I think people tend to think that when two groups who may have differences but want to reach a common goal (destroying America) they will put their grievances aside to reach this goal such as Saddam working with Al Qaeda. I think people also tend to think that Al Qaeda needs more than just people, its needs funding and intelligence greater than Bin Laden and backing of a larger organization to meet its goals. I can't speak for everyone but I don't think they believe that Saddam actually caused 9-11 but may have provided funding to help do so. Also Saddam had a hatred for Saudi Arabia, one of the same Ideals that Al Qaeda has because of its ties to the US as well.

Personally I dont know what is true because I don't know saddam or bin laden, none of us do. None of us can say with any accuracy. I don't think Saddam worked side by side with Al Qaeda but I think its feasible that he provided money and arms. I don't think the war should have started on this assumption though and trying to make a connection to 9/11 unless solid proof exists.

quote:

Originally posted by zag2me I just saw a news item on uk tv about americans perceptions on the link between Iraq and the september 11th attacks. I was horrified to see all 7 of the interviewed americans on the street really do beleave that sadam hussain had anything to do with the 9/11 attacks. I just cant beleave people can be so naive. Is your government telling you this? Is it really true? From an outsiders point of view this seems absolutly crazy. I was under the impression Sadam hussain spent his entire life as the countries leader suppresing muslims fundementalism which was the biggest threat to his dictatoship rule. Or am i missing something here?

Exactly how old was the interview? To answer your question about what the government is telling us, if you take a little stroll over to cnn.com, you can find the answer on the main story headlined there. Of course, bush says something every once and a while but for some reason I have trouble paying attention.

___________________
Retro ...

Last edited by occrider on Jun-16-2004 at 18:50

quote:

Originally posted by zag2me I just saw a news item on uk tv about americans perceptions on the link between Iraq and the september 11th attacks. I was horrified to see all 7 of the interviewed americans on the street really do beleave that sadam hussain had anything to do with the 9/11 attacks. I just cant beleave people can be so naive. Is your government telling you this? Is it really true? From an outsiders point of view this seems absolutly crazy. I was under the impression Sadam hussain spent his entire life as the countries leader suppresing muslims fundementalism which was the biggest threat to his dictatoship rule. Or am i missing something here?

The reason why people believe there is a connection because of the repeated lies that have been told by this administration:

quote:

Published Tuesday, June 15, 2004 Cheney: Iraq Tied to al-Qaida By MIKE SCHNEIDER The Associated Press ORLANDO -- Vice President Dick Cheney said Monday that Saddam Hussein had "long-established ties" with al-Qaida, an assertion that has been repeatedly challenged by some policy experts and lawmakers. "He was a patron of terrorism," Cheney said of Hussein during a speech before The James Madison Institute, a conservative think-tank based in Florida. "He had long-established ties with al-Qaida." Cheney offered no details to back up his claim of a link between Hussein and al-Qaida. In making the case for war in Iraq, Bush administration officials frequently cited what they said were Saddam's decade-long contacts with al-Qaida operatives. They stopped short of claiming that Iraq was directly involved in the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks on the United States, but critics say Bush officials left that impression with the American public. Sen. Bob Graham, D-Fla., said the Bush administration had "a sorry record in the war on terror." Graham, the former chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, spoke Sunday in a conference call arranged by John Kerry's presidential campaign in anticipation of Cheney's speech. The U.S. State Department acknowledged last week it was incorrect in stating that terrorism declined worldwide last year in a report that the Bush administration initially pointed to as evidence it was succeeding against terrorism, Graham noted. Instead, both the number of incidents and the toll in victims increased sharply, the department said. A handful of protesters led by the League of Conservation Voters protested outside the hotel where Cheney spoke Monday in Orlando. The vice president later went to a Panama City for a $350,000 fund-raiser. During his brief speech at the institute, Cheney listed what he described as the accomplishments of the Bush administration in the war on terror. He said democracy was taking root in Afghanistan and Iraq; Libya's leader, Moammar Gadhafi, has abandoned his nuclear ambitions; Pakistani president Gen. Pervez Musharraf has become a U.S. ally, and Saudi Arabia's leaders have gotten a wake-up call about the threat posed by alQaida operatives in the kingdom. Cheney made no mention of the kidnapping in Saudi Arabia over the weekend of Lockheed Martin contractor Paul Johnson Jr., who has ties to Florida's Space Coast. "We are now about three years into the war on terrorism," Cheney said. "We met great challenges. There are more ahead. This is not time for impatience or self-defeating pessimism."

