Cheney: Iraq, al-Qaeda linked pre-war – USATODAY.com

s?19=40004&7=1660&38=1823139154

spacer.gif spacer.gif
USA TODAY emailthis-logo.gif

Powered by
* Please note, the sender’s email address has not been verified.
spacer.gif
You have received the following link from rjbbjb1@charter.net:
spacer.gif
Click the following to access the sent link:
etIcon.gifCheney: Iraq, al-Qaeda linked pre-war – USATODAY.com*
SAVE THIS link FORWARD THIS link
Get your EMAIL THIS Browser Button and use it to email content from any Web site. Click here for more information.
spacer.gif
*This article can also be accessed if you copy and paste the entire address below into your web browser.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2007-04-06-cheney_N.htm?plckFindCommentKey=CommentKey:0728134c-6bf3-4343-8b70-c7985748394b&POE=click-refer
Advertisements

10 Responses to “Cheney: Iraq, al-Qaeda linked pre-war – USATODAY.com”

  1. jbintenn Says:

    Both statements are true.

    VP Cheney’s statement that Zarqawi was in Iraq and operating from there before we invaded Iraq and the Pentagon’s report that there was no cooperation between Saddam’s government and al-Qaeda are both factual and true so no one is lying here.

    Haven’t we been through all of this before?

  2. jbintenn Says:

    Kurdistan is part of northern Iraq so VP Cheney’s statement is true. However, no one in the administration has ever claimed that there was the link between Saddam and Al-Qaeda or that Saddam himself directly conspired with Zarqawi while he was there.

    All of this is mute anyway since Zarqawi was a terrorist and a terrorist camp was inside the borders of Iraq before we invaded.

    Those are the facts. Stop insisting that the Bush admin lied about this when they clearly did not.

    Too many people are clinging to this in the hopes that it is true. Just another example that proves the desire of many to misrepresent our current administration for their gain only.

    How can these same people continue to spew these lies about the administration and say the adminstration deceived us about the Iraq war when it is clearly the accusers that are doing the deceiving?

    Who do you want to claim as being the credible ones here – our administration or those that continue to try and misrepresent them?

  3. jbintenn Says:

    Walter,

    Thanks for stating the facts as you did.

    But my contention all along is that it works both ways. There are those out there that are all too eager to put this administration in a bad light only for their selfish gain. Just look at the number of people using this latest news article to ‘pile on’ to this notion that the administration lied when the facts are otherwise.

    You state this: “Perhaps it is something far worse: a half-truth meant to deliberately decieve in order to achieve a certain end.” What about these same accusers that spin the truth like many are doing now to make it appear that the Bush administration purposely misled us? Again, clearly illustrated by many of those on this blog. So who is being truthful and who is not?

  4. jbintenn Says:

    Walter wrote:

    “”Saddam had long-established ties with al Qaeda.”

    This is what Dick Cheney claimed in 2003.

    This is simply not true. A LIE.”

    This again is true. Dick Cheney did say this.

    However, what you left out is that the administration immediately came back and corrected VP Cheney’s statement for the record. Even President Bush himself corrected this.

    Again, illustrating my point that too many are willing to ‘cherry pick’ the data only for their purposes to misrepresent this current administration.

    The most any of us can possibly say about VP Cheney is that he does tend to get ‘carried away’ with some of his public statements and has gone overboard. However, when the administration clearly corrects this, how then can you conveniently leave this out and go on to say that the entire administration lied and purposely misled.

    Again, who is it that is purposely misleading the rest of us by ‘cherry picking’ the facts and leading us a certain direction with ‘half truths’?

  5. jbintenn Says:

    ljessen wrote:

    “jblnTenn- so you’re saying Bush -(and the administration) never said Iraq had ties to Al Queda before we went to war with Iraq? Are you hiding in a basement somewhere? That was the flagship lie…Cheney is so convinced he is still saying it.”

    Yes that is what I am saying. Do I need to prove it with the quotes?

  6. jbintenn Says:

    “ljessen wrote:

    “jblnTenn- so you’re saying Bush -(and the administration) never said Iraq had ties to Al Queda before we went to war with Iraq? Are you hiding in a basement somewhere? That was the flagship lie…Cheney is so convinced he is still saying it.”

    Yes that is what I am saying. Do I need to prove it with the quotes?”

    ljessen,

    My mistake. I was getting confused with what they are on record claiming about Iraq and 9/11 ties, not Iraq and Al-Qaeda. Clearly Iraq has never had any connection to 9/11 and the administration is on record saying that.

    It is true that they claimed before the invasion and are still claiming that Iraq and Al-Qaeda had connections. So this latest finding about the Saddam – Al-Qaeda connection, or lack thereof as it reports, from the Pentagon report does contradict what the administration said and is still saying about that.

