Bush: No evidence Saddam was involved in 9/11 attacks
WASHINGTON (AP) -- President Bush said Wednesday there was no evidence that Saddam Hussein was involved in the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 -- disputing an idea held by many Americans.
"There's no question that Saddam Hussein had al Qaeda ties," the president said. But he also said, "We have no evidence that Saddam Hussein was involved with the September 11" attacks.
The president's comment was in line with a statement Tuesday by Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, who said he not seen any evidence that Saddam was involved in the attacks.
Yet, a new poll found that nearly 70 percent of respondents believed the Iraqi leader probably was personally involved. Rumsfeld said, "I've not seen any indication that would lead me to believe that I could say that."
The administration has argued that Saddam's government had close links to al-Qaida, the terrorist network led by Osama bin Laden that masterminded the September 11 attacks.
On Sunday, for example, Vice President Dick Cheney said that success in stabilizing and democratizing Iraq would strike a major blow at the "the geographic base of the terrorists who have had us under assault for many years, but most especially on 9/11."
And Tuesday, in an interview on ABC's "Nightline," White House national security adviser Condoleezza Rice said that one of the reasons Bush went to war against Saddam was because he posed a threat in "a region from which the 9/11 threat emerged."
In an appearance on NBC's "Meet the Press," Cheney was asked whether he was surprised that more than two-thirds of Americans in a Washington Post poll would express a belief that Iraq was behind the attacks.
"No, I think it's not surprising that people make that connection," he replied.
Rice, asked about the same poll numbers, said, "We have never claimed that Saddam Hussein had either direction or control of 9/11."
hey the zionist-proamerican-prowar squad! where are thou?
Sorry, being entertained by the PP thread.
Anyway is this news? Rummy/wolfowitz have said as much numerous times in the past.
I thought this was clear after the congressional investigation report was released.
___________________
Retro ...
Sep-18-2003 00:22
rizo
rizoholic
Registered: Apr 2003
Location: sf south bay
someone forgot to tell chaney!
quote:
But Cheney left that possibility wide open in a nationally televised interview two days ago, claiming that the administration is learning "more and more" about connections between Al Qaeda and Iraq before the Sept. 11 attacks. The statement surprised some analysts and officials who have reviewed intelligence reports from Iraq. (link)
quote:
Top ten reasons Americans believe Saddam Hussein and 9/11 are linked:
1. It would be impossible to fathom that America was attacked., and in response we attacked the wrong people.
2. Our army is in Iraq fighting, therefore they must be the enemy.
3. Iraq had reconstituted their nuclear program.
4. We trust our president, or naively want too.
5. Iraq used chemical weapons we gave them to kill their own people.
6. The economy is bad, we need a war and low interest rates.
7. What's good for Carlisle, Halliburton and Bechtel is good for America !!
8. Average American education is 3rd grade, keep them dumb and ignorant and you can get away with anything.
9. My president gave me a tax refund
10. #1 reason- Elvis lives in the white house!!
Sep-18-2003 00:28
PhloTron
EJECT EJECT EJECT !!!
Registered: Jun 2002
Location: Isle of Spam
Re: Bush admits Saddam's gov't had no ties to 9/11
quote:
Originally posted by Galapidate
Bush: No evidence Saddam was involved in 9/11 attacks
"No, I think it's not surprising that people make that connection," he replied.
Maybe I don't understand why you think him saying this would lose an election? He's always stated Al-Qaeda ties, not necessarily 9/11 ties. It's unfortunate that people like to generalize and base decisions and opinions on little to no knowledge, or one sided knowledge of a situation. Plus, when you look all the way across the globe the general American Public looks at the Middle east as completely tied together...you must realize that the majority of the population doesn't spend a lot of time looking into foreign politics, nor relations, nor how big the middle east even is. Thus: 9/11 = Al-Qaeda=Saddam=Middle East. Thus supporting or not supporting efforts.
I'm kind of curious to know if you were some of the 'population' that made the assumtion as well? Not that there was a connection, but that since an article came out saying "no evidence of 9/11 connection", that there was in the past? A connection with Al-Qaeda isn't the same as a connection to 9/11.
You also have to remember that 1/2 the U.S. Population can't point to Washington DC on a map of their own country. It's sad really. But one persons "big story" is anothers "well duh".
Just my view.
___________________
"I'd like to buy a techno song."
Sep-18-2003 00:28
MrSquirrel
Auf Wiedersehen
Registered: Aug 2003
Location: In a Tree.
During the whole pre-war debate there was a lot of insinuation on the part of the hawks in the administration that Iraq at least had some minor supportive role in Sept. 11. I will agree they never flat out declared it but they did try to give that impression. I don't think this is such big news.
Hans Blix saying he now believes that Iraq destroyed most or all of its WMD's back in 1992 and acted like they had them for the ensuing time to deter a military invasion is a better and more interesting story than another Bush comment. He could say 3 days from now that evidence has come to light.
You can't tell with politicians these days. Even the usually semi-predictable occrider throws you a curve ball now and then
MrS
___________________
Click the sig to see MrSquirrel -"Reality" is the only word in the language that should always be used in quotes.
Sep-18-2003 00:40
DR86
I <3 GW Basketball
Registered: Jan 2003
Location: Neither Here Nor There {NYTA/DCTA}
Everyone knew this all along.
___________________
It has to start somewhere,
It has to start sometime,
What better place then here?
What better time than now? --Rage Against the Machine
Sep-18-2003 00:55
ProDiGaL
Supreme tranceaddict
Registered: Jul 2002
Location: Earth, Solar System
quote:
Originally posted by DrummeRaver86
Everyone knew this all along.
Eveyone with a brain anyway
so this excludes DJBARON and mike automatically
___________________
Sep-18-2003 01:45
Psionic
Dark & Dirty
Registered: Apr 2003
Location: Boston, MA
quote:
Originally posted by ProDiGaL
Eveyone with a brain anyway
so this excludes DJBARON and mike automatically
Making that comment was just plain stupidity coming from you. Now there'll be more flaming and it's because of people like you that they start.
Sep-18-2003 02:28
LiquidX
It's All OvA!
Registered: Mar 2001
Location: In Ur Mind
Today we were heaving this nice discussion in my english class, my teacher even made a poll of what we thought of the war and what not. Anyways.. as I was saying, we were heaving this discussion about .. how many of the Hijackers were Iraquis.. Conclusion:NONE!!.. so we were all like, then why didnt the US go after Saudi Arabia? ( Since they are all from there, exept some from Egyo and LEbanon .. Im talking about the Hijackers here. ).. eitherway, this point has been said 1000 times.. so I wont keep saying.. and Yes.. Bush sucked his own foot today.
___________________
Upcoming:
Michael Andrews Feat. Gary Jules - Mad World (Grayed Out Mix)
Sep-18-2003 02:34
ProDiGaL
Supreme tranceaddict
Registered: Jul 2002
Location: Earth, Solar System
quote:
Originally posted by Galapidate
Making that comment was just plain stupidity coming from you. Now there'll be more flaming and it's because of people like you that they start.
wow, i dont know if i should be flattered or insulted.....
___________________
Sep-18-2003 04:45
hardcore trancer
Mystic Mind
Registered: Jan 2002
Location: Toronto,Canada
quote:
Originally posted by ProDiGaL
wow, i dont know if i should be flattered or insulted.....
