AP: Bush: No Proof of Saddam Role in 9-11

[David Zephyr]

These stories are popping up everywhere, but here's another one.

What is going on to make the White House all sing this tune today?

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=514&e=1&u=/ap/20030917/ap_on_go_pr_wh/bush_saddam

[TomNickell]

1. Burned on YellowCake?

Maybe somebody inside remembered the fuss over the Niger Yellocake claim in the SOTU. Didn't want the a repeat over Cheney's remarks on Meet the Press.

They don't really -need- that claim anymore, so why take heat about it? Just deny you ever said it.

[David Zephyr]

2. And What About Condi's "Mushroom Cloud"?

grrrrrrrrrr.....

[ElementaryPenguin]

3. BFEE/PNAC Mob having a total meltdown!!!!

Look out, folks! ChimpCo is falling apart at the seams - and that makes them even more dangerous!!

[DoYouEverWonder]

4. No shit Sherlock/W

Isn't that what millions of people around the planet tried to tell him last January? The millions of people in that focus group that he choose to ignore?

edit: meant to respond to original post (oops)

[Sinistrous]

5. Could be Cheney has become a liability. or * needs a fall-guy.

Cheney's Halliburton connections are in the open and looking bad for the Dick, especiallly in the context of past denials.

Or, since the Iraq invasion has become such a fiasco, * needs a fall-guy so he can point away form his own slimy self and say "He (Cheney) did it." The PNAC cabal will remain intact.

No honor among thieves, etc.

[hippiechick]

31. Give Sinistrous a cookie !!

:toast:


You NAMED THAT TUNE IN ONE NOTE OR LESS !!!

That is exactly what's behind this.
Time for a new Veep leading into the election season.
Cheney's like dirty undies... he's smellin' up the room, even if ya' can't see why.
The BFEE is looking to send him into early retirement with an $87B 401<k>, thanks to the American Taxpayers.


:hippie:

[hippiechick]

32. Give Sinistrous a cookie !!

:toast:


You NAMED THAT TUNE IN ONE NOTE OR LESS !!!

That is exactly what's behind this.
Time for a new Veep leading into the election season.
Cheney's like dirty undies... he's smellin' up the room, even if ya' can't see why.
The BFEE is looking to send him into early retirement with an $87B 401<k>, thanks to the American Taxpayers.


:hippie:

[karlschneider]

6. I just now saw that story. WE NEED TO SEND THIS TO ALL MEDIA!

Sorry for the shouting, but this really, really, needs to get into the mainstream news organizations. (Yes, I know they are aware of it, they just need to be pressured to -report- it!)

EVERYONE: Copy the link to this story and save it. Find an email address for your nearest newspaper(s) and TV station(s) and send to to every person who has an email. PLEASE DO THIS. I've just sent it to www.tulsaworld.com, www.ktul.com, www.kjrh.com and www. kotv.com. Those are the media outlets in this neck of the woods.* And COMPLAIN if they haven't reported it. This is CRITICAL shit, people.

* I omitted the FAUX outlet here for what I believe are obvious reasons.
;-)

Hope all this isn't too hyper.....

[glarius]

7. This is DISGUSTING!!!...They're suddenly all singing the same song!

After hinting at and insinuating for months, that Saddam was in on 9/11, Bush and his buddies are suddenly wide-eyed with innocense! "We don't believe he was in on 9/11! Whatever gave you that idea!"...They got their desired effect....persuading the American public and now they are pretending they didn't mean that at all....DISGUSTING :puke:

[Brazosboomer]

8. No hint - he said it.

http://edition.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/01/29/sprj.irq.bush.iraq/

"He is a danger not only to countries in the region but, as I explained last night, because of his al Qaeda connections, because of his history, he is a danger to Americans," Bush said, referring to Tuesday's State of the Union address. "And we're going to deal with him. We're going to deal with him before it's too late."

- snip --

The Bush administration has been trying for months to link Iraq with al Qaeda, the organization that coordinated the September 11, 2001, attacks that claimed about 3,000 lives. Its leader, Osama bin Laden, has been the subject of a extended manhunt.

Bush said Wednesday that Saddam could use al Qaeda as a "forward army" that could attack the United States with weapons of mass destruction "and never leave a fingerprint behind."