    I think this just underscores again how contradictory/faulty much of our intelligence reporting was back then. It is not clear to me with this latest finding by the Pentagon that VP Cheney is still publicly claiming that Saddam and Al-Qaeda had connections, however. That is the key. VP Cheney only said that Al-Qaeda was inside Iraq before we invaded and that is indeed true.

    However, if the adminstration still holds the view that Saddam’s government and Al-Qaeda had connnections then the burden of proof is clearly in their court now and they need to explain it to the public in relation to this latest finding. Otherwise, this will have the appearance to the public, especially to those that want so bad to believe it, that they misled us. If it is not true, they should come clean and admit they were basing is on faulty intelligence.

  7. jbintenn Says:

    This statement from the article summarizes the situation best:

    “Although Feith’s assessment in mid-2002 offered several examples of cooperation between Saddam’s government and al-Qaeda, the report said, the CIA had concluded months earlier that no evidence supported the existence of significant or long-term relationships.”

    Wasn’t it this same CIA organization, however, that we now know presented wrong intelligence to the President that showed Saddam had WMD’s? So how can we then turn around and use intelligence from back then from the same CIA that says there was no evidence of a “significant or long-term” relationship between Saddam and Al-Qaeda as reliable data?

  8. jbintenn Says:

    Walter wrote:

    “The point of the pentagon’s report was that the CIA DID present credible evidence to the president, but that the White House searched long and hard for the wrong intelligence to justify the invasion. This report vindicates the CIA, not the president.”

    I agree with you and I would welcome further clarification from the adminstration on this point before rushing to judgement.

    However, I also wanted to illustrate, again, the deception of those that want to bring this adminstration down.

    This latest bit of info may vindicate the CIA, as you say, but the WMD issue also vindicates the CIA? Wasn’t the President given faulty CIA data about the WMD’s back then to base his decision? But yet that fact is always left out now. Now we want to believe that the administration lied to us about the WMD’s.

  9. jbintenn Says:

    I still say we need to wait and let the administrtation answer this fully before we rush to judgement.

    I did not hear VP Cheney on Rush Limbaugh yesterday and have not seen anymore reports about this where any official from the administration has responded.

    Has anyone else from the administration gone on record and responded publicly about this latest Pentagon report besides the VP?

    No question, though, answering the report the way it was reported VP Cheney did on the Limbaugh show is not sufficient because the real issue brought out in the report is whether Saddam and Al-Qaeda were known to have ties, not whether Al-Qaeda was actually in Iraq before we invaded. There is a difference and this administration would do well to respond to it adequately.

    I will hold out judgement on this one, however, until we hear from the administration.

  10. jbintenn Says:

    Due to the recent reports from the Pentagon investigations as orchestrated by our Senate Intelligence Committee’s look into pre-war Iraq intelligence ( today’s and the one back in February that cited Mr. Feiths “inappropriate” behaviour ), I decided to go on my own fact finding mission.

    First of all, I challenge everyone to do the same. I was enlightened by what I have found. There truly are many myths out there involving this current administration. One that is extremely frustrating is that the Bush administration “lied” or purposely misled about the Iraq war.

    Secondly, since it is so easy for us to look at something now with a “Hindsight is 20/20” vantage point and conveniently draw our own conclusions about something, it is also very important to put all of this in the proper perspective and to not forget what the general consensus by everyone, including our mainstream media, was back before 9/11 as it related to Iraq. So take a look at this video from 1999/2000 timeframe and remember how it was back then. Add to that the events of 9/11 and how everyone felt about Iraq then.

    http://powerlineblog.com/archives/016745.php

    Did the Bush administration really lie about the Iraq/Al-Qaeda connection or did they just rely on the same general consensus that existed back then? You know the same one that Clinton used.

    Or should we just leave it that our sixteen intelligence agencies were really bad back then and had a lot of faulty unreliable data so much to the point that it was hard to share it between the different groups and that who could tell which data was correct or not?

    Could this be why the Bush adminstrtation decided to create a seperate group in the Pentagon that Mr. Feith headed to try and make sure the data they were getting was the most accurate? Or no, wait a minute, that’s right….it was this group that everyone is accusing now that surely the Bush administration created them to fabricate the intelligence data to make their case for war….Oh I forgot that. Was that really the intention? Read and go find your facts to see, why don’t you.

    Finally, part of my research led me to some more data that I found very interesting that I wanted to share in light of all those that so want to believe the administration misled/lied about Iraq.

    Countless investigations have now been launched to investigate this administration and its use of pre-war intelligence and not one has ever found that the Bush administration lied about anything. But they did find that the intelligence we used to make our case to go to war was faulty.

    Bottom-line is don’t be ‘hood-winked’ by those that would have us believe, at all cost, that this administration is ‘evil’. These people believe it because primarily they hope it to be true. A little fact-finding mission will show you the way. I challenge everyone to go on your own fact-finding mission to get the real truth.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: