Bush Falsely Claims He Never Linked Hussein To September 11
By on Mar 20th, 2006 at 1:46 pm
Bush Falsely Claims He Never Linked Hussein To September 11
Bush, this afternoon:
First, just if I might correct a misperception, I don’t think we ever said – at least I know I didn’t say that there was a direct connection between September the 11th and Saddam Hussein.
In fact, Bush justified the war against Iraq by directly linking it to 9/11:
The use of armed forces against Iraq 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 person who planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001. [Bush's Letter to Congress, 3/21/03]
View Most Popular
Advertisement
What We're About
What We're Fighting For
What We're Fighting Against
Featured
Subscribe to the Progress Report
Topic CloudView topics sorted by popularity
Afghanistan
Bachmann
Beck
Boehner
Bush
Cheney
Civil Rights
Congress
Corporate Ethics
Dobbs
Economy
Education
Election
Energy
Environment
Ethics
Fox News
Gingrich
Global Warming
Health Care
Immigration
International Relations
Iraq
Justice
LGBT
Lieberman
Limbaugh
Maddow
McCain
Media
Military
Obama
Palin
Pelosi
Public Plan
Race
Radical Right
Religion
Sports
Steele
Steve King
Stimulus
Tea Parties
Technology
Women's Rights
Visit Our Affiliated Sites
Reports
In-depth studies on select topics
Got a hot tip?
Have a hot news tip? We'd love to hear from you. Use the form below to send us the latest.
ArchivesBlog Roll
Another lie from the Liar in Chief.
March 20th, 2006 at 1:47 pmbeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeep…..lie #243
March 20th, 2006 at 1:49 pmOne line after another …
March 20th, 2006 at 1:50 pmLying , incompetent idiot!
March 20th, 2006 at 1:51 pmWhy do you want Saddam Hussein in power?
March 20th, 2006 at 1:51 pmsuprised his pants aren’t on fire
March 20th, 2006 at 1:52 pmbeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeep…..lie #243
Comment by wisedup — March 20, 2006 @ 1:49 pm
You left out about 8 zeros… :)
March 20th, 2006 at 1:52 pmWhy does he keep on lying? I agree Liar, Liar pants on fire.
March 20th, 2006 at 1:53 pmW has a memory like a steel sieve!
March 20th, 2006 at 1:55 pmCakewalk my ass…
March 20th, 2006 at 1:58 pmI nominate George W. Bush as “Upper Class Twit of the Year.”
-Stolen from Monty Python. Ah, what a great weekend…
March 20th, 2006 at 1:59 pmI cannot believe you guys haven’t kicked him out of the white house yet. After his term is over will he deny ever being president?
March 20th, 2006 at 1:59 pmBen – I for one would rather Saddam be in power, rather than having this 8 Trillion dollar debt for something that was no needed.
Now my wife and I have to consider if we are still going to have kids, after all they start off owing the government 30,000 dollars.
That’s a great way to start off a life!
March 20th, 2006 at 1:59 pmThe letter of intent to go to war certainly includes Iraq and its leader as fitting the bill of supporters of 9/11…
The use of “we” and then the switch to “at least I” (never said) is interesting…
Do we have a speech/ language person around here at TP?
March 20th, 2006 at 1:59 pmIt seems there must be a term for the common politico speech pattern of beginning a statement, only to abruptly change the subject and switch context to answer a sometimes unrelated question.
Neither answer, question or statement of position becomes fully stated, leaving the readily available out of “I must have mis-spoken………”
Bush urges patience on Iraq – When we get the oil contracts we can withdraw a few troop – George Bush
March 20th, 2006 at 2:00 pmDo you think he’s realized that his credibility rating has gone past the zero mark and is climbing into significant negative numbers? It’s time to stop catapulting the propaganda and just catapult him. Actually, it’s way past time.
March 20th, 2006 at 2:01 pmJust because Iraq and 9/11 were said in the same sentence in a document that was sent to Congress does not mean that he was linking the two.
That was a preemptive troll response brought to you by “Idiotworks”. “We hurt our brains so you don’t have to.”
March 20th, 2006 at 2:01 pmWar crime?
According to eyewitnesses and local officials interviewed over the past 10 weeks, the civilians who died in Haditha were killed not by the roadside bomb but by the Marines themselves. They went on a rampage in the village after the attack, killing 15 unarmed Iraqis in their homes, including seven women and three children, the magazine said.
http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/30D3E5CA-44A5-4610-B1D5-7D77D5AC7A16.htm
March 20th, 2006 at 2:02 pmWas stretching in the gym for a run when he said this – loud groans were uttered by all. I haven’t run that hard in a while though. Thanks, Dumya!
March 20th, 2006 at 2:03 pmLIAR ,LIAR, LIAR.
You said it i heard you . You incompetent buffoon .
March 20th, 2006 at 2:04 pmU.S. War Spending to Rise 44% to $9.8 Bln a Month, Report Says
March 17 (Bloomberg) — U.S. military spending in Iraq and Afghanistan will average 44 percent more in the current fiscal year than in fiscal 2005, the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service said.
Spending will rise to $9.8 billion a month from the $6.8 billion a month the Pentagon said it spent last year, the research service said. The group’s March 10 report cites “substantial” expenses to replace or repair damaged weapons, aircraft, vehicles, radios and spare parts.
March 20th, 2006 at 2:05 pmhttp://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=10000087&sid=ak3gHkUGPtpY&refer=top_world_news
Ben,
That is a straw man argument. The post is over, wether Bush ever linked Saddam to 9/11. and in his defense he may not have directly. His cabinet including the vice president, often subtly linked Sadaam to 9/11, and sadaam to potential future terror attacks, by linking Sadaam to Al Quadia. By throwing in your why do you want sadaam in power statement you are doing nothing but de-railing the debate.
I guess the question could be asked why do you want to kill american troops?
March 20th, 2006 at 2:06 pmMakes about as much sense as your statement.
Iraqi police say U.S. troops executed 11, including baby
The villagers were killed after U.S. troops herded them into a single room of the house, according to a police document obtained by Knight Ridder Newspapers. The soldiers also burned three vehicles, killed the villagers’ animals and blew up the house, the document said.
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2002876683_civilians20.html
March 20th, 2006 at 2:07 pmjust like Cheney didn’t say Atta met with Iraqi agents in Praque… even when they showed him the tape of him saying so he denied…
March 20th, 2006 at 2:08 pmIn Secret Unit’s ‘Black Room,’ a Grim Portrait of U.S. Abuse
As the Iraqi insurgency intensified in early 2004, an elite Special Operations forces unit converted one of Saddam Hussein’s former military bases near Baghdad into a top-secret detention center. There, American soldiers made one of the former Iraqi government’s torture chambers into their own interrogation cell. They named it the Black Room.
In the windowless, jet-black garage-size room, some soldiers beat prisoners with rifle butts, yelled and spit in their faces and, in a nearby area, used detainees for target practice in a game of jailer paintball. Their intention was to extract information to help hunt down Iraq’s most-wanted terrorist, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, according to Defense Department personnel who served with the unit or were briefed on its operations.
March 20th, 2006 at 2:10 pmhttp://fairuse.100webcustomers.com/fairenough/nyt111.html
He must think we all drank & did as much coke as he did.
Jeez, my memory is way better than that.
Bet bushies here swollow this whopper whole, AGAIN.
March 20th, 2006 at 2:11 pmBush, the worst ( dictator) president in the history of America. Cuts Democracy in america and claims to be bringing it to the world, via a war on Iraq and the world. The only person to reside in the white house to have lied all the time about anything and everything…34 months to go, if we survive……..Blessings
March 20th, 2006 at 2:12 pmWhen I think of having to endure 3 more years of this nightmare it makes me want to just get under the bed and hide. I can’t believe this nitwit said he never connected Iraq and 9/11 – he is seriously stupid and or a pathological liar. Go Feingold and Murtha – and hurry up!
March 20th, 2006 at 2:12 pmAnd of course the “liberal media” will continue to let him get away with it.
March 20th, 2006 at 2:13 pmBush is telling the (half) truth at least regarding the quote from his letter. He’s not saying, “We must take action against those who attacked us on 9/11, like Iraq.” He’s saying “We must take action against [bad people], including those who attacked us on 9/11.” I guess he means that Saddam was one of those [bad people]. (Except the elided “bad people” are “international terrorists and terrorist organizations”. So Saddam was an international terrorist? What other nation did he terrorize since 1991?)