[Buns_of_Fire]

23. That "wide-eyed innocence" is just BushCo repositioning

Remember, WhistleAss ran as a "moderate" in 2000. Once selected, he trotted off to suck up to his neocon buddies. Now, with an election 14 months away, they're attempting to slither back towards the center.

[genius]

9. It's made the TV news too.

Gee. First no WMDs. Now no connection to 9/11. So there was no reason whatsoever for going to war. I hope the American public is paying attention.

[ikojo]

25. The American public is NOT paying attention

It does not involve a celebrity so most people don't care.

Retractions rarely get the same attention as the original story. Now if Democrats yelled as loudly as the pugs and if they had friends in the media, like the pugs have in Rush and Faux, then this story could develop "legs." However I don't think most people will recall it in a day or so.

Again, if Clinton had gone to war on such flimsy "evidence" then the pugs and their cohorts in the media would still be pounding him for lying and sending boys and girls in harms way to further an agenda. That is what angers me the most, Clinton couldn't even get a hair cut but that the pugs wanted an investigation. Now to see the Democrats roll over like puppies for this president really, really, really irritates me.

If the Dems want people to turn out for them in 2004 then they had best be turning the heat up on BUSH and not on one another.

It is BUSH we want out of the White House.

:argh: :argh: :argh: :argh: :argh:

[Starpass]

10. Bet I know what strategy they are now using

This will be only one of the things they will back away from over the next couple months so that by the time they have to fight with Dems in summer of '04, this will all be erased from the public's mind. They can claim then that it is just made up political crap by lying Democrats and, unfortunately, the idiot public will believe them. Therefore, the Dems have to come out screaming right now and throw every quote they can dig up in their face. It's way to late to do that next summer and thus, do it from a defensive position instead of a offensive one. These guys are going to try to boil it all down to: "why we only ever said that we were going there to get rid of an evil dictator". We have to make this an issue NOW!!!!!!!!!

[Enraged_Ape]

24. Cheney is being greased and dressed like a Christmas pig...

to be sacrificed for the Bush boy, Rummy, Wolfowitz, and the rest of the PNAC clan.

"Blame Clinton" isn't working for them anymore. Dick Cheney is one arrhythmic heartbeat away from a dirt nap anyway, so who better to blame for all this administration's sins as they distance themselves from Dirty Dick and send him out the door. "Blame Cheney" will be their 2004 campaign slogan.

[freeforall]

11. Yeah right!

Polls are down, so now he's changing his tune? Also wants support from the UN.


:puke: :puke: :puke: :puke:

(There goes my dinner.)


You guys need to get this a**hole out of office. Fast.

[CHIMO]

14. He Gave Them A Chance

Haven't you been listening?

Oh well guess the real estate prices have to fall in snowbird country. What with all the iris scans and fingerprints required. Does anyone know a good (honest) short seller for real estate down south!

[komplex]

12. We Need Links

Does anybody have any links to when the GOP would implicate Saddam with the 9/11 attacks?
The Freepers & Bushbots are starting to say that "they never explicity said that."

[jamesinca]

22. here are some quotes and any link I can find

most of these are implied and he saying it is not his fault that the country is misled

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bush Cites 9/11 On All Manner Of Questions
References Could Backfire
advertisement


By Mike Allen
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, September 11, 2003; Page A12


<SNIP>
Such references are not new for Bush. In April, when he was making the case for invading Iraq, he said he refused to leave the nation's enemies "free to plot another September the 11th."
<SNIP>
The attacks sometimes even seem to overshadow the president's sense of previous history. "Prior to September the 11th, there was apparently no connection between a place like Iraq and terror," he said at a congressional retreat earlier this year. Iraq was first placed on the State Department's list of designated terrorist states in 1979 and has been there continuously since 1990.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sorry I don't have a date on this one.

Rose: Arrogance, or something darker?

By John David Rose
Carolina Morning News

<SNIP>

One bit of confirmation: Former Gen. Wesley Clark told Tim Russert (Meet the Press) that "There was a concerted effort to pin 9/11 and the terrorism problem on Saddam Hussein. I was on CNN (on 9/11) and got a call at my home (from people around the White House) saying 'you got to say this is connected to Saddam Hussein.' I said, 'I'm willing to say it, but what's your evidence?' And I never got any evidence."

