• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Saddam & Al-Qaeda

cnredd

Major General Big Lug
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 5, 2005
Messages
8,682
Reaction score
262
Location
Philadelphia,PA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
The fallacy that comes into play with this is that the media tried to portray that the Administration said there were ties between Al-Qeada & Iraq when it comes to 9/11...That is untrue...

What they've said was that there were ties to Al-Qaeda & Iraq PERIOD.

I've located an article from PBS that does EXACTLY this...I will italicize the lie from the reporter, and highlight what was ACTUALLY being said...

KWAME HOLMAN: When President Bush declared an end to major hostilities in Iraq a year ago, he once again linked Saddam Hussein to the terror attacks on Sept. 11.

PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH: The battle of Iraq is one victory in a war on terror that began on Sept. 11, 2001, and still goes on. We've removed an ally of al-Qaida and cut off a source of terrorist funding.

KWAME HOLMAN: The debate over Hussein's ties to al-Qaida was reignited this week with one paragraph of a 9/11 Commission staff report.

DOUGLAS MACEACHIN, Staff, 9/11 Commission: There have been reports that contacts between Iraq and al-Qaida also occurred after bin Laden returned to Afghanistan, but they do not appear to have resulted in a collaborative relationship. Two senior bin Laden two senior bin Laden associates have adamantly denied that any ties existed between al-Qaida and Iraq. And so far we have no credible evidence that Iraq and al-Qaida cooperated on attacks against the United States.

KWAME HOLMAN: But yesterday, President Bush again insisted there were links between Saddam Hussein and al-Qaida.

PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH: The reason I keep insisting that there was a relationship between Iraq and Saddam and al-Qaida, because there was a relationship between Iraq and al-Qaida. This administration never said that the 9/11 attacks were orchestrated between Saddam and al-Qaida. We did say there were numerous contacts between Saddam Hussein and al-Qaida.

KWAME HOLMAN: The 9/11 Commission's Democratic vice chairman, Lee Hamilton, said he saw no major difference between the president's position and the commission's finding.

LEE HAMILTON, Vice chairman, 9/11 Commission: The president is saying, I think, that there were connections between al-Qaida and Saddam Hussein's government. We don't disagree with that. What we have said is what the governor just said: We don't have any evidence of a cooperative or a corroborative relationship between Saddam Hussein's government and these al-Qaida operatives with regard to the attacks on the United States.

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/white_house/jan-june04/iraqconnection_06-18.html

So we have the President of the United States outright saying...This administration never said that the 9/11 attacks were orchestrated between Saddam and al-Qaida. We did say there were numerous contacts between Saddam Hussein and al-Qaida.

And then we have the Vice Chairman of the 911 Commission agreeing with that statement...

And yet the reporter(Kwame Holman) is LYING when he says...he once again linked Saddam Hussein to the terror attacks on Sept. 11

NO....HE.....DID....NOT....

There were no ties (that we know of) between Saddam & Al-Qaeda ONLY in reference to 911...That doesn't mean that there were no ties AT ALL...

That is REALLY what the Administration has been saying, and the Vice-Chairman agrees in this report...

Want to see it from another source?...How about "Hardball"?

This article LIES in the headline...

9/11 commission: No link between bin Laden and Saddam

What it SHOULD say is "Link between bin Laden and Saddam, but NOT with 911"...

excerpts from the artilcle...

CHRIS MATTHEWS, HOST: This is a development a lot of people will find clarifying is that there was no direct connection between Saddam Hussein and 9/11.

THOMAS KEAN, 9/11 COMMISSION CHAIRMAN: Well, that's what our staff has found. Now, it doesn't mean there weren't al Qaeda connections with Iraq over the years. They're somewhat shadowy, but I think they were there. But with 9/11, no, our staff has found no evidence of that.

MATTHEWS: Mr. Hamilton, so many polls have been taken that shows the American people, almost three-quarters of the people, believe there was a connection. How do we rectify that? Is your commission going to clarify that to the extent that people won't still be singing country music that says “remember how you felt?”

LEE HAMILTON, 9/11 COMMISSION VICE CHAIRMAN: All we can do is state as clearly as we can what the evidence is that we have found. We have found no operational collaboration between Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden with regard to attacks on the United States. That conclusion is a very firm one that we have reached.

What the governor referred to is also true. There are all kinds of ties. There are all kinds of connections. And it may very well have been that Osama bin Laden or some of his lieutenants met at some time with Saddam Hussein lieutenants.

They had contacts, but what we did not find was any operational tie with respect to attacks on the United States.