The whole truth is that Bush probably never did say, “Saddam attacked us on 9/11.” He did do a Jedi mind trick and mention them in the same sentence about a jillion times, and scare the US into thinking Saddam attacked us on 9/11. Meanwhile, the talking heads cut it even closer “You cannot distinguish between Saddam and al-Qaeda,” “We know an Iraqi intelligence officer met with Mohammed Atta in Prague,” and Powell’s whole speech to the UN.
But the worst part is that even if you grant them their claim that the conflation wasn’t intentional, it did convince a majority of Americans (at the time the war started) that Saddam was involved in 9/11. Now the admin’s saying it’s not their fault America got duped…by them?
March 20th, 2006 at 2:14 pmDoes Bushie actually think the entire conutry will come down with amnesia and forget how he tied 911 to Saddam Hussein? In fact doesn’t Chenney still connect Saddam Hussien to 911 until this very day? The extent of this administration’s incompetence boggles the mind.
March 20th, 2006 at 2:16 pmThe extent of this admistrations contempt for American citizens boggles the mind.
March 20th, 2006 at 2:17 pmBush WINS,….the ‘underground poll vault’ award, Keep it up bushie, NOBODY can pull your poll numbers down like YOU.
March 20th, 2006 at 2:18 pmNeocons do not believe in the U.S. Constitution, civil liberties, the separation of powers, or the Geneva Conventions. According to published reports, President Bush described the Constitution as “a scrap of paper.” Bush’s attorney general, vice president, and secretary of defense have openly defended the Bush administration’s practice of torture, violations of habeas corpus, and illegal spying. These high officials, in violation of their oath of office, have openly declared that Bush, as commander in chief, is above the law.
READ THIS
March 20th, 2006 at 2:19 pmBut hasn’t Bush read Stephen Hayes? Saddam was involved in 9/11.
(A joke.)
Seriously, if Hayes’s evidence is so sound, why isn’t Bush using it during talks like this one?
March 20th, 2006 at 2:21 pmI hope Bush’s true believers who still think that Saddam Hussein “personally helped plan the 9/11 attacks” take notice of this. Their fearless leader is saying they are either confused or misinformed.
March 20th, 2006 at 2:24 pmHe does know that people write stuff down, right?
March 20th, 2006 at 2:24 pmSaddam still Iraq leader: Gaddafi
LIBYAN leader Muammar Gaddafi said Saddam Hussein should still be considered Iraq’s legal president and the current government illegitimate as it was elected under an occupation regime.
In an interview with the Italian Sky TG24 television channel, he slammed the practice of sending in troops to get rid of heads of state, saying by that theory he could be next.
“Saddam Hussein cannot be tried because he is a prisoner of war and under the Geneva Convention should be released at the end of hostilities,” Col. Gaddafi said.
“Saddam is still to be considered the legal president of Iraq because he was not overthrown by the people but by the occupation forces.
March 20th, 2006 at 2:25 pmWhat a freegin’ liar. They did nothing but use Saddam and 9/11 in the same sentence for months on end!
Please go away….soon.
March 20th, 2006 at 2:25 pmI think he believes in his own infallibility to much.
March 20th, 2006 at 2:25 pmI have yet another new term for Bush: King Backpedal!
March 20th, 2006 at 2:27 pmWonder what the citizens of New Orleans think about Dupya crowing that we’ve restored so much of the vital infrastructure in Iraq – power plants, water plants, rebuilt schools and roads, and all is just peachy (more lies). I guess ‘protectin the meriken people’ applies only to the ‘have mores’.
March 20th, 2006 at 2:28 pmMy television brust into flames! Bush’s pants on fire are a-blazing!
March 20th, 2006 at 2:34 pmHe knows the lies are in print, on tape, on video, or whatever.
March 20th, 2006 at 2:36 pmTHEY DO NOT CARE.
You see, there is no penalty for them when it comes to lying, about ANYTHING.
They lie whenever they want, about whatever they want, all the while knowing
they will never be held accountable.
Disgusting white collar criminals that should be treated as such.
Bush is for the war in Iraq like he is for motherhood.
March 20th, 2006 at 2:37 pmHe is about as good at both.
He’s for war, he’s for victory, hell, he’s for fiscal responsibility!
Hey George, I know you’re for prevention of STD, but when you do your country, have the decency to put a rubber on.
Hell, I’m for the complete end of disease and hunger: make me president. As Lewis Black said “I can watch TV and guess with the best of them.”
Wait…. Bush is coming out for apple pie!
I wonder if he will say something like ” it depends on your definition of is”
ROFL
March 20th, 2006 at 2:38 pmWhat does anyone expect from a liar. I guess he thinks American people are so dumb he can tell them anything and they will believe him. Too many news released and media coverage to lie about that even Cheney said it was Saddam and Bin Laden. I guess if people want to believe Bush’s lies he’ll just keep telling them. Notice how different the invasion aka war is viewed by Bush vs reality. Iraq former PM, Saudi, troops in Iraq, other world leaders and the Iraq people say there is a civil war.
March 20th, 2006 at 2:42 pmYet Bush/Cheney/Rummy say everything is going great and we have won the hearts and mine of the Iraq people. We are building up everything the hold country and they don’t have to pay us back. Our troops are dying everyday yet Bush/Cheney/Rummy don’t see it. If one of their family members were in Iraq maybe they would look a little closer but they would never put their family memebers in this invasion. Bush better build that H bomb in a hurry because he is putting us in the line of fire. Yes it might take 10 years to get Iraq in order so if my math is right. At 1 billion a day, 365 billion a year in 10 years the United State taxpayers would have paid $3,560,000,000,000 rememer Bush said we would pay and they don’t have to pay us back. So the United State will be broke and yes the GOP will blame Bill Clinton for all the problems while the crooks and liars live off our stolen money.
Freedom fries has become reading lies
March 20th, 2006 at 2:45 pmHere’s a pretty explicit link made by Bush himself. This is from the first debate with Kerry.
LEHRER: Mr. President, new question. Two minutes. Does the Iraq experience make it more likely or less likely that you would take the United States into another preemptive military action?
BUSH: I would hope I never have to. I understand how hard it is to commit troops. Never wanted to commit troops. When I was running — when we had the debate in 2000, never dreamt I’d be doing that.
But the enemy attacked us, Jim, and I have a solemn duty to protect the American people, to do everything I can to protect us.
I think that by speaking clearly and doing what we say and not sending mixed messages, it is less likely we’ll ever have to use troops.
March 20th, 2006 at 2:50 pmIf you parse the statements carefully, Bush never directly said that a link existed between Sadaam and 9/11. However if you read between the lines on the second statement. Bush was attempting to Link Sadaam to 9/11.
March 20th, 2006 at 2:51 pmNeat post santo any chance we can have it in english?
March 20th, 2006 at 2:54 pmAin’t it funny how Bush never said that al Queda and Iraq were linked, yet he chose to allows the nation to suffer under that misconception? That during the entire time the war drums for Iraq were beating, he never thought to say “Now, I’m not saying al Queda & Iraq are linked together,” even though we were fighting a war on terrorism and the terrorists who attacked us were in al Queda and he was trying to get support to attack Iraq? And in all the years since we invaded Iraq, not one has he ever tried to clarify that misconception that the American people have, and the media promoted? He must’ve been aware of that common misperception, because he doesn’t live in a bubble. He said so. Soooo, it’s kinda funny that he never corrected the American people on this misperception he had nothing to do with, even though it’s one of the main reasons America was so pro-war at first. Isn’t it funny? I mean…really, isn’t it?
March 20th, 2006 at 2:57 pmThank you Santo,
I think that #55 may need its own post. Current discussion is on Bush lying about him lying. I know that our government has condoned some nasty things all in the name of proteting us. 1984 anyone?
Slappy,
March 20th, 2006 at 3:03 pmamerica was pro-war when Rumsfeld stood there and said we would be in and out in 3 months and cheap oil would flow. Now that we realize we have been had by the snake oil salesman we are not so happy.
People,
If that quote from Bush is not strong enough evidence for you, try this one.
White House
June 17, 2004
President Discusses Economy, Iraq in Cabinet Meeting
Remarks by the President After Meeting with His Cabinet
The Cabinet Room
There is no if ands or buts about it. GEORGE BUSH LINKED SADDAM AND AL QAEDA. PERIOD.
