130
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 21:
Line 21: + +
→Removal
::::::::Right, it's not a forum for propaganda. So why are you pasting Zionist propaganda that's demonstrably untrue? The statement that "under Muslim law, only Muslims may rule a Muslim state" is a lie. That's what I'm saying. It needs to be removed because it simply is not true.[[User:Accidnets|Accidents]] 18:56, 17 March 2007 (PST)
::::::::Right, it's not a forum for propaganda. So why are you pasting Zionist propaganda that's demonstrably untrue? The statement that "under Muslim law, only Muslims may rule a Muslim state" is a lie. That's what I'm saying. It needs to be removed because it simply is not true.[[User:Accidnets|Accidents]] 18:56, 17 March 2007 (PST)
:::::::::Ok, I clarified it a bit. [[User:RobS|RobS]] 15:25, 18 March 2007 (EDT)
:::::::::Ok, I clarified it a bit. [[User:RobS|RobS]] 15:25, 18 March 2007 (EDT)
I have removed the line 160 "However, as of yet, there has been absolutely no hard, physical evidence to support the idea of a link between Osama bin Laden and Saddam Hussein, and it is often dismissed as propaganda by conservatives desperate for justification." which appears without any citation of source and comes directly after showing DOCUMENTATION by the Iraqi forces... "42 pages of Iraqi Intelligence Service memos that revealed Saddam's purchase of mustard gas and anthrax, <b> and his extensive ties to al Qaeda</b>." If those memos which contain that information are not hard, physical evidence.. what exactly constitutes hard physical evidence for a RELATIONAL LINK between these groups? What proof could be given to such a skeptic as this person who posted (without references) and inveighed that it is "propaganda by conservatives desperate for justification"?? Are these documents "propaganda" then? And on what basis does this person dismiss them? Has he seen and read these memos? This statement which I removed, therefore, is not factual but inflammatory rhetoric and not conservative in viewpoint - in keeping with the mission of conservapedia. Otherwise, why call it conservapedia, why not just go with another (liberal) site and view? I also ask censure and watching of the poster of these comments by conservapedia for non-conservative bias. The poster was Michaelvalentine. Thank you. Skies.
== Citations Needed ==
== Citations Needed ==