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/5228545/

Again...no ties when it comes to 911...But there WERE ties and connections...

Now let's go back in time a touch with a Washington Times article...

Clinton first linked al Qaeda to Saddam

By Rowan Scarborough
THE WASHINGTON TIMES

The Clinton administration talked about firm evidence linking Saddam Hussein's regime to Osama bin Laden's al Qaeda network years before President Bush made the same statements.
The issue arose again this month after the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States reported there was no "collaborative relationship" between the old Iraqi regime and bin Laden.

Democrats have cited the staff report to accuse Mr. Bush of making inaccurate statements about a linkage. Commission members, including a Democrat and two Republicans, quickly came to the administration's defense by saying there had been such contacts.
In fact, during President Clinton's eight years in office, there were at least two official pronouncements of an alarming alliance between Baghdad and al Qaeda. One came from William S. Cohen, Mr. Clinton's defense secretary. He cited an al Qaeda-Baghdad link to justify the bombing of a pharmaceutical plant in Sudan.
Mr. Bush cited the linkage, in part, to justify invading Iraq and ousting Saddam. He said he could not take the risk of Iraq's weapons falling into bin Laden's hands.
The other pronouncement is contained in a Justice Department indictment on Nov. 4, 1998, charging bin Laden with murder in the bombings of two U.S. embassies in Africa.


http://www.washtimes.com/national/20040624-112921-3401r.htm

I'm sure some here will be able to produce many sources that say the opposite...They will be wrong...The President just said "ties"...The 911 Commision just said "ties"...

That is all...
 

Simon W. Moon

Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 20, 2005
Messages
22,807
Reaction score
8,096
Location
Fayettenam
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
cnredd said:
The fallacy that comes into play with this is that the media tried to portray that the Administration said there were ties between Al-Qeada & Iraq when it comes to 9/11 ...
They will be wrong...The President just said "ties"...The 911 Commision just said "ties"...
That is all...
I'm not here to defend the excerpts that you've selected.
You arguably have a technically correct point here.

I'm here to point out even if you're point is conceded to you, you're still only splitting hairs in describing how Team Bush was being dishonest about the relationship between Hussein and aQ.

The point is overshadowed by the fact that in order for the whole Hussein-aQ-ties thing to be true, the meaning of the word 'ties' must be watered down til it is rendered almost entirely insignificant. The US has 'ties' to aQ.

After 9-11, in the run-up to the war, during the war, and currently, during the "post-war" phase, and despite pressure from Team Bush to find meaningful ties between aQ and Hussein, the Intelligence Community remained firm in its assessment that no operational or collaborative relationship existed.

That's what was coming form the US Intel Community the entire time, even while Team Bush was going on about how the Atta / Prague connection was "pretty well confirmed" etc. Of course, Cheney ended up denying that he ever said that.
BORGER: Well, let's get to Mohammad Atta for a minute, because you mentioned him as well. You have said in the past that it was, quote, "pretty well confirmed."
Vice Pres. CHENEY: No, I never said that.
Team Bush were trying to present the ties between aQ and Hussein as something more significant than they were,(perhaps they were merely sharing trivia?)

"[T]he risk of Iraq's weapons falling into bin Laden's hands" in the foreseeable future was low by the US Intel Community's estimate. While Bush was right to be concerned about it, based on the information available at the time, the "cure" suggested for the situation was riskier than, and out of proportion to the "disease."

In addition, even if Team Bush never specifically and explicitly said that Hussein was tied to 9-11, Team Bush tied Hussein to 9-11 repeatedly through comments like Cheney's above.
 

cnredd

Major General Big Lug
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 5, 2005
Messages
8,682
Reaction score
262
Location
Philadelphia,PA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
Simon W. Moon said:
I'm not here to defend the excerpts that you've selected.
You arguably have a technically correct point here.

I'm here to point out even if you're point is conceded to you, you're still only splitting hairs in describing how Team Bush was being dishonest about the relationship between Hussein and aQ.

The point is overshadowed by the fact that in order for the whole Hussein-aQ-ties thing to be true, the meaning of the word 'ties' must be watered down til it is rendered almost entirely insignificant. The US has 'ties' to aQ.

After 9-11, in the run-up to the war, during the war, and currently, during the "post-war" phase, and despite pressure from Team Bush to find meaningful ties between aQ and Hussein, the Intelligence Community remained firm in its assessment that no operational or collaborative relationship existed.