<SNIP>

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From the SOTU address

"Evidence from intelligence sources, secret communications and statements by people now in custody reveal that Saddam Hussein aids and protects terrorists, including members of Al-Qaida. Secretly, and without fingerprints, he could provide one of his hidden weapons to terrorists, or help them develop their own."

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Editorial: Intelligence report / Damning list of failures, distortions


Published July 25, 2003 ED25

<SNIP>

Numerous examples like this illustrate that, as in the run-up to the war in Iraq, the United States suffered a massive intelligence failure before Sept. 11. Indeed, questions of intelligence -- though not the intelligence itself -- do provide a connection between the events of Sept. 11 and the war in Iraq. One unnamed official in Washington told United Press International, "The report shows there is no link between Iraq and Al-Qaida." Former Sen. Max Cleland, D-Ga., a member of the joint committee, agreed.

"The administration sold the connection to scare the pants off the American people and justify the war," Cleland told UPI. "What you have here is the manipulation of intelligence for political ends."

<SNIP>

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

A conversation/interview between Frank Sessno and Max Cleland. Sorry I don't have a date on this on either.

<SNIP>

CLELAND: Let's talk about that here. This commission was formed about mid-December, the 9/11 Commission. We were supposed to use the joint inquiry report as a launching pad to get into this issue of not only fixing the intelligence community, but moving beyond, and getting into what is the al Qaeda all about? What is this terrorist global network that we're fighting? A new kind of war and all that.
Well, the independent, bi-partisan commission, hello, didn't even get the stuff 'til a few weeks ago.

I'm saying that's deliberate. I am saying that the delay in relating this information to the American public out of a hearing… series of hearings, that several members of Congress knew eight or ten months ago, including Bob Graham and others, that was deliberately slow walked… the 9/11 Commission was deliberately slow walked, because the Administration's policy was, and its priority was, we're gonna take Saddam Hussein out.

SESNO: Senator, do you have any documentation or any proof to back up this very serious charge of yours that this was deliberate besides your own…

<SNIP>

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

<SNIP>

Home > News > UK > Politics


20 Lies About the War
Falsehoods ranging from exaggeration to plain untruth were used to make the case for war. More lies are being used in the aftermath. By Glen Rangwala and Raymond Whitaker
13 July 2003


1 Iraq was responsible for the 11 September attacks

A supposed meeting in Prague between Mohammed Atta, leader of the 11 September hijackers, and an Iraqi intelligence official was the main basis for this claim, but Czech intelligence later conceded that the Iraqi's contact could not have been Atta. This did not stop the constant stream of assertions that Iraq was involved in 9/11, which was so successful that at one stage opinion polls showed that two-thirds of Americans believed the hand of Saddam Hussein was behind the attacks. Almost as many believed Iraqi hijackers were aboard the crashed airliners; in fact there were none.

2 Iraq and al-Qa'ida were working together

Persistent claims by US and British leaders that Saddam and Osama bin Laden were in league with each other were contradicted by a leaked British Defence Intelligence Staff report, which said there were no current links between them. Mr Bin Laden's "aims are in ideological conflict with present-day Iraq", it added.

Another strand to the claims was that al-Qa'ida members were being sheltered in Iraq, and had set up a poisons training camp. When US troops reached the camp, they found no chemical or biological traces.

<SNIP>

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

WASHINGTON TODAY: Bush faces rising concern over Iraq, deficit

TOM RAUM, Associated Press Writer Saturday, August 30, 2003 1.

(08-30) 09:56 PDT WASHINGTON (AP) --

<SNIP>
Terrorists are being confronted in Iraq and Afghanistan "so our people will not have to confront terrorist violence in New York or St. Louis or Los Angeles," Bush told an American Legion convention last week.

<SNIP>

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I will continue to look and find things I have been collecting stuff since the beginning of the war on this topic. I have collected just about 380mb of stuff, mp3 to news articles. I will gladly look through my library of thigs and send them to you as I go thru them if you want.

Most of his remarks have been misleading in the fact that he says terrorist and Iraq in the same sentence. Or 9/11 and Hussein etc. He usually does not say that Iraq was responsible for 9/11, but most of this country believes it was. It has been one big marketing ploy by this administration. I will post on here later if I find a quote of anybody in the WH that says iraq and 9/11 are linked.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

More things I have found. This says that the WH used the Iraq 9/11 thing, but I don't know his referance.