March 20th, 2006 at 3:03 pmWell Mr Commander-in-Chief war president, somebody told these people that Saddam was responsible for 9-11 and since you are the Commander-in-chief that means you are accountable for it…
March 20th, 2006 at 3:04 pmCheney lied again just yesterday on CBS.
March 20th, 2006 at 3:04 pmHe clearly stated Iraq had a 100 brigades ready for action.
My Mother always said, ‘the trouble with lying is you have to
remember everly lie.’
Bush & company are now seeing this phenom with themselves.
They’ve told soooo may lies, they can’t remember which lie to lie about.
What nonsense. The recently translated Iraqi government files show what we knew all along that Saddam and the Islamofasctist headchopper were working together. Of course they were working together, why not?
Did Saddam know about 9-11? My guess he new something was afoot but it doesn’t really matter now does it? It’s too late. We’re there. We’re killing headchopper and teaching other headchoppers to be nice people. Pretty soon we’re going to use our permanent bases to attack Iran…it’ll be great…more dead headchoppers and finally some payback for that Jimmy Carter hostage fiasco.
Life is good and you losers are missing out. Too bad.
Hey..by the way. I didn’t see any of you losers at the HUMONGOUS ANTI WAR RALLY THIS WEEKEND. Maybe it was because there were sooooo many people there protesting the war? HA!
What a bunch of losers! In case you missed the bazillion man mass protest here are some highlights. The Republicans ought to use this next election.
GLOBAL DAY OF ACTION RALLY, SAN FRANCISCO, MARCH 18, 2006
On March 18, 2006, activist groups around the world held protests to mark the third anniversary of the invasion of Iraq. San Francisco was no exception: the communist anti-war group ANSWER planned to stage a large rally and march through the city, in opposition to the war and other American policies.
The problem is, other groups also planned additional anti-war and anti-authoritarian events in San Francisco (and nearby) on March 18. And all the events were conflicting with each other. Something obviously had gone terribly awry in the progressive community. In the weeks leading up to the big day, the different factions began bickering with each other.
The most glaring scheduling snafu involved the Anarchist Bookfair, which was being held on the other side of San Francisco from the ANSWER march, but on the same day at the exact same time. Seeing as the anarchist event and the anti-war event both drew on the same pool of potential attendees, accusations began to fly that each event was going to hurt attendance at the rival event.
Arguments broke out in public forums (such as this thread on the Indybay progressive site) over which side was to blame. The anarchists accused ANSWER of being Stalinists who use bullying tactics (which is true), while ANSWER accused the anarchists of being disorganized poseurs with no clue how to start a real revolution (which is also true). (The squabbling continued even after the events were over.)
Meanwhile, a larger (and perhaps more significant) rift occurred between ANSWER and United For Peace and Justice. UFPJ, the other major anti-war organizing group, very publicly announced its intention to stop cooperating with ANSWER because of ANSWER’s extremist stance.
As a result, independent and rival leftist organizations sponsored their own rallies in various cities in the San Francisco Bay Area — events which were intentionally promoted to be more laidback and palatable to suburbanites.
http://www.zombietime.com/global_day_of_action_march_18_2006/
March 20th, 2006 at 3:06 pmIf forty million people march into Washington to physically drag these assholes out into the street will they kill us all?
March 20th, 2006 at 3:08 pmBush Claims He Never Tied Saddam to 9/11…
Mr. Bush, just because you’re an idiot with short-term memory problems doesn’t mean we are….
March 20th, 2006 at 3:08 pmI-RIGHT-I
Post some facts (read: links to non-partisan sites) that show that Iraq, specifically Saddam has ties to terrorists, specifically al Qaeda or STFU.
March 20th, 2006 at 3:11 pmHere’s just one snapshot of Bush describing a link between Iraq and 9-11 & Al Qaeda:
“
March 20th, 2006 at 3:13 pmUh IRI,
those “recently translated Iraqi government files” don’t actually show the information you are claiming. and furthermore show that Sadaam had refused meetings with Al -Quadia agents.
As for the statement “of course their working together” ummm well Sadaam was secular kind of guy and Bin Laden clearly is not. Just because their both muslim middle easterners, does not mean they liked each other. For more reference on schism’s between middle eastern groups see , sunni, shiite, arab, persian, and Kurd.
As for the clusterfuck in San Francisco, I am unsure what that has to do with Bush lying again. Aren’t you bothered that their is clear evidence of Bush lying? After all you were ready to impeach clinton for far less.
March 20th, 2006 at 3:14 pm“What nonsense. The recently translated Iraqi government files show what we knew all along that Saddam and the Islamofasctist headchopper were working together. MizzWrong”
Oh please, this is an outright lie, you’re as retarded as a bag of rocks.
“Hey..by the way. I didn’t see any of you losers at the HUMONGOUS ANTI WAR RALLY THIS WEEKEND. Maybe it was because there were sooooo many people there protesting the war? HA! MizzWrong”
You mean like the national PRO-WAR Republican rally that could only must 400 people nationwide? Hehe, you’re such an idiot.
“Pretty soon we’re going to use our permanent bases to attack Iran…it’ll be great…more dead headchoppers and finally some payback for that Jimmy Carter hostage fiasco. MizzWrong”
Don’t you mean the republican fiasco? If they hadn’t overthrown a democracy in order to install a republican friendly DICTATOR (the shah), and permitted the persecution and torture of vast number of Iranians, they might not have taken our embassy.
Under every rotten rock is a corpse of a republican failure – Iran is just another, and apparently you’re one of their biggest corpses.
And hey MizzWrong, did you hear about the new longterm study that shows whiney insecure children grow up to be conservative? It was just published – interesting reading, it explains a lot about you and Mighty Moron. You’re still whiney you know.
March 20th, 2006 at 3:14 pmOMG – the spin zone never quits. This is the old repugnik trick of “you misunderstood/misinterpreted what I said”
How many times can they spin it and sell it?
March 20th, 2006 at 3:14 pmThanks for catching this — very interesting!!
March 20th, 2006 at 3:27 pmHis public rhetoric was carefully constructed to avoid this, but the authorization letter for the war required that he put it in. This is why John Dean believes that his signing and sending of the authorization letter constitutes an impeachable offense. I agree.
March 20th, 2006 at 3:27 pm#7 suprised his pants aren’t on fire
March 20th, 2006 at 3:38 pmComment by Buy European
I think his tailor (the one who makes pockets in the inside upper back lining for transmitters) makes them out of asbestos.
Fabricated Links? A CIA report casts new doubt on links between Iraq and Al Qaeda. 26 Oct 2005 “A secret draft CIA report raises new questions about a principal argument used by the Bush administration to justify the war in Iraq: the claim that Saddam Hussein was ‘harboring’ notorious terror leader Abu Mussab al-Zarqawi prior to the American invasion… An updated CIA re-examination of the issue recently concluded that Saddam’s regime may not have given Zarqawi ’safe haven’ after all.”
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9831216/site/newsweek
http://levin.senate.gov/newsroom/release.cfm?id=236440
March 20th, 2006 at 3:39 pmBut the funny thing is, the AUMF begins with:
So this means Bush forgot his own authorization? Of did I miss something here?
March 20th, 2006 at 3:42 pmCaption contest: STFU you major league asshole… Oh shit, is this thing on?
March 20th, 2006 at 3:44 pmLOL
March 20th, 2006 at 3:56 pmOn the matter of Saudi Arabia’s attacks on American civilians on September 11, 2001, the Administration avoided the name “Saudi Arabia’ like the plague, instead opting for the incessant use of the names “al Qaeda” and “terrorists” in place of “Saudi Arabia”.
And while I’m waiting for a transcript of the President’s speech in Cleveland today, I’m anticipating how many times he will make a reference to “al Qaeda in Iraq” and “terrorists in Iraq”.
As a matter of fact, these days when you listen to the President or any other spokesperson for the Administration on this matter, that’s almost all they say about why we’re in Iraq: Because of “al Qaeda” there, and “terrorists” there.
Which again, is almost all they had to say about Saudi Arabia’s attacks on American civilians on September 11, 2001: “al Qaeda” and “terrorists”.
You do the math.
March 20th, 2006 at 3:59 pmAnd while I think my posts are never profane, or even insulting (much), I’m sometimes surprised (and a little annoyed) to see one removed, and I wonder why, sometimes.