Then the 911 commission comes out with this report today:

quote:

No Evidence Connecting Iraq to Al Qaeda, 9/11 Panel Says By Dan Eggen Washington Post Staff Writer Wednesday, June 16, 2004; 1:32 PM There is "no credible evidence" that Saddam Hussein's government in Iraq collaborated with the al Qaeda terrorist network on any attacks on the United States, according to a new staff report released this morning by the commission investigating the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks. Although Osama bin Laden briefly explored the idea of forging ties with Iraq in the mid-1990s, the terrorist leader was hostile to Hussein's secular government, and Iraq never responded to requests for help in providing training camps or weapons, the panel found in the first of two reports issued today. The findings come in the wake of statements Monday by Vice President Cheney that Iraq had "long-established ties" with al Qaeda, and comments by President Bush yesterday backing up that assertion. The commission issued its report on al Qaeda's history at the start of a two-day round of hearings this morning. In a separate report on the planning and deliberations for the Sept. 11 plot, the panel cited numerous pieces of FBI evidence in concluding that ringleader Mohamed Atta never met with an Iraqi intelligence officer in Prague on April 9, 2001, as Cheney and some other Bush administration officials have alleged. "Based on the evidence available -- including investigation by Czech and U.S. authorities plus detainee reporting -- we do not believe that such a meeting occurred," the second report said. The report on al Qaeda's history said the government of Sudan, which gave sanctuary to al Qaeda from 1991 to 1996, persuaded bin Laden to cease supporting anti-Hussein forces and "arranged for contacts between Iraq and al Qaeda." But the contacts did not result in any cooperation, the panel said. "There have been reports that contacts between Iraq and al Qaeda also occurred after bin Laden had returned to Afghanistan [in 1996], but they do not appear to have resulted in a collaborative relationship," the report says. "Two senior bin Laden associates have adamantly denied that any ties existed between al Qaeda and Iraq. We have no credible evidence that Iraq and al Qaeda cooperated on attacks against the United States." The conclusions provide the latest example of how the Sept. 11 commission has become a political irritant for the Bush administration. The 10-member bipartisan commission, initially opposed by the White House, has frequently feuded with the government over access to documents and witnesses and has issued findings sharply critical of the Bush administration's focus on terrorism prior to the Sept. 11 attacks. In testimony before the commission, CIA and FBI officials said they agreed with the staff report's assessment of the abortive relationship between al Qaeda and Iraq. A CIA counterterrorism analyst who testified using the pseudonym Ted Davis said, "We’re in full agreement with the staff statement," which he said did "an excellent job" of representing the agency’s current understanding of the al Qaeda-Iraq relationship. John Pistole, the FBI's executive assistant director for counter-terrorism, concurred. Staff writer William Branigin contributed to this report.

quote:

Originally posted by zag2me I just saw a news item on uk tv about americans perceptions on the link between Iraq and the september 11th attacks. I was horrified to see all 7 of the interviewed americans on the street really do beleave that sadam hussain had anything to do with the 9/11 attacks. I just cant beleave people can be so naive. Is your government telling you this? Is it really true? From an outsiders point of view this seems absolutly crazy. I was under the impression Sadam hussain spent his entire life as the countries leader suppresing muslims fundementalism which was the biggest threat to his dictatoship rule. Or am i missing something here?

Unfortunately, you are not missing anything. Bush has stated in the past that there are no credible links between the Saddam and the 9/11 attacks:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/3118262.stm
-and-
http://www.thememoryhole.org/war/no-saddam-qaeda.htm


yet continues to state there is a connection between Al Qaeda and Saddam:

http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast...aeda/index.html

Cheney has long stated this tie and has never corrected himself, despite all evidence that points to the countrary.

Just today the 9/11 panel once again reiterated no credible evidence for this Al Qaeda 9/11 attacks-Saddam tie:

http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS...sion/index.html

But I really don't know if this will sink in to the majority whatsoever. This Administration has done a master spin job on creating the terrorism fear and support for the Iraq War with this erroneous tie, and I sincerely doubt considering this will quell Bush or any of his supporters from continuing to make this error considering terrorism is Bush's main re-election card. Look no further than the White House website which continues to maintain this tie:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/response/disarm.html

I think the difference here is that Bush admits there is no connection between the Al Qaeda 9/11 attackers, but still maintains a link between Al Qaeda and Saddam. This is really a very weak argument at best, and is not credible by the majority of intelligence agencies.