That's what was coming form the US Intel Community the entire time, even while Team Bush was going on about how the Atta / Prague connection was "pretty well confirmed" etc. Of course, Cheney ended up denying that he ever said that.
BORGER: Well, let's get to Mohammad Atta for a minute, because you mentioned him as well. You have said in the past that it was, quote, "pretty well confirmed."
Vice Pres. CHENEY: No, I never said that.
Team Bush were trying to present the ties between aQ and Hussein as something more significant than they were,(perhaps they were merely sharing trivia?)

"[T]he risk of Iraq's weapons falling into bin Laden's hands" in the foreseeable future was low by the US Intel Community's estimate. While Bush was right to be concerned about it, based on the information available at the time, the "cure" suggested for the situation was riskier than, and out of proportion to the "disease."

In addition, even if Team Bush never specifically and explicitly said that Hussein was tied to 9-11, Team Bush tied Hussein to 9-11 repeatedly through comments like Cheney's above.
When I wrote this, I said to myself..."Let's see how the left responds to this...And Simon"...:2wave:

You are correct in saying that this is a matter of interpretation...But to say "Bush lied about the connections" would clearly be wrong...The information can only be interpreted to be a lie...That is quite different than concrete evidence such as the score of a game or a shape of an object...

Pertaining to your link in red, I thought I already made that point clear?...:confused:

As per your source freerepublic.com...

Vice Pres. CHENEY: I disagree with the way their findings have been portrayed. This has been enormous confusion over the Iraq-al-Qaida connection, Gloria. First of all, on the question of whether or not there was any kind of a relationship, there clearly was a relationship. It's been testified to. The evidence is overwhelming. It goes back to the early '90s.

It involves a whole series of contacts, high-level contacts between Osama bin Laden and Iraqi intelligence officials. It involves a senior official, a brigadier general in the Iraqi intelligence service going to the Sudan before bin Laden ever went to Afghanistan to train them in bomb-making, helping teach them how to forge documents. Mr. Zarqawi, who's in Baghdad today, is an al-Qaida associate who took refuge in Baghdad, found sanctuary and safe harbor there before we ever launched into Iraq. There's a Mr. Yasin, who was a World Trade Center bomber in '93, who fled to Iraq after that and we found since when we got into Baghdad, documents showing that he was put on the payroll and given housing by Saddam Hussein after the '93 attack; in other words, provided safe harbor and sanctuary. There's clearly been a relationship.

There's a separate question. The separate question is: Was Iraq involved with al-Qaida in the attack on 9/11?

BORGER: Was Iraq involved?

Vice Pres. CHENEY: We don't know. You know, what the commission says is that they can't find any evidence of that. We had one report which is a famous report on the Czech intelligence service and we've never been able to confirm or to knock it down.
 

Simon W. Moon

Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 20, 2005
Messages
22,807
Reaction score
8,096
Location
Fayettenam
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
cnredd said:
You are correct in saying that this is a matter of interpretation...But to say "Bush lied about the connections" would clearly be wrong...The information can only be interpreted to be a lie...That is quite different than concrete evidence such as the score of a game or a shape of an object...
I don't think it's clearly wrong at all.
One could make the case that it was arguably, technically wrong, or at least has the possibility of being wrong.
Team Bush portrayed the 'connections' as something much more than what they were - something much more significant than what they were.

The 'connections', such as they were, were given a prominence of something significant when, in fact, the 'links' were trivial and anecdotal. Team Bush played up the "links and connections" as if it bouyed the premise that Hussein was likely to give aQ WMD. It matters little that Team Bush used ambiguous language to convey an idea that was not supported by the facts as they were known.

Team bush did not bring up the 'relationship' between the two in an off-hand manner. The fact that one can, in retrospect, finely parse the language that was used to say that Team Bush were merely speaking of trivialities when they used the words 'links', 'connections,' and 'relationship' misses the issue central to the affair - What was team Bush saying?
They were telling us that Hussein was likely to give WMD to al-Qaida for use on the US.
Not only was this not supported by the facts at hand, it was contrary to the best assessments available.

cnredd said:
Pertaining to your link in red, I thought I already made that point clear?...
Perhaps it is I who has not made himself clear. I'm saying that even if Team bush didn't directly and explicitly make the case that Hussein was behind 9-11, Team Bush portrayed the links between aQ & Hussein to be much, much more significant than was justified by the information that they had at the time.
 

scottyz

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 31, 2005
Messages
1,575
Reaction score
0
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Moderate
You blame this on the media? The Bush admin. has never tried to playdown a connection between Iraq, 9/11 and AQ. If anything they've tried to playup one, but always deny a solid connection when cornered on the subject.
 
Top Bottom