On the thread to the item about the Iraq ‘war’ timeline (it’s not a ‘war’, it’s an ‘invasion’ and an ‘occupation’); an item which invited readers to post any additional events or quotes that the item may have neglected, someone posted that they should add the “December 21, 2004 rocket attack on a GI mess tent in Mosul that killed 22 U.S. Troops”…
…and I felt compelled to post that that was a lie; that no such rocket (or mortar) was the cause of that attack that took the lives of 22 U.S. Troops in that mess tent; that it was a suicide bomber who had entered the mess tent and blew himself up; that he was not an Iraqi, but a Saudi; that not only was he in Iraq on a Saudi diplomatic passport, but it was credentials such as that that enabled him to get onto the Army Post, and into the mess tent; and he had such credentials because he was the son of a Saudi Arabian Ambassador, in addition to being a cousin to three of the September 11, 2001 hijackers; and his name was Ahmed al-Ghamdi.
And so I thought I’d report the truth about it here, and see if it gets removed, again.
March 20th, 2006 at 3:59 pmspudge and angel, you just spoiled troll CDS ‘S whole day….thanks to you both.
March 20th, 2006 at 4:00 pmIn the UK we have just watched despatches an hour long program looking into Iraqs 23 Bn dollars missing , we just had to watch babies dying in hospitals cause you guys stole their money and reported it was going into hospitals , water , sewage, and of course haliburton
we just watched , kids dying from malaria from mosquitos breeding in sewage work spills , kids dying from diarrhea from unclean water, we just watched kids dying from no vitamin K at births, theres nothing in any of their hospitals ventilators 10 years old from the good old days of saddam
what American has done to Iraq will never ever be forgotten by everybody in Europe and the world from the age of 16 till they die
We will never forgive you ..mass murdering thiefs
I have not bought an American product for three years now or will I ever buy one, I even use UK Wheat in bread as to not buy American super wheat , I can tell you now I WILL NEVER EVER BUY ANYTHING AMERICAN FIOR THE REST OF MY LIFE
March 20th, 2006 at 4:10 pmBush has a mind like a steel trap.
RUSTED SHUT.
March 20th, 2006 at 4:17 pmBush still retains his churlish charm to deceive and confuse those willing to be duped. Cleveland today was the prime example. Bush claimed that the world agreed with him that Saddam had WMDs. That is erroneous. The major European nations disagreed, weapons inspectors disagreed, many in the intelligence community disagreed and the Niger yellow cake deal was a lie. It took a big lie by Colin Powell to convince the UN. Saddam was begging the world about two weeks prior to the invasion to come to Iraq and search every inch of the country to look for WMDs he said he did not have. Bush said no. Bush did mention Afghanistan, but said nothing of the growth of the Taliban. Neither did he mention that the so-called war is costing$200,000,000 per day, $6,000,000,000 per month, off budget, with a burgeoning deficit. He spoke positively of his policy in Iraq. Reports coming from the unfortunate country tell of pervasive destruction, killings/murders, lack of public utilities and upheaval bordering on civil war.
March 20th, 2006 at 4:17 pm#83 er Nova – that’s more like $9.8 billion a month, not $6 billion. And correct me if I am wrong this number is still not being counted as part of the deficit?
March 20th, 2006 at 4:36 pm[...] Say what?! From ThinkProgress: In fact, Bush justified the war against Iraq by directly linking it to 9/11: The use of armed forces against Iraq 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 person who planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001. [Bush’s Letter to Congress, 3/21/03] [emphasis mine] [...]
March 20th, 2006 at 4:43 pmYep, president dickhead, you and your gang of lying, manipulating cohorts, are going to have a hell of a time with karma. You and your mushroom cloud, Condi with “smoke and mirrors” and Colin with his vials and mobile labs.
We remember…and you can’t spin your way out of this shit.
March 20th, 2006 at 4:50 pmThe Road To GuantanamoFilm to watch
March 20th, 2006 at 4:52 pmLook at King George on your two pictures today. He is pissed, getting a good grill in Cleveland I guess. Yet another stupid blunder, why would wander into a traditional democratic town to drum-up support for the Iraq debacle. What an idiot.
March 20th, 2006 at 4:55 pmTerry: I will sadly defer to you numbers. Bush spends money so fast its “hard work” to keep up.
March 20th, 2006 at 4:55 pmI-RIGHT-I
the minute you see this guys posts dont even bother reading them
he still suffers from attention seeking disorder
March 20th, 2006 at 5:03 pm…but it wasn’t a lie when Clinton linked Iraq and Al Qaeda and bombed al Shifa. But it wasn’t a lie when Tim Russert was pushing the Salman Pak Al Qaeda connection on MTP…but, but, but it’s lying when you read “between the lines” of a Bush letter.
March 20th, 2006 at 5:11 pmIf Dumbya Bush were Pinocchio, his nose would already be circling the globe once–perhaps twice. Same with Cheney. These guys almost make Tricky Dick Nixon look like an honest man.
March 20th, 2006 at 5:34 pm91- Still peddling that shit? Wow.
March 20th, 2006 at 5:40 pmThis b*st*rd in chief is truly beyond belief (literally and figuratively!). I’ve never known of anyone in political life takes lying to the extreme he does. Doesn’t he even give a damn that everyone now knows that he lies about everything? Without a doubt he makes Tricky Dick look like an amateur.
March 20th, 2006 at 5:44 pmRed and Karly Pyoub,
No reading between the lines needed. From post number 58 (link there to WhiteHouse.gov):
March 20th, 2006 at 5:50 pm
Besides clinton was smart enough not to invade Iraq.
March 20th, 2006 at 5:59 pmSpudgeboy
“For example, Iraqi intelligence officers met with bin Laden, the head of al Qaeda, in the Sudan.”
That was Clinton’s intelligence, too. Like I said…al Shifa…remember?…Clinton’s Iraq al Qaeda link.
Now go back to playing your stupid video games.
March 20th, 2006 at 6:35 pm“Now my wife and I have to consider if we are still going to have kids, after all they start off owing the government 30,000 dollars.”
March 20th, 2006 at 6:48 pmBut it must make you feel better that all of the rich upperclass elite owe the same amount of money, even after their tax cuts.
First time post. Check this out.Check out who sent the letter at the bottom.. I’m too discusted to comment after watching Bush answer questions today.A MUST READ!The Project for the New American Century ; Letter to Clinton,January 26, 1998
The Honorable William J. Clinton
President of the United States
Washington, DC
January 26, 1998
Dear Mr. President, We are writing you because we are convinced that current American policy toward Iraq is not succeeding, and that we may soon face a threat in the Middle East more serious than any we have known since the end of the Cold War. In your upcoming State of the Union Address, you have an opportunity to chart a clear and determined course for meeting this threat. We urge you to seize that opportunity, and to enunciate a new strategy that would secure the interests of the U.S. and our friends and allies around the world. That strategy should aim, above all, at the removal of Saddam Hussein’s regime from power. We stand ready to offer our full support in this difficult but necessary endeavor. more…..
March 20th, 2006 at 6:50 pmRed and Karly Pyoub,
What does Clinton have to do with your comment about reading between the lines and my retort? Nothing.
Can’t do that at work nimrod.
Now go back to sticking your thumb up your ass.
March 20th, 2006 at 6:51 pm“misperception”?
March 20th, 2006 at 6:57 pmUse this LINK
March 20th, 2006 at 7:58 pmto view the RoiNews24 torture article in English.
Lately, when I have witnessed yet another GWB “Festival Of Fibs”, I am reminded of Charles Durning. That song he sang in “The best little whorehouse in Texas”. He plays the role of the “Governor” “And, ooooh, I love to do a little side step, now you see me , now you don’t, I’m come and gone. And ooooh, I like to sneak around the wide step, do a little dance, and lead the people on!” But Bush seriously lacks the charm required to pull it off. OH!!- that picture of him is SO great!! He looks really “pissy”, doesn’t he? LOVE IT!!
March 20th, 2006 at 8:01 pmThere was/is no lie.
Nowhere has Bush EVER linked 9/11 and Iraq. You are reading into what you want to see.
