Wordsmith, yes, and I remember a link from MISSY, that the DEMOCRATS where giving pressure to go to war with SADAM HUSSEIN, BEING KNOWN BEFORE THE WAR as using torture on his people and on the one tribe living on the north the KURDS, SADAM WAS ALREADY KNOWN TO BE DEFEATED EVEN BEFORE 9/11
FOR THE SAKE OF FREEDOM AND TO STOP THE TORTURE,
THE DEMOCRATS WHERE PUTTING A BIG INFLUENCE ON THE MATTER AND AGREED TO WAR IN IRAK
so, who accuse BUSH, CAN PUT THE DEMOCRATS IN THE SAME ACCUSASION

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Pg 415-416, In My Time:

WHEN I APPEARED ON Meet the Press on the Sunday after 9/11, Tim Russert asked me whether we had any evidence linking Saddam Hussein or the Iraqis to the 9/11 attacks. “No,” I answered. But shortly afterward, George Tenet brought me information that suggested the possibility: The CIA had a report that Mohammed Atta, the lead hijacker of 9/11, had met with a representative of the Iraqi intelligence Service in Prague prior to the attacks. I was subsequently shown a photograph said to have been taken in Prague and told that there was a high probability that the man in the photo was Mohammed Atta. Thus when I sat down with Tim Russert on December 9, 2001, I mentioned a report, “pretty well confirmed,” that Atta had gone to Prague and met with a senior Iraqi intelligence official. Colin Powell, apparently shown the same information, went even further, telling Wolf Blitzer on CNN’s Late Edition, “Certainly those meetings took place.”

In the summer of 2002, having been told that the case for Mohammed Atta’s Prague meeting was weakening, I began to alter my statements. I said to Tim Russert on September 8 that the meeting was “unconfirmed at this point.” The next year, following along with what the CIA was reporting, I told Tim, “We’ve never been able to develop any more of that yet, either in terms of confirming it or discrediting it. We just don’t know.” I was careful with what I said- and disappointed when Director Tenet later erroneously wrote that I continued to claim the story was “pretty well confirmed” after the CIA began to doubt it.

I was also disappointed on June 2, 2004, when Tenet, citing personal reasons, told the president he would be leaving. The Senate Intelligence Committee was soon to issue a report that many thought would be critical of Tenet, and I suspected that entered into his thinking. The president had kept Tenet on when we came into office, a move I had supported. Throughout the intelligence mistakes of Tenet’s tenure, the president and I had backed him. For him to quit when the going got tough, not to mention in the middle of a presidential campaign, seemed to me unfair to the president, who had put his trust in George Tenet.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

@Jon:

Intellectually honest much?

After wading through your two posts, the phrase I just blockquoted from you appears to be your only original comment-contribution. Care to elaborate? Just what did you not get from reading my blogpost (if you actually took the time to read it) that you think is trumped by your links? The “substance” of which, I believe, has already been covered in the original post? What is it that you aren’t getting?

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Jon, hi, so what I read is that PRESIDENT BUSH did the right thing, to show them that any terrorist movement where ever they are, who ever they connect with,wont get away easy,and that should be
the policy of today also, because they are again with IRAN include, taunting the AMERICAS,
and using the money supply in their SWISS BANK not for helping their people, but to finances
the not so peacefull people to emigrate in here and try to empower their own brothers who realy
are too scare to resist and show their names publicly, that is done underground and get some sympathic support from administration who pass it by very diligently, to the detriment of THE AMERICANS
bye

Like or Dislike: 0  0

18 September, 2003

US President George W Bush has explicitly stated for the first time that there is no evidence that Saddam Hussein was involved in the 11 September attacks.

Mr Bush has never directly accused the former Iraqi leader of having a hand in the attacks on New York and Washington, but he has repeatedly associated the two in keynote addresses delivered since 11 September. Senior members of his administration have similarly conflated the two.

Despite his stated rejection of any clear link between Saddam Hussein and the events of that day, Mr Bush continues to assert that the deposed president had ties with al-Qaeda, the terrorist network blamed for the 11 September attacks.

BBC News Online looks at some of the remarks made by Mr Bush and members of his administration both in the run-up to war and after hostilities had officially ended.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/3119676.stm

Bush links Al Qaeda in Iraq to 9/11; critics reject connection

July 13, 2007

BAGHDAD — In rebuffing calls to bring troops home from Iraq, President George W. Bush employed a stark and ominous defense. “The same folks that are bombing innocent people in Iraq,” he said, “were the ones who attacked us in America on September the 11th, and that’s why what happens in Iraq matters to the security here at home.”

It is an argument that Bush has been making with heavy frequency in the past few months, as the challenges to the continuation of the war have grown. On Thursday alone, he referred at least 30 times to Al Qaeda or its presence in Iraq

But his references to Al Qaeda in Iraq, and his assertions that it is the same group that attacked the United States in 2001, have greatly oversimplified the nature of the insurgency in Iraq and its relationship with the Qaeda leadership. Bush’s critics say that he has overstated the Qaeda connection in an attempt to exploit the same kinds of post-Sept. 11 emotions that helped him win support for the invasion in the first place.

BBC News Online looks at some of the remarks made by Mr Bush and members of his administration both in the run-up to war and after hostilities had officially ended.

Intellectually honest much?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/3119676.stm

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Bush Defends Assertions of Iraq-Al Qaeda Relationship

President Bush yesterday defended his assertions that there was a relationship between Saddam Hussein’s Iraq and Osama bin Laden’s al Qaeda, putting him at odds with this week’s finding of the bipartisan Sept. 11 commission.

“The reason I keep insisting that there was a relationship between Iraq and Saddam and al Qaeda: because there was a relationship between Iraq and al Qaeda,” Bush said after a Cabinet meeting. As evidence, he cited Iraqi intelligence officers’ meeting with bin Laden in Sudan. “There’s numerous contacts between the two,” Bush said.

“This administration never said that the 9/11 attacks were orchestrated between Saddam and al Qaeda,” Bush said. “We did say there were numerous contacts between Saddam Hussein and al Qaeda.”

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A50679-2004Jun17.html

The impact of Bush linking 9/11 and 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.

Sources knowledgeable about US intelligence say there is no evidence that Hussein played a role in the Sept. 11 attacks, nor that he has been or is currently aiding Al Qaeda. Yet the White House appears to be encouraging this false impression, as it seeks to maintain American support for a possible war against Iraq and demonstrate seriousness of purpose to Hussein’s regime.

“The administration has succeeded in creating a sense that there is some connection [between Sept. 11 and Saddam Hussein],” says Steven Kull, director of the Program on International Policy Attitudes (PIPA) at the University of Maryland.

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

Like or Dislike: 0  0

this only a mistake of the keypad

Like or Dislike: 0  0

@Unbelievable:

Ummm… that would be David Brooks who said that.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Where did you get the ridiculous notion that “neocon” translates as “jew” “conservative”?

“Neo” means NEW, not jew.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

i was watching fox news and 911 plane struck and another it so scary to try to figure if people could escape and as i just read DC a real person who escape that against the odds it is something we will always remember best to you DC thank you it should be kept made a book on wath you just wrote

Like or Dislike: 0  0