BTW, Powell admitted awhile back that there was no hard proof of this link between the two:

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstra...DA80894DC404482

___________________
Whence September dusk grows crisper still,
with leaves all crimson conquered,
I yearn to shout,
and dance about,
and stick pickles in my honker...

The report I saw was a couple of hours ago, it was on some report by a senate commitee into september 11. The report stated very clearly that there was absolutly no link between Iraq and Al Qieda. The whole focus of the report was that bush was saying one thing while the facts said something different.

And it was backed up by the fact that all the "people on the street" said things like "Terrorists are all the same, they all work together" and "we had to do something after september 11".

Personally I think they are using al qieda as an excuse to ligitimise the war, I dont think any of us would argue that if it where true something should be done. But its simply not true, which makes me think that people are being Lied to, and if they are, what else are they being told thats not true!!

___________________
Live for today - Plan for tommorrow - Party tonight!

Any informed American would realize that Al-Qaeda and Saddam Hussein being linked together is pure bullshit, the uninformed on the other hand might hear their local news carry a piece on Bush saying so and remember this and think it is true. Remember America is huge, different regions, beliefs, sense of awareness of international issues, etc. To assume that most Americans share this uniform belief is to assume that we all see the same sources that put forth such a connection between Al-Qaeda and Iraq, this of course wouldn't be true.

There are those who do believe there is a connection, stop and ask them what that connection was however and they tend to get glossy with providing details or lack thereof. False assumptions are the prerequisites of ignorance be they an American who simply believes this because he reads it in the newspaper or the President makes another stupid comment that is offbase such as "we know their is a link because Al-Zarqawi is in Iraq today" To do so would be to ignore the numerous other sources in America that argue counter to such a notion, problem is who reads and hears this and who doesn't Zag2me look up other American news sources that do not assert such a connection between Hussein and al-Qaeda because to not do so and assume that Americans are simply sheep in a herd is to also be ignorant of events in America such as the released 9-11 reports today that debunk such a notion of Al-Qaeda and Saddam Hussein being connected partners.

___________________
Trance = Heart, Mind, Body and Soul all in 1

Current fav. Global Experience = Madras

quote:

Originally posted by BadBadNeil I think people tend to think that when two groups who may have differences but want to reach a common goal (destroying America) they will put their grievances aside to reach this goal such as Saddam working with Al Qaeda. I think people also tend to think that Al Qaeda needs more than just people, its needs funding and intelligence greater than Bin Laden and backing of a larger organization to meet its goals. I can't speak for everyone but I don't think they believe that Saddam actually caused 9-11 but may have provided funding to help do so. Also Saddam had a hatred for Saudi Arabia, one of the same Ideals that Al Qaeda has because of its ties to the US as well. Personally I dont know what is true because I don't know saddam or bin laden, none of us do. None of us can say with any accuracy. I don't think Saddam worked side by side with Al Qaeda but I think its feasible that he provided money and arms. I don't think the war should have started on this assumption though and trying to make a connection to 9/11 unless solid proof exists.

I can hardly see how you can believe Saddam ever supported Al Quaeda because they openly attempted to topple his regime. They did have the common enemy, the US, but their hatred for each other outweighted their hatred of america.

___________________
1+1=10

I have doubt about a link between the two, but who knows. Of course if you interview people on the street some may say that there is a link. It's what majority thinks. Why are they still trying to figure this out (the govt.)? To find some credible excuse for us invading Iraq?
I'm 100% supportive of the coalition troops there, US, Uk, Korean all of them.
I'm just against this policy of invading Irak and infuriating other Muslim nations.
I think Bush managed to actually increase the hatred for America.

It amazes me as well, but when you have every corporate media outlet from the NY Times, to MSNBC, to Fox News perpetuating the same lies before the war, that the public has come to believe those lies shouldn't have come as a surprise.

Cheney's brazenness in his lying is also truly something to behold.

ever think the sample they used was not a good one?



I am guessing you have never seen the Jay Leno show when he does a segment called Jay Walking.



He askes simple questions to people on the street...these are simple 8th grade questions, and a lot of the people get them wrong. So don't put too much faith in the the old people on the street method.

quote:

Originally posted by Boomer187 ever think the sample they used was not a good one?

I have to agree with this one, it just goes to show, that not all tv and goverment statements are truthfull.

All I know is

The reason the uk went to war was to stop "weapons of mass destruction". This has so far been proved a false, and inacurate reason. And all I see is more false statements by the US government.

And I think that sucks.

___________________
Live for today - Plan for tommorrow - Party tonight!