All Leftists are cowards and traitors to America
sssrats2lycos.com
March 20th, 2006 at 8:24 pmRealizing that there are more than two more years of this nonsense to go until we can get this idiot out of office sort of makes me want to cry, but mostly it enrages me. I confidently believe that if I ever met W, I would give him a very large piece of my mind. And by that I mean probably punching him in the nose.
March 20th, 2006 at 8:28 pmAz Joe,
Read post number 58. Straight from the White House web site, you will find a transcript of a press conference in which Bush said:
Sorry, but you are wrong and everytime you state that Bush didn’t tie them together, you are lying as well.
March 20th, 2006 at 8:56 pmAz Joe,
The fact that Bush uses the term “I keep insisting” is because he did it over and over and over.
March 20th, 2006 at 8:57 pm# 59 Spudge_Boy… Bingo!!!
March 20th, 2006 at 9:01 pmThere WAS contact between Iraq and Al Qaeda. No one has ever claimed that Iraq and 9/11 were linked. You are seeing what you want to see and you are traitors to America. Get out of my country you worthless yellow cunts.
March 20th, 2006 at 9:38 pm“Presidential prevarication”~~Craig Crawford on Keith Olbermann, 3/20/06
March 20th, 2006 at 9:39 pmOlberman is gay and hates Bush for his pro-family values. Olberman was in on the ridiculous “the vote was stolen in ‘04″ bullshit too. He’s an idiot. His take is all about a wounded homo angry at Bush. I imagine most of you take it up the ass ya yellow fuckin’ cunt traitors.
How fuckin’ stupid are you asshole traitors? LOl!
March 20th, 2006 at 9:52 pmAz Joe,
So instead of posting a link to some proof, you are going to go with the tired used up old out of date “you are traitors” arguement. Good job.
Go back to your high school debate class.
March 20th, 2006 at 9:58 pmOLBERMAN IS GAY YOU IDIOTS. THAT IS WHY HE HATES BUSH. HE WANTS TO BE ABLE TO SODOMIZE LITTLE BOYS AT WILL AND BUSH WON’T LET HIM DO THAT.
WHY ELSE DO YOU THINK THE GUY IS 47, HAS NO KIDS AND HAS NEVER BEEN MARRIED? HE QUEER AND HAS A RADICAL GAY AGENDA TO PUSH!
LOL!
March 20th, 2006 at 10:00 pmSpudgehead
March 20th, 2006 at 10:01 pmYOU are the ones claiming he lied. He didn’t and you can’t prove he did. You are the liars and you are traitors.
I have proved it already.
Boy, you deteriorated into a worthless bag of shit within a couple of minutes didn’t you?
March 20th, 2006 at 10:03 pmYou are a comic master. Very witty. WHat does that mean?
March 20th, 2006 at 10:04 pmYou haven’t proved anything except that you were a traitor long before Bush came to office.
You need to step back boy. I don’t like traitors at all.
March 20th, 2006 at 10:16 pm“Any man who says he is an American, but something else also, isn’t an American at all. We have room for but one flag, the American flag… We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language… and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the American people.” —Theodore Roosevelt
March 20th, 2006 at 10:18 pm#119 – Ax Joe,
March 20th, 2006 at 10:33 pmBut W’s loyalty is to the American Corporation – the people be damned.
“Az Joe” sez:
and:
OIC. Bob Boudelang has been forced to come up with a new nonde plume and [a]vocation…. Pleased to meet you, Bo… — um, sorry, “Az Joe”….
Cheers,
March 20th, 2006 at 10:50 pm#119 – Ax Joe,
But W’s loyalty is to the American Corporation – the people be damned.
Comment by WaltTheMan — March 20, 2006 @ 10:33 pm
Walt and to his Saudi prince butt buddies he LOVES holding hands with every time they come to visit Crawford for the weekends Jeff Gannon is out of town.
March 20th, 2006 at 10:52 pmBefore George W. Bush was in office, I fought in Desert Storm under George H. W. Bush.
What do you think you can do to me? Type faster or BIGGER at me? Ha. Punk.
March 20th, 2006 at 10:57 pmBTW Az Joe, which branch of the military did you say you are/were in?
4/5 Field Artillery 1st Infantry Division Fort Riley, Kansas here. Walt, Clif? Does this guy sound like Marine or Army to you guys?
Or just a redneck from Texas?
March 20th, 2006 at 11:01 pmWhat a dick. “direct connection”
March 20th, 2006 at 11:05 pmOLBERMAN IS GAY YOU IDIOTS. THAT IS WHY HE HATES BUSH. HE WANTS TO BE ABLE TO SODOMIZE LITTLE BOYS AT WILL AND BUSH WON’T LET HIM DO THAT.
WHY ELSE DO YOU THINK THE GUY IS 47, HAS NO KIDS AND HAS NEVER BEEN MARRIED? HE QUEER AND HAS A RADICAL GAY AGENDA TO PUSH!
LOL!
Comment by Az Joe —
To homophobic trolks
I don’t know about Olberman; I, in fact, have never watched his program because I am overseas a lot. But what do you have to say about Jeff Gannon/James Guckert, the gay hooker, also 47, never married with no kids, who, according to Secret Service records, was visiting the White House even before he got a job as a “reporter” for a now discredited Texas-based GOP website? It would seem to me that someone in the White House is actually quite fond of gays.
March 20th, 2006 at 11:17 pmSpudge if he was either he sounds like a timmy McVeigh clone, same anger, same lack of ability to process facts that contridict his illusions of the world….
March 20th, 2006 at 11:32 pm
March 20th, 2006 at 11:52 pmBush was born a LIAR, so do not expect him to tell the truth about anything! Pathological lying is a serious brain disease and George has a bad case of it > PERIOD.
March 21st, 2006 at 12:08 amWell then… Az Joe is an exciteable little thing, isn’t he? And foul-fingered to boot! It must be time for his bedtime medication.
I can’t wait for someone to come up with the audio of Bush saying, over and over, “Saddam Hussein”, “9/11″ “Iraq”, “Al-Queda”. I never thought I would say THAT! :0
March 21st, 2006 at 12:52 amBush has been a narcissist from an early age and he will always be one, the small percent of people in this country that support this evil are hurting themselves by being his ’supply sources’. Everyone heard the lie, heard his BUZZ WORDS, quit insulting America’s intelligence anymore, Mr. President, quit defiling our troops with your narcissism.
March 21st, 2006 at 12:54 amNo one argues today about three facts that are known to everyone; we will list them, in order to remind everyone:
First, for over seven years the United States has been occupying the lands of Islam in the holiest of places, the Arabian Peninsula, plundering its riches, dictating to its rulers, humiliating its people, terrorizing its neighbors, and turning its bases in the Peninsula into a spearhead through which to fight the neighboring Muslim peoples.
If some people have in the past argued about the fact of the occupation, all the people of the Peninsula have now acknowledged it. The best proof of this is the Americans’ continuing aggression against the Iraqi people using the Peninsula as a staging post, even though all its rulers are against their territories being used to that end, but they are helpless.
Second, despite the great devastation inflicted on the Iraqi people by the crusader-Zionist alliance, and despite the huge number of those killed, which has exceeded 1 million… despite all this, the Americans are once against trying to repeat the horrific massacres, as though they are not content with the protracted blockade imposed after the ferocious war or the fragmentation and devastation.
So here they come to annihilate what is left of this people and to humiliate their Muslim neighbors.
Third, if the Americans’ aims behind these wars are religious and economic, the aim is also to serve the Jews’ petty state and divert attention from its occupation of Jerusalem and murder of Muslims there. The best proof of this is their eagerness to destroy Iraq, the strongest neighboring Arab state, and their endeavor to fragment all the states of the region such as Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and Sudan into paper statelets and through their disunion and weakness to guarantee Israel’s survival and the continuation of the brutal crusade occupation of the Peninsula.
March 21st, 2006 at 1:27 amIraq News 1999, more Iraq-AQ intelligence from yours truely, Bill Clinton:
…given the proximity of Iraq’s angry suspension of UNSCOM
inspections, Aug 5, and the simultaneous terrorist assaults on the two
US embassies, Aug 7, it would seem that in the Aug 20 strikes, the US,
hit two targets–Osama bin Ladin, in Afghanistan, and Iraq, in Sudan,
even as the White House has tried to blur that, with the claim that bin
Ladin was linked to the al-Shifa plant. The White House did something
similar in June, 1993, in that, when it struck Iraqi intelligence
headquarters then, it did not clearly and fully explain the several
reasons for the attack.
