September '03-Bush says NO link between Saddam and 9/11

[underpants]

I know this is old news but I just wanted to note this DIRECT QUOTE. Consider the news sources though

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/3118262.stm

Thursday, 18 September, 2003

"We have no evidence that Saddam Hussein was involved with the 11 September attacks," Mr Bush told reporters as he met members of Congress on energy legislation.

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/national/140133_bushiraq18.html
Thursday, September 18, 2003

COX NEWS SERVICE

The president's comments came in response to a reporter's question about Vice President Dick Cheney's assertion Sunday on NBC's "Meet The Press" program that Iraq was the "geographic base" of the terrorists behind the attacks on New York and Washington.

Bush said yesterday there was no attempt by the administration to try to confuse people about any link between Saddam and Sept. 11.

"No, we've had no evidence that Saddam Hussein was involved with September the 11th," Bush said. "What the vice president said was is that he (Saddam) has been involved with al-Qaida.

"And al-Zarqawi, an al-Qaida operative, was in Baghdad. He's the guy that ordered the killing of a U.S. diplomat. ... There's no question that Saddam Hussein had al-Qaida ties."

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,97527,00.html
Wednesday, September 17, 2003

"We have no evidence that Saddam Hussein was involved with the Sept. 11" attacks, Bush said at the start of a meeting with congressional lawmakers discussing new energy legislation. But, he added, "There's no question that Saddam Hussein had Al Qaeda ties."


http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2003-09-17-bush-saddam_x.htm
Posted 9/17/2003 5:12 PM

"We have no evidence that Saddam Hussein was involved with the September 11th" attacks," Bush said in a brief encounter with reporters after a meeting with members of Congress. Bush added, "There's no question that Saddam Hussein had al-Qaeda ties."

Of course in most of these links there is the following from The Dickster and Condi

Cheney on Sunday was asked whether he was surprised that more than two-thirds of Americans in a Washington Post poll would express a belief that Iraq was behind the attacks.

"No, I think it's not surprising that people make that connection," he replied.

Rice, asked about the same poll numbers, said, "We have never claimed that Saddam Hussein had either direction or control of 9-11."

[kentuck]

1. But what did he say yesterday ??

We are in Iraq because we were attacked on 9/11 ??

[underpants]

2. That's right

and that is why we are there-along with freedom mass graves uh..... freedom is on the march-but he never actually said that don't you see? but, as Cheney said, it is easy to see why people would think that even though Saddam didn't have very much connection with 9/11 we know that to be true there is no doubt about that fact about Saddam and 9/11 and that is what they said from the very beginning.

[Igel]

3. Yep, that's what he said.

And the DSM memos concur.

He didn't say we attacked Iraq because Iraq attacked us on 9/11. He said we attacked Iraq because we were attacked on 9/11. There's a rather huge difference between the two.

The DSM memos provide a clear mechanism. The thing is, it's plausible and not a post-hoc mechanism.

Ambiguity's a wonderful thing. You can avoid stating what it is you mean, exactly; others can then read into what they want you to have meant, and you can always reply, "Not what I said." Avoid the trap.