explosive training center camp in northeastern Iraq."

"In fact, according the committee reports, Saddam not only didn't harbor [], the al-Qaeda leader killed early this year by the US, but he even tried to arrest him. [], another Democratic senator, spelled the doubt."

"There was no credible information that Iraq was [] or had full knowledge of the September 11 Attack or any other al-Qaeda strike, or anyway. The committee also found that Iraq did not provide chemical or biological weapons training, or any material or operational support to al-Qaeda prior to the war."

"It's worth stressing that this report is not an attack on the Intelligence Community. It is an attack directly on the administration, they not saying what is new to be true. Does any of this matter now politically? Does it [] and the way that could damage Bush administration? Probably not. Those Americans who think the president lied will fill themselves further of indicated those who trust him or unlikely to change their minds this later again. White House said this report was old news. Many Americans would agree even if they wish the news was different."

The Intelligence committee of the United States senate declared that Saddam Hussein never gave support to Al Qaeda and he had no relationship with Al Qaeda in Iran Musab al-Zarqawi. Old news to many people perhaps, but in Washington it is still a very much live political issue because the members of Bush Administration including President himself have so often implied that such links did exist. A washington correspondent Justin Web reports.

Many many Americans believe when he was in power saddam Hussein was friendly with Al Qaeda. What the senate committee decided he wasn't and the intelligence comunity knew that he wasn't and told the president he wasn't. Democratic Senator Carl Levin said that the information had been suppressed.

The accurate prewar intelligence assessments didn't stop the administration from making many fault and misleading statements trying to link saddam hussein with Al Qaeda.

The difficulty with white house is that various senior members of bush team are on record in no uncertain terms suggesting links between Al Qaeda and Saddam. This was Collin Paul, the then Secretary of states, addressing the UN Securtity Council in the run up to the war.

Iraq today harbors a deadly terrorist network headed by Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, an associate collaborator of Osama Bin Laden. Zarqawi, returning to Afghanistan in 2000, oversaw a terrorist camp. One of the specialties of this camp is poisons. When our coalition outsted Taliban, the Zarqawi network helped establish another poison and explosive training center camp in northeastern Iraq.

In fact, according to the committee reports, Saddam not only didn't harbor al-Zarqawi, the Al Qaeda leader killed earlier this year by the US, but he even tried to arrest him. J.R.F, another democratic senator, spelled the doubt.

There was no credible information that Iraq was complicit in or had full knowledge of the September attack or any other Al Qaeda strike anywhere. The committee also found that Iraq did not provide chemical or biological weapons training or any material operational support to Al Qaeda prior to the War.

It's worth stressing that this report is not an attack on the intelligence community. It is an attack directly on administration for not saying what it knew to be true. Does any of this matter now politically? Does it reopen the wounds in a way that would damage Bush adminisration? Probably not. Those Americans who think the president lied will find themselves vendictated. Those who trust him are unlikely to change their mind this late in the game. The White house said this report was old news. Many american would agree, even if they wish the news was different.
每天半小时 轻松提高英语口语
on dreamcast

The Intelligence Committee of the United States Senate has declared that Saddam Hussein never gave any support to Al-Qaeda, and that he had no relationship with the Al-Qeada leader in Iraq Abu Musab al-Zarqawi. Old news to many people perhaps but in Washington it's still / very much a live critical issue because members of the Bush administration including the president himself have so often implied that such links did exist. Our Washington correspondent Justin Webb reports.

Many, many Americans believe that when he was in power Saddam Hussein was friendly with Al-Qaeda. What the Senate Committee decided was that he wasn't and the Intelligence Community knew that he wasn't and told the president that he wasn't. Democratic Senator Carl Levin said the information had been suppressed.

"The accurate pre-war intelligence assessments didn't stop the administration from making many faults and misleading statements trying to link Saddam Hussein with Al-Qaeda."

The difficulty for the White House is that various senior members of the Bush team are on record in no uncertain terms suggesting links between Al-Qaeda and Saddam. This was Colin Powell, the then Secretary of State addressing the UN Security Council in the run-up to the war.