August 7, 2003
1. Wolfowitz Lets Slip
Iraq Was Not Involved in 9/11; No Ties to Al-Qaeda
By JASON LEOPOLD

Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz, one of the main architects for the war in Iraq, admitted for the first time that Iraq had nothing to do with the September 11 terrorist attacks, contradicting public statements made by senior White House and Pentagon officials whose attempt to link Saddam Hussein and the terrorist organization al-Qaeda was cited by the Bush administration as one of the main reasons for launching a preemptive strike in March against Iraq.

In an interview with conservative radio personality Laura Ingraham, Wolfowitz was asked when he first came to believe that Iraq was behind the 9-11 terrorist attacks.

"I'm not sure even now that I would say Iraq had something to do with it," Wolfowitz said in the interview, aired Friday.

Wolfowitz's answer confirms doubts long held by critics of the Iraq war that the Bush administration had no evidence linking Iraq to 9-11 or al-Qaeda, but simply used the horrific terrorist attacks as a reason to overthrow Saddam Hussein and his Baathist regime.

<SNIP>
Jason Leopold can be reached at: [e-mail]
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This one pretty much hits it on the head.

The impact of Bush linking 9/11 and Iraq

American attitudes about a connection have changed, firming up the case for war.

By Linda Feldmann | Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor

WASHINGTON – In his prime-time press conference last week, which focused almost solely on Iraq, President Bush mentioned Sept. 11 eight times. He referred to Saddam Hussein many more times than that, often in the same breath with Sept. 11.
Bush never pinned blame for the attacks directly on the Iraqi president. Still, the overall effect was to reinforce an impression that persists among much of the American public: that the Iraqi dictator did play a direct role in the attacks. A New York Times/CBS poll this week shows that 45 percent of Americans believe Mr. Hussein was "personally involved" in Sept. 11, about the same figure as a month ago.

<SNIP>

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[RapidCreek]

13. Gee Wally

One has to wonder why The Furher wasn't clarifying these points prior to invading Iraq. One also has to wonder why the media wasn't either.....Gosh, could it be that it was so much more convenient NOT TO? Nahhhh....our fearless leader would never resort to disingenuous means.....He is a God fearing Christian man.

Fact is, he thinks 80% of America is as sharp as a sack full of bowling balls. Say terist, 9/11 and Saddam Hussein in the same sentence 5000 times and Billy and Betty Bob will arrive at the desired conclusion. Sad to say....it works.....and it always will. On second thought Bush doesn't think Americans are stupid and apathetic....he knows they are. Hey did you hear Maddona was sucking on Brittanys tongue?

RC

[demgrrrll]

15. Check out this link to Tom Tomorrow. Letter from Bush to Congress prior

to the invasion. this link is from the today the 17th. I think Bush has really dropped the pooch on this one.

[proud patriot]

16. Holy Cow demgrrrl ..thanks for posting that n/t

[RapidCreek]

26. Thanks for the link demgrrrll!

RC

[Resistance Is Futile]

17. Reinventing the propaganda

What is going on to make the White House all sing this tune today?

They're reinventing the propaganda so Cheney looks out of step and takes the blame for Iraq with him when he drops off the ticket. The Junta is not falling apart at the seams. This is all part of a plan.

[demgrrrll]

19. Well if the plan was meant to look like the wheels are falling off the

wagon and having the press start to turn on you then bravo, well done.
Link to .

[Resistance Is Futile]

20. Window dressing

The press is turning on Cheney. Not the entire cabal. Until the mainstream press stands up and exposes the lies told by Shrub, Rice, Powell, Rumpsfeld, Wolfowitz and the rest of the junta, all they're doing is furthering the cabal's agenda by heaping the blame on a member of the admin who's now expected to drop off the GOP ticket.

All that's going to happen is that Cheney is going to drop off the ticket, the mass media will say that the <cough, gag, choke> honest people in the administration can do their jobs now that Cheney is gone, and the sheeple will remain insufficiently disturbed to uninstall Shrub.

The media are doing 'us' no favors until they target Shrub directly. Targetting Cheney personally is counterproductive because whatever blame is piled on his head will leave when he does.

Score another one for Rove.

[jamesinca]

18. Here is todays lie exposed

<SNIP>

Most of the administration's public assertions have focused on the man Bush mentioned, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, a senior bin Laden associate who officials have accused of trying to train terrorists in the use of poison for possible attacks in Europe, running a terrorist haven in northern Iraq — an area outside Saddam's control before the war — and organizing an attack that killed an American aid executive in Jordan last year.

<SNIP>

Lets see, Iraq had al-Queda connections. No what they meant to say is that somebody in the geographical space of the country that is called Iraq has sympathy for al-Queda. Mostly they should point out that these activities were taking place in the no-fly zones in areas that were considered to be controlled by our allies the Kurds. They also need to point out that one of the forst places that was invaded from the north was a supposed stronghold of these terrorist. It was one of the places that Powell pointed out at his U.N. presentation. What was found was nothing. An abandonded village is what they found, no WMD!!! This needs to be brought up. Why, because it further discredits their story of an al-Queda link. It should also be brought up that communications between bin_Ladens people and the country of Iraq stopped after a few months and they never did meet to form an alliance. These meetings which have been refered to recently by the WH took place before bin-Laden moved to Afghanastan. This is not revisionist history, this is how it happened.

[ze_dscherman]

21. Kick!

So, where are the Emperors clothes now?

Pretty damn cold there in the real world, Dubya, isn't it?

[VolcanoJen]

27. Kick!

:dem:

[Not a robought]

28. AP: Undeniable links between Bush and Bin Laden Families

I'll sprout wings the day I see that dateline.

[DoYouEverWonder]

29. Then why on 09/26/02

Did W say, "Both of them need to be dealt with. You can't distinguish between al Qaeda and Saddam when you talk about the war on terror"?


http://www.cnn.com/2002/US/09/25/us.iraq.alqaeda/

[BelgianMadCow]

30. Well it's sad but true

I don't think Bush* has once uttered "Saddam Hussein is responsible for 9/11".

You see, Rove may be crazy but he knows the game.

So yes, Bush* has linked Iraq and Al Qaida,

yes, he has used 9/11, Iraq, Hussein and Al-Qaida in the same sentence as much as possible (without actually saying the one above)

yes, he is guilty of misleading, overstating and on an incredible number of occasions, lying. The US was led to war on allegations...

But I am really afraid that he never actually said that first sentence, and RWmedia and Bush* will get away with it.

Which, come to think of it, conclusively proves Bush has not uttered two whole sentences on the subject that weren't scripted. If he would have, he would never habe been able to pull off this remarkable trick of continuously almost saying it, but never saying it.

Which leads me to the final conclusion : somewhere, somehow, someone was supposed to ask questions. It is unimaginable that Bush* never had to answer tough, unscripted questions. This is where democracy broke down.

"The day the Washington Press Corps Died"

I don't fear the puppet, but the puppetmasters.

[DoYouEverWonder]

33. According to W, al Qaeda was responsible for 9-11

According to W, Saddam and al Qaeda were directly connected. (There are 100's of statements from W and his mineons regarding this connection.) Therefore, Saddam was connected to 9-11.

This was among their top ten reasons for invading Iraq, and just like all their other reasons, this one is turning out to be bullshit too.

The WH & the lap dog media, intentionally and purposely linked Saddam to the events of 9-11 as often as possible. Even when they were presented with evidence proving otherwise, they would dismiss anything that did not fit in with their senario. When you are delivering a speech about invading Iraq and numerous times during that speech mention al Qaeda and 9-11, you are purposely presenting false evidence to manipulate public opinion. This is TREASON.

[BelgianMadCow]

34. I agree with you on principle, of course, but

the connection 9/11 - Al Qaeda + Al Qaeda - Iraq will not keep Bush from saying "I never said Saddam was responsible for 9/11"

This statement will be very hard to disprove, I believe it is technically correct. A lot of smoking guns in this GD thread still don't show such a direct statement.

In reality it obviously is a lie.

Bush* will need to be called on his bluff REAL HARD before the lie becomes transparent, and even then it will require the above logic to be grasped by the public.

So when will question time come ? I dream of Bush* being in front of a true congressional opposition, having to adress the hard, explicit questions and not being able to take a vacation or conjure a terralert...Blair at least had to do that, I think Bush would go down in minutes if he was put on the stand.

on edit : I guess question time will ultimately come in presidential candidates' debates (and I mean the final ones dem-repub)- but from what I recall (having seen only a few) these amount to little more than repetitive sloganesque babble.