On the Jim Lehrer News Hour, Jan 21, 1998, over a year ago, as the
March 21st, 2006 at 1:40 amsecond Iraq crisis began, Clinton, warning of the danger Iraq posed,
said, “Think how many can be killed by just a tiny bit of anthrax, and
think about how it’s not just that Saddam Hussein might put it on a Scud
missile, an anthrax head, and send it on to some city he wants to
destroy. Think about all the other terrorists and other bad actors who
could just parade through Baghdad and pick up their stores. . . . This
is a serious thing with me, this is a very serious thing. You imagine
the capacity of these tiny amounts of biological agents to cause great
harm; it’s something we need to get after.”
Why would OBL defend Iraq if there wasn’t a relationship?
On Dec 26, 1998 as AP reported, Al Sharq Al Awsat published an interview
March 21st, 2006 at 1:46 amwith bin Ladin in which he said, “‘The British and the American people
loudly declared their support for their leaders’ decision to attack
Iraq. ‘ . . . This made it ‘the duty of Muslims to confront, fight and
kill’ Britons and Americans.”
1998 wasn’t that long ago, but we remember…
On Dec 28, 1998 the Italian paper, Corriere della Sera, reported
March 21st, 2006 at 1:49 am“Saddam Husayn and Osama Bin Ladin have sealed a pact. Faruq Hijazi,
the former director of the Iraqi secret services and now the country’s
ambassador to Turkey, held a secret meeting with the extremist leader on
21 December. . . . Hijazi reiterated Iraq’s amenability to offering
shelter to Osama and to his mujahedin, ‘You will always be a welcome
guest. . . We cannot forget our debt of gratitude. This was a reference
to the establishment last February of the ‘International Islamic Front
against the Crusaders and the Jews,’ announced by Osama in the midst of
one of the periodic crises between Iraq and the United Nations. . . The
same ritual was reenacted during the most recent crisis. The day after
the air strikes, Osama called an international news conference and
issued a new statement, including threats that neither Washington nor
London are taking lightly”
#133 Nice try at the slight of brain move but it PROVES nothing…no hard facts, just quotes out of context.
I’ll bet you were one of the morons who bought the Jerry Falwell tape about all of Clinton’s “crimes” and were madder at Clinton for not having committed them then at Falwell for lying about it.
March 21st, 2006 at 1:50 am[...] [...]
March 21st, 2006 at 2:00 am[...] [...]
March 21st, 2006 at 2:00 amObermann was so awesome tonight.
Bush:
Olbermann:
Bush [from SOTU]:
Olbermann:
March 21st, 2006 at 2:50 am
Red and Karly Pyoub,
You sound like a whacko tarot card reader. Where did you learn to ’speculate’, the tinfoil hat convention?
And a speculative article from a newspaper isn’t evidence, it’s ‘hearsay’. You sound like you’ve gone to Mighty Aphrodite Republican troll and fake attorney’s school of nonsense law.
And as for Bin Laden defending Iraq, any attack against any ‘muslim’ land was going to fuel Al Queda, it’s why many in the CIA and Pentagon recommended against attacking Iraq without true and real cause.
All you’ve done is pointed out what a miserable failure Bush was for not recognizing Iraq would fuel anti-american sentiment. You’re obviously as ‘brilliant’ as the gas gump jockey in chief we now have in the whitehouse. Most people always said he’d be more appropriately working pumping gas, little did they know how close to home that career path would come thanks to his misguided ‘messiah’ complex.
March 21st, 2006 at 3:08 amI could be wrong here, but I am thinking not. A “translation”, perhaps? “Red and Karly Pyoub”= a red and “curly, pube”. I don’t know, I do alot of word puzzles. Just popped into my head.
March 21st, 2006 at 3:28 am#140 again,
On Dec 26, 1998 as AP reported, Al Sharq Al Awsat published an interview
with bin Ladin in which he said, “‘The British and the American people
loudly declared their support for their leaders’ decision to attack
Iraq. ‘
Pay attention sweet tits, Clinton was attacking Iraq in 1998 not Bush. Clinton attacked Sudan, Afghanistan and Iraq in Aug 1998…because of the relationship between the three.
March 21st, 2006 at 3:52 am
March 21st, 2006 at 6:01 amOlberman is watched by nothing but barking leftist moonbats. The guy is whacko and has the lowest ratings on prime time cable. Nobody but you idiots watch the traitor.
“OH MY GOD…BUSH SAID SADDAM AND HE SAID 9/11…HE’S TRYING TO LINK THEM AHHHHHHHHHH!!!!”
“HE ALSO SAID SALT AND THEN HE SAID PEPPER AND LATER SAID 9/11 HE’S TRYING TO LINK SALT AND PEPPER AND 9/11″ AHHHHH!!!!!”
YOU FUCKIN’YELLOW COWARD TRAITOR FOOLS!
March 21st, 2006 at 6:36 amI guess that must have been his double who made those claims at the State of the Union speech in 2002. Oh and for Az Joe’s comment #144, you are such a fool not to recognize truth when you see it. Why don’t you enlist, go to Iraq and get your Azz shot off and then maybe you’ll be happy. Every media outlet on the planet except Fox has concluded that they used weapons of mass deception, tried to link Iraq to 9-11 to get re-elected, claimed we would be welcomed a liberators and the war was over when the President landed on the Aircraft Carrier. And by the way over 2000 US troops have been killed since the famous Carrior landing, go tell their families they were welcomed as liberators.
It’s fools like you that got us into this mess in the first place, because you were stupid enough to vote for the Republicans. Joe I’m a veteran and I don’t have a thing against war. If you had ever served a day in your life, you’d know that Soldiers aren’t eager to go to war, especially when they are lied to about he real reasons for going. You obviously didn’t see the poll of our troop in Iraq, in which 46 percent didn’t know what their mission was and 70 percent want to come home. Don’t get so drunk on the kool aid that you loose your ability to think for yourself. Open your eyes, step outside the Republican talking points and see for yourself what’s really going on.
If you were to stop and research things for yourself and not listen to Fox news you’d see things as they really are. I watch Fox News on a daily basis, but I’m not stupid enough to believe every word they say. I’d say about a third of what they say is true the rest is just Republican spin. I am currently running a Campaign for a Republican Candidate although I’m a Democrat. I don’t listen to or work for one party, only fools think in absolutes. No one party has a monopoly on truth and they are both in the business of spreading bull to get elected, don’t you know that Joe. Wake up man, they’ve got you in the matrix so deep you can’t think for yourself anymore.
March 21st, 2006 at 7:10 am[...] Think Progress has the goods: Bush, this afternoon: First, just if I might correct a misperception, I don’t think we ever said – at least I know I didn’t say that there was a direct connection between September the 11th and Saddam Hussein. In fact, Bush justified the war against Iraq by directly linking it to 9/11: The use of armed forces against Iraq 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 person who planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001. [Bush’s Letter to Congress, 3/21/03] [...]
March 21st, 2006 at 7:16 amIf the dolt suggests that he did not make a connection between Iraq, terrorism and Al quaida, then there is no reason to fight this meaningless war. Bring the troops home, lets repay Red China for the loans since our treasury is loaded with bucks. It is odd, however, that millions of dolt followers believe that he made that connection and are willing to attend gatherings to support the dolt in fighting the so-call war. JoAz is either neurotic or psychotic. A neurotic believes that 2+2=5, a psychotic knows that 2+2=4, but he is damn mad about it. If Ignorance is bliss, ‘Tis folly to be wise best fits his rants.
March 21st, 2006 at 8:45 amI find it fascinating how few “news sources” have bothered to mention this little fact in today’s editions.
Why aren’t we holding this administration’s feet to fire about these lies?
Where are the Democrats and Republicans, who want to be President in 2008, not jumping all over this?
March 21st, 2006 at 9:48 am[...] Bush Claims He Never Linked Saddam to 9/11 by Ryan @ 9:13 am. Filed under GWB, GOP ThinkProgress: Bush, this afternoon: First, just if I might correct a misperception, I don’t think we ever said – at least I know I didn’t say that there was a direct connection between September the 11th and Saddam Hussein. [...]
March 21st, 2006 at 10:12 amThe trolls don’t like that Olbermann points to the truth on his program, so they attack him personally. Who cares about his private life – does it affect you and me? It’s the old ad hominem attack, irrelevant and pointless.