"Iraq today harbors a deadly terrorist network headed by Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, an associate and collaborator of Osama bin Laden. Zarqawi returning to Afghanistan in 2000 oversaw a terrorist training camp. One of the specialties of this camp is poisons. When our coalition ousted the Taliban, the Zarqawi network helped to establish another poison and explosive training center camp in northeastern Iraq."

In fact, according to the committee reports, Saddam not only didn't harbor Zarqawi, the Al-Qaeda leader killed earlier this year by the US, but had even tried to arrest him. Jay Rockefeller, another Democratic Senator spelled it out.

"There was no credible information that Iraq was complicit then or had full knowledge of the September 11th attack or any other Al-Qaeda strike anywhere. The committee also found that Iraq did not provide chemical or biological weapons training or any material or operational support to Al-Qaeda prior to the war. "

It's worth stressing that this report is not an attack on the Intelligence Community. It is an attack directly on the administration for not saying what it knew to be true. Does any of this matter now politically? Does it reopen old wounds in a way that could damage the Bush administration? Probably not. Those Americans who think the president lied will feel themselves further vindicated; those who trust him are unlikely to change their minds this late in the game. The White House said this report was old news. Many Americans would agree, even if they wish, the news was different.

...............................................................................

We must live through all time, or die by suicide!


And God said, Let there be English: and there was English.
And I saw the English, that it was good.
The Intelligence Committee of the United States Senate has declared that Saddam Hussein never gave any support to Al-Qaeda, and that he had no relationship with the Al-Qeada leader in Iraq Abu Musab al-Zarqawi. Old news to many people perhaps but in Washington it's still very much a live critical issue because members of the Bush administration including the president himself have so often implied that such links did exist. Our Washington correspondent Justin Webb reports.

Many, many Americans believe that when he was in power Saddam Hussein was friendly with Al-Qaeda. What the Senate Committee decided was that he wasn't and the Intelligence Community knew that he wasn't and told the president that he wasn't. Democratic Senator Carl Levin said the information had been suppressed.

"The accurate pre-war intelligence assessments didn't stop the administration from making many faults and misleading statements trying to link Saddam Hussein with Al-Qaeda."

The difficulty for the White House is that various senior members of the Bush team are on record in no uncertain terms suggesting links between Al-Qaeda and Saddam. This was Colin Powell, the then Secretary of State addressing the UN Security Council in the run-up to the war.

"Iraq today harbors a deadly terrorist network headed by Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, an associate and collaborator of Osama bin Laden. Zarqawi returning to Afghanistan in 2000 oversaw a terrorist training camp. One of the specialties of this camp is poisons. When our coalition ousted the Taliban, the Zarqawi network helped to establish another poison and explosive training center camp in northeastern Iraq."

In fact, according to the committee reports, Saddam not only didn't harbor Zarqawi, the Al-Qaeda leader killed earlier this year by the US, but had even tried to arrest him. Jay Rockefeller, another Democratic Senator spelled it out.

"There was no credible information that Iraq was complicit then or had full knowledge of the September 11th attack or any other Al-Qaeda strike anywhere. The committee also found that Iraq did not provide chemical or biological weapons training or any material or operational support to Al-Qaeda prior to the war. "

It's worth stressing that this report is not an attack on the Intelligence Community. It is an attack directly on the administration for not saying what it knew to be true. Does any of this matter now politically? Does it reopen old wounds in a way that could damage the Bush administration? Probably not. Those Americans who think the president lied will feel themselves further vindicated; those who trust him are unlikely to change their minds this late in the game. The White House said this report was old news. Many Americans would agree, even if they wish, the news was different.
enjoy striving for my luxury future.
口译专员推荐—>口译训练软件IPTAM口译通
在听或阅读时,只要将不明白的词写上去随时都有回答吗???? rolleyes.gif rolleyes.gif rolleyes.gif
返回列表