Article about perceived Iraq/al Qaeda link
Thread Starter
Wannabe yuppie
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 25,918
Likes: 0
From: Madison, WI
While that's all well and good that's kind of a larger scope than the one issue I'm talking about here.
Anyway.
It appears that the administration has become aware of opinions such as mine and seems to be changing its position a bit.
This is an AP article: http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmp...d=544&ncid=716
This is a Reuters article: http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmp.../iraq_usa_dc_1
(I'm trying to not pick slanted sources here)
President Bush said Wednesday there was no evidence that Saddam Hussein was involved in the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001—disputing an impression that critics say the administration tried to foster to justify the war against Iraq.
"There's no question that Saddam Hussein had al-Qaida ties," the president said. But he also said, "We've had no evidence that Saddam Hussein was involved with September the 11th."
The president's comment was the administration's firmest assertion that there is no proven link between Saddam and Sept. 11. It came after Vice President Dick Cheney on Sunday clouded the issue by saying, "It's not surprising people make that connection" between Saddam and the attacks.
If you want to read the full article feel free to click it.
I'm really fed up with the administration and their handling of this. It seems like there is some kind of initiative to spin things one way and now that their spin is being criticized the individual people that make public statements are no longer coordinated in their statements. Cheney in particular seems to be oblivious even while so many people around him are recanting their previous claims.
This seems to all have started when Paul Wolfowitz (Deputy Defense Secretary and our guy in charge of Iraq) backed off assorted claims he made about the Iraq-al Qaeda link. An AP article on that, for those who were unaware: http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmp...aq_wolfowitz_6
Hopefully the administration will stop trying to take advantage of public perception and tell us the truth rather than using a prevailing misconception to enact policy that otherwise would mose likely not be accepted by an informed constituency.
Anyway.
It appears that the administration has become aware of opinions such as mine and seems to be changing its position a bit.
This is an AP article: http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmp...d=544&ncid=716
This is a Reuters article: http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmp.../iraq_usa_dc_1
(I'm trying to not pick slanted sources here)
President Bush said Wednesday there was no evidence that Saddam Hussein was involved in the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001—disputing an impression that critics say the administration tried to foster to justify the war against Iraq.
"There's no question that Saddam Hussein had al-Qaida ties," the president said. But he also said, "We've had no evidence that Saddam Hussein was involved with September the 11th."
The president's comment was the administration's firmest assertion that there is no proven link between Saddam and Sept. 11. It came after Vice President Dick Cheney on Sunday clouded the issue by saying, "It's not surprising people make that connection" between Saddam and the attacks.
If you want to read the full article feel free to click it.
I'm really fed up with the administration and their handling of this. It seems like there is some kind of initiative to spin things one way and now that their spin is being criticized the individual people that make public statements are no longer coordinated in their statements. Cheney in particular seems to be oblivious even while so many people around him are recanting their previous claims.
This seems to all have started when Paul Wolfowitz (Deputy Defense Secretary and our guy in charge of Iraq) backed off assorted claims he made about the Iraq-al Qaeda link. An AP article on that, for those who were unaware: http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmp...aq_wolfowitz_6
Hopefully the administration will stop trying to take advantage of public perception and tell us the truth rather than using a prevailing misconception to enact policy that otherwise would mose likely not be accepted by an informed constituency.