March 21st, 2006 at 10:22 amHowever, the homophobes on the right get all fidgety with regard to sexuality, what do they think of their own – obviously, Gannon, closeted Mehlman, Drier, et al?
And just WHO was Gannon visiting at the White House?
AZ Joe sounds kinda afraid.
March 21st, 2006 at 11:19 amI think he is saying that the money paid to suicide bombers in Palistine constituted support for the terrorists. I’m not sure tho because my class hasn’t got to “nuance” yet.
March 21st, 2006 at 1:41 pmI’m sorry, but I didn’t see anywhere in that statement where he said Iraq had anything to do with 9/11. Seems quite a stretch you are making here.
March 21st, 2006 at 1:46 pm[...] First up, you have Dubya claiming that he never made a connection between Saddam Hussein and 9/11. That’s so startlingly untrue that it causes me to blurt out laughing. There have been literally dozens of recorded quotes by not only him but the majority of his administration, members of congress, and quite possibly members of the White House kitchen who’ve made that connection. Now he has the audacity to say that it never happened? I realize that Dubya thinks Americans are stupid people but he can’t really expect people to swallow that one, does he? [...]
March 21st, 2006 at 2:52 pmUndersecretary of State Thomas Pickering, August 25 1998 on the al Shifa-al Qaeda-Iraq connection:
Q: Ambassador Pickering, do you know of any connection between the so-called pharmaceutical plant in Khartoum and the Iraqi government in regard to production of precursors of VX?
PICKERING: Yeah, I would like to consult my notes just to be sure that what I have to say is stated clearly and correctly. We see evidence that we think is quite clear on contacts between Sudan and Iraq. In fact, al Shifa officials, early in the company’s history, we believe were in touch with Iraqi individuals associated with Iraq’s VX program.
Yes, it was the Clinton administration connecting the dots.
March 21st, 2006 at 4:03 pmOh, we have another Clinton official “lying” about the Iraq-Sudan-Al Qaeda connection.
Ambassador Bill Richardson, in an appearance on CNN’s “Late Edition with Wolf Blitzer,” on August 30, 1998.
“We know for a fact, physical evidence, soil samples of VX precursor–chemical precursor at the site,” said Richardson. “Secondly, Wolf, direct evidence of ties between Osama bin Laden and the Military Industrial Corporation–the al Shifa factory was part of that. This is an operation–a collection of buildings that does a lot of this dirty munitions stuff. And, thirdly, there is no evidence that this precursor has a commercial application. So, you combine that with Sudan support for terrorism, their connections with Iraq on VX, and you combine that, also, with the chemical precursor issue, and Sudan’s leadership support for Osama bin Laden, and you’ve got a pretty clear cut case.”
March 21st, 2006 at 4:05 pmWas Joe Lieberman lying?
In an appearance in Decmeber 2003 on MSNBC’s “Hardball with Chris Matthews.
“I want to be real clear about the connection with terrorists. I’ve seen a lot of evidence on this. There are extensive contacts between Saddam Hussein’s government and al Qaeda and other terrorist groups. I never could reach the conclusion that [Saddam] was part of September 11. Don’t get me wrong about that. But there was so much smoke there that it made me worry. And you know, some people say with a great facility, al Qaeda and Saddam could never get together. He is secular and they’re theological. But there’s something that tied them together. It’s their hatred of us.”
March 21st, 2006 at 4:10 pmRichardson and Lieberman were deliberately misinformed, disinformed and selectively informed. We all know that the inner circle in the White House is privy to information that is not available to everyone — they trust that the White House is telling them the truth. How naive to even trust this White House for the correct time of day!
March 21st, 2006 at 5:12 pmMOONBATS!
YOU LOST THE ELECTIONS IN ‘00, ‘02, ‘04.
BUSH IS GOING TO REAM YOUR ASSES ONCE AGAIN IN ‘06, BUT SINCE YOU LIKE IT UP THE ASS THAT SHOULD BE FUN FOR YOU AGAIN.
YOU LOST AND THAT IS ALL THAT ANYTHING YOU SAY IS ALL ABOUT.
YOU ARE BORN TRAITORS, YOUR FATHERS AND MOTHER WERE LEFTIST TRAITORS.
GET OUT OF MY COUNTRY YOU UNDESERVING OF FREEDOM COCKSUKERS
March 21st, 2006 at 5:17 pmMarie,
March 21st, 2006 at 5:21 pmAre you saying that Richardson, Clinton’s ambassador to the U.N. and Thomas Pickering were deliberately misinformed by the White House? You know that would be the Clinton White House since Bush wasn’t president yet in 1998.
Leftist traitors!
YOU SUPPORT THE SCUM THAT KIDNAPS WOMEN AND CUTS THEIR HEADS OFF. YOU SUPPORT THE SCUM THAT INDISCRIMINETLY TARGETS CHILDREN!
YOU ARE EITHER WITH BUSH AND AMERICA OR YOU ARE A TRAITOR TO AMERICA AND A TERROIST SYMPATHIZER
YOU FUCKING YELLOW SCUM
March 21st, 2006 at 5:31 pmRichard Clarke writes in his book, Against All Enemies: Inside America’s War on Terror about the Iraqi VX found at al Shifa by the CIA:
EMPTA is a compound that had been used as a prime ingredient in Iraqi nerve gas. It had no other known use, nor had any other nation employed EMPTA to our knowledge for any purpose.
March 21st, 2006 at 5:37 pmOH MY GOD IS THERE AN UGLIER CUNT THAN CINDY SHEEHAN?!
YOUO COULD NOT BEAT A WOMAN ENOUGH TO MAKE HER THAT UGLY!
WHY DO LEFTIST MALES LIKE TO TAKE COCK UP THEIR ASS?
March 21st, 2006 at 5:46 pmOH MY GOD IS THERE AN UGLIER CUNT THAN CINDY SHEEHAN?!
Comment by Az Joe
Hillary or Barbara Striesand?
YOUO COULD NOT BEAT A WOMAN ENOUGH TO MAKE HER THAT UGLY!
You’re a fine judge of horseflesh
WHY DO LEFTIST MALES LIKE TO TAKE COCK UP THEIR ASS?
You’d have to ask Ryan “FMFB” Neat about that.
By the way, we don’t use the “C” word around here. It really pisses off all the leftist homosexuals and most but not all of the conservative women. Try and have a little more class…K?
March 21st, 2006 at 8:46 pmYOU ARE EITHER WITH BUSH AND AMERICA OR YOU ARE A TRAITOR TO AMERICA AND A TERROIST SYMPATHIZER
YOU FUCKING YELLOW SCUM
Comment by Az Joe
So true and descriptive.
March 21st, 2006 at 8:47 pmSaddam’s WMD and terrorist connections all proven in one document!!!
IZSP-2003-00003336
The Arabic original shows the Falcon emblem of the Iraq Intelligence Service. A translation is provided if you scroll down. I highlight the key wording but there is more:
March 11, 2003
The al-Quds liberation army division supplied us with information….as follows.
1. The Iraqi government will distribute the same leaflets that the American forces are distributing but it will contain anthrax.
2. Iraq imports uniforms resembling American forces uniforms for the purpose of killing Iraqi citizens….
3. Dig trenches around Baghdad…oil…burning…cause mayhem
Now this letter is from al-Quds, a Jihad organization that supports the Palestinians. Saddam was the patriarch and Iraq officers worked closely with them.
IZSP-2003-00000859 also talks about the al-Quds Basra division. This is a a letter from a paramilitary organization INSIDE Iraq and not from Palestinian territories. The al-Quds in Iraq are Palestinians who live in Iraq and also are involved in Palestinian activities. They fought for Saddam because Saddam supported them in Palestine. The officers were Iraqi.
The al-Quds are covering their own butts by telling the IIS what they have been ordered to do or even trying to get them to stop Saddam since the war is immanent. If Saddam wanted to kill Iraqis with anthrax to make it look like the U.S. did it, it would be wise for him to use Palestinians instead of Iraqis. Therefor, it makes sense that he ordered the al-Quds to do it.
Iraqis might not carry out the order.
They also would talk to their communities. the Palestinians would naturally be in more segregated ethic areas of Iraq, thus better security. Perhaps they would go back to the Palestinian territories when finished.
