arguements against the "bush never said iraq and 911" revisionists

[Options Remain]

Ok I just lost it on someone who gave the answer "people beleive what they want to beleive. Bush never said it therefore he has no responsibility."

Does anyone have any examples of misleading statements W made that "imply" the connection? How about the theoretical but proven false "meeting with iraq intelligence" thing.

I thinkwe need to flood the net with them. Theres too much "lets let it slide going on."

TearForger

[lindashaw]

1. some are around, I think, but it needs to be compiled in one piece

[dwckabal]

2. I asked a similar question ealier

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=105&topic_id=202802

[wryter2000]

3. I'm wondering, too.

maybe a google search :shrug:

We have to find some quotes similar to those about WMD.

[wryter2000]

11. Another one

http://www.csmonitor.com/2003/0314/p02s01-woiq.htm

You know, it is possible that all along they never said "Hussein was involved in 9/11." Instead, they could have been saying, "Hussein supports terrorists, and we know what terrorists did on 9/11." Kind of a "the British told us about the uranium" thing. So, we may never find an exact quote. But the article here points out how Bush linked them in his talk.

Is there somewhere we can find the text of that speech?

[wryter2000]

4. I don't know how to insert a link

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-intel30jan30,0,6143421.story?coll=la-home-headlines

Can someone turn this into a link. It looks pretty good. LA Times from 1/30/03

[wryter2000]

6. Hey, it worked

I'm smarter than I thought.

Off to google some more.

The truth is out there!

[Name removed]

7. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[wryter2000]

8. Maybe not, too

Sorry for the dupe

[TioDiego]

5. The Freepers erased them all.

</corn starch>

[tg]

9. The flag that was flying over the pentagon on 9/11

Why did they take it to Irag if Saddam had nothing to do with 9/11?

Peace, -tg

[newyawker99]

19. Hi tg!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[tridim]

20. Does anyone remember the stories

about the troops carrying pictures of the twin towers into battle?

It's bloody obvious that the hawks were making the connection on a daily basis for many months leading up to and during the war.

[sangh0]

10. The response is

"So why did he wait more than two years to say so?"

[wryter2000]

12. Good one, Sangh

That's the answer, right there. :yourock:

[JHB]

13. See: Tom Tomorrow's blog

http://www.thismodernworld.com/weblog/mtarchives/week_2003_09_14.html#001082

Now:
WASHINGTON - President Bush said Wednesday there was no evidence that Saddam Hussein was involved in the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001 — disputing an impression that critics say the administration tried to foster to justify the war against Iraq.
"There's no question that Saddam Hussein had al-Qaida ties," the president said. But he also said, "We've had no evidence that Saddam Hussein was involved with September the 11th."


Then:
Text of a Letter from the President to the Speaker of the House of Representatives and the President Pro Tempore of the Senate
-----
2) acting pursuant to the Constitution and Public Law 107-243 is consistent with the United States and other countries continuing to take the necessary actions against international terrorists and terrorist organizations, including those nations, organizations, or persons who planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001.

This is the letter where he formally asked for Congressional authorization to use military force against Iraq.

[proud patriot]

18. JHB ...Thanks ....Whoop There it is ..

:bounce:

[lindashaw]

14. I have a link for you: [e-mail]

[TrueBlueDem]

15. Well, there was Chimpy's Iraq speech to the UN, Sept 2002

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/09/12/national/main521781.shtml

"In the attacks on America a year ago, we saw the destructive intentions of our enemies. This threat hides within many nations, including my own. In cells and camps, terrorists are plotting further destruction and building new bases for their war against civilization. And our greatest fear is that terrorists will find a shortcut to their mad ambitions when an outlaw regime supplies them with the technologies to kill on a massive scale.

In one place — in one regime — we find all these dangers, in their most lethal and aggressive forms..."

... and of course, Chimpy was talking about Iraq.

[Timefortruth]

16. You can fool some of the people some of the time

but on this issue they just aren’t going to get 70% of the population to believe that they weren’t tricked. The core will say, “oh yeah that’s what they said all along, there was never a connection”. But Chimp didn’t even get a majority of the votes so his support is thin, and a major chunk of the folks who learn that they were played as fools aren’t going to trust him anymore.

Who knows why they are making this shift? They surly didn’t have too, it’s not like the public was going to realize there was no connection after all this time.

[Hamlette]

17. great thread, I've wondered myself, here are a few!

"I hope they understand the lesson of September the 11th," Bush said on March 6. "The lesson is, is that we're vulnerable to attack, wherever it may occur, and we must take threats which gather overseas very seriously. We don't have to deal with them all militarily, but we have to deal with them." (from the Nightline web site, bush on going to war in iraq.)

"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." http://www.csmonitor.com/2003/0314/p02s01-woiq.html

"Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld last year boasted that the Pentagon and CIA had “bulletproof” evidence linking Iraq to al-Qaeda, although Rumsfeld refused to declassify any of the intelligence he had to support his claims. Shortly after the attacks, however, the administration claimed that Mohammed Atta, the suspected ringleader of the 9-11 attacks, met with an Iraqi agent in Prague in early 2001, suggesting a possible connection with Saddam Hussein." http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article4372.htm

This one is great! Frome NewsMax At first I thought it was satire!
Wolfowitz Bombshell: Saddam Behind 9/11 Attacks and OKC Bombing

Assistant Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz, said by some to be the architect of America's war on Iraq, reportedly suspects that Saddam Hussein played a significant role in the three worst terrorist attacks ever on the U.S. - the Sept. 11 attacks on the World Trade Center and Pentagon, the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing and the 1993 World Trade Center bombing. http://www.newsmax.com/showinsidecover.shtml?a=2003/6/1/161354

I'm googling, more later!

[Hamlette]

21. As to the new lie " Saddam has links to al Qaeda" No!!!!

http://www.dailykos.com/archives/003511.html on the congressional report on 9-11

snip

Asked whether he believed the report will reveal that there was no connection between al-Qaida and Iraq, Cleland replied: "I do ... There's no connection, and that's been confirmed by some of (al-Qaida leader Osama) bin Laden's terrorist followers."

snip

Just to make clear -- Bush directly contradicted clear evidence offered by our intelligence agencies. As Cleland says,

"The reason this report was delayed for so long -- deliberately opposed at first, then slow-walked after it was created -- is that the administration wanted to get the war in Iraq in and over ... before (it) came out," he said.

"Had this report come out in January like it should have done, we would have known these things before the war in Iraq, which would not have suited the administration."