If Iraqis were caught by U.S. forces with the anthrax, then Saddam is caught. If the Palestinians were caught, he could deny it. See the post below on how he never admitted to using chemicals on the Iranians.
So these guys get this order and report it to the IIS to make clear it is not their idea.
The wording “the Iraqi Government” seems to indicate that they are clarifying that when they do this it will not be a Palestinian attack on the Iraqis but under the orders of Saddam. They also avoid saying “we will do it” in case things don’t go Saddam’s way. They don’t want that in a record.
They don’t want anybody at the IIS coming after them. They also realize Saddam might be setting them up to take the fall if it all goes bad. The IIS may not know about it.
It wouldn’t take “stockpiles” of anthrax to do it, a few vials would be plenty.
This is the only logical reason why al-Quds would be telling the Iraq Intelligence Service what the Iraqi Government is going to do instead of the other way around.
When you think about it, it’s very clever. Half the Arabs in the world would be all too eager to believe we used anthrax on Iraq. And the method of transmission would link it straight to us. The Jihad fighters we are facing now would be many times greater, enough to possibly save Saddam’s regime.
It also would explain where some of that 17 tons of growth medium went as talked about in a post below.
Unless we see a translation that is different I think we have this:
Proof that Saddam had small amounts of anthrax.
Proof that Saddam would use non Iraqi terrorists to carry out a biological attack.
This is exactly the scenario that President Bush warned about, Saddam giving WMD to terrorists. This is the Mother of all Smoking Guns.
March 21st, 2006 at 10:38 pmRR,
You’re such a redneck moron – that’s no proof of an Al Queda link, which is what you morons keep claiming. And you’re probably too retarded to realize this, but EVERY arab nation in the ARAB WORLD has some ties to the palestinians – especially the Saudis – our ‘friends’. The Palestinians are seen by other arabas an oppressed and occupied people, and that’s why they get support from the arab world. This proves nothing but that Saddam was an arab nation.
You’re such a FOOL and MORON. Were you always this retarded, or did you have to work at it.
And where is the ORIGINAL of this document – it sounds as fake as the Swiftboat ‘evidence’. Boy you’re a gullible idiot.
March 22nd, 2006 at 2:36 amAz Joe, lmao. You can ALMOST string a coherent sentence together. I salute you (sieg hile).
March 22nd, 2006 at 2:48 amWhat’s Become of Americans?
The neocons have yet to tell us the real reason for their assault on Iraq, which has so far produced 20,000 dead, maimed, and wounded U.S. soldiers, between 30,000 and 180,000 (and rising) Iraqi civilians, and demoralized U.S. Marines to the point that they commit atrocities on women and children.
Would real Americans accept these blows for the sake of an undeclared agenda? Perhaps it is true that Americans don’t live here any longer.
READ THIS
March 22nd, 2006 at 5:16 am“What’s Become of Americans?”
It isn’t just Americans, alas: it is human beings. The penchant for violence is an unfortunate legacy of our animal natures. Or a distortion thereof – I’m not sure even sharks /enjoy/ the act of killing. But we do.
Humans /the world over/ enjoy killing, and many who you would think nothing about having as neighbors avidly pursue the “sport” of putting bullets into members of other species and watching them scream, bleed and die.
March 22nd, 2006 at 12:05 pmMonkey Knut Wrench
You are a fuckin yellow traitor. In time we will deal with you according to law.
March 22nd, 2006 at 7:04 pmTo you “Az Joe” And You “I-Right-I”
March 27th, 2006 at 5:28 amWe are a grup of real Americans that truly support your view and would gladly welcome fine young (preferebly WHITE) minds such as yours. We at WAFA (read White Aryans For America) are seeing an increasing number of good valued American youngsters that now also rae feeling tat OUR time is at hand. Thus we want to support the hunger for a fullout take over of our beautiful and strong Nation away from all blacks, Jews, Liberls, Homosexuals and other weker spieces such as those that proclames women in power to be something good. As you two we also do believe that the womans place is in the home at her chosen mans side and taking care of and educating their children, We do also believe that Hispanics, Blacks and other (dirtier races) should in NO WAY be part of the NEW AMERICAN FUTURE and thus ultumitly be ( put to sleep or otherwice neutralized in any matter propper to the humane and ethical way) So, in other words, Both of you fine youngsters are more then welcome to contact us and jion our lines…SIEG HEIL UND FAIR SALUTE FOR OUR LEADER THE GREAT BUSH JR!
To this crazy bastard “Ãœberdorf Whatever Nazi like arse-hole”
March 27th, 2006 at 6:30 amPlease, And I beg you PLEASE come alone at any time on my street here in NY City and I will personally take real GOOOD care of your sorry ass.
For the comment that you posted above, you must be one hell of a sick ugly mind dear old timer, I have been reading all these posts in here and I do confirm that these two individuals that you refer to as (young fine white minds) with most certainty might be young, but I do not in any way think that they are That kind of trolls. Not in any way that hateful enough to join the Christ awful ranks of Neo-Nazi such as you. Az Joe might be a guy that has his own mind set on not liking whatever it is that he dislikes, I-right I might not very found of Liberals but I am pretty sure that none of these guys would even be in here if it was not for the fact that they DO sincerely care for America as a whole. So, as most in here I must say that not did I only become quite baffled and a bit shocked by your “invitation” old man, but I got a hell of an ERUPTION of ANGER and since I am a very REAL BCW Territorial-SpFs and a VET (GF 90- 91) I am ready for your kind at any time and place just name it dear Sir. I do not insist in anyone supporting any war in any way but I condemn those that insult any One wearing a uniform in any democratic country. I am an immigrant that moved here back in 96 to this fine country and did my service for Britain as you might have noticed if you are familiar with Army codes as typed above (which I by the way doubt) And my Grandfather did fight those of your kind in the great war. So I am a bit familiar with your tactics in drafting young men into your cause. But even more do I recognize your true back drafting and more often hidden agenda, To gain power over the mass just because of power in the first place. Another of their aim is to do as much ill towards recognized and humane efforts in a geological commonwealth. So to you all in here or elsewhere do not listen to sick and troubled minds that do not understand the difference between “Neo-conservatives” and “Neo-Nazis”. They are nothing of the same kind even though many seem to lean a bit too much to the far right. I am my self a Democratic liberal and damn proud of it. I salute all who has the aim as to fight exact this kind of filth and I encourage all in here to do so. And as for this President and his huge lack of conscience, I believe that neither HE nor his administration is worth mentioning after all their foul plays and misdeeds. Thus with that, dear commentators I depart with the recognition of have been giving my final words.
[...] Re: Bush said: Iraq had NOTHING to do with 911 Bush Falsely Claims He Never Linked Hussein To September 11 Bush, this afternoon: First, just if I might correct a misperception, I don’t think we ever said – at least I know I didn’t say that there was a direct connection between September the 11th and Saddam Hussein. In fact, Bush justified the war against Iraq by directly linking it to 9/11: The use of armed forces against Iraq 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 person who planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001. http://thinkprogress.org/2006/03/20/9-11-and-saddam/ Terri321 [...]
August 30th, 2006 at 7:12 am[...] Bush claims he’s never connected Iraq to the attacks on 9/11. But here he is connecting some kind of attack to Iraq. If he’s not talking about the attack on 9/11, then what is he talking about ? Did Iraq attack us but the left wing media covered it up ? The Horse’s Mouth President Bush: My attitude about our – look, I’m into campaigning out there: People want to know, can you win? That’s what they want to know. I mean, there’s – look, there’s some 25 percent or so that want us to get out, shouldn’t have been out there in the first place – and that’s fine. They’re wrong. But you can understand why they feel that way. They just don’t believe in war, and – at any cost. I believe when you get attacked and somebody declares war on you, you fight back. And that’s what we’re doing. [...]
October 26th, 2006 at 7:46 pmIt’s not worth explaining every charge these witch hunter commenters make and spin, but just one, the most official as I recall, at Bush’s late 2002 prime time news conference he explicitly and clearly stated that “we have no proof that Iraq (Sadam) had anything to do with the attacks of 9-11.” ‘course these facts certainly get in the way of your all’s fun….
January 11th, 2007 at 3:55 pm…. just a quick clarification: Sadam not having anything to do with 9-11, and Sadam having ties to al quaeda are two totally separate things; though muddled minds will tend to muddle them! [plus this is way too old for anyone to notice...]
January 11th, 2007 at 4:00 pm