http://www.spinsanity.org/post.html?2004_0...780918427108137

 

SpinSanity is a site that tears apart anything stated by any party.

 

Here's a part of the article:

 

But the administration in fact did suggest that Iraq might be linked to 9/11. Vice President Cheney left open the possibility that Iraq was involved with September 11 on several occasions, most recently last week. During his June 17 CNBC appearance, host Gloria Borger asked, "Was Iraq involved [with Al Qaeda in the attack on 9/11]?" Cheney responded, "We don't know. You know, what the commission says is they can't find any evidence of that." It’s the same line Cheney has been taking since major combat operations ended. During a September 14, 2003 interview on NBC’s "Meet the Press," host Tim Russert asked Cheney, "Is there a connection [between Iraq and Al Qaeda]?" The Vice President responded, "We don’t know," and then listed heavily disputed evidence indicating that it was a possibility. In addition, the administration repeatedly made strategically ambiguous statements implying a link between Iraq and Al Qaeda.

 

During the CNBC interview, Cheney also dissembled in the following exchange about Mohammed Atta, an Al Qaeda member who was allegedly involved in the September 11 attacks (a witness claimed that Atta met with an Iraqi intelligence officer in Prague in the spring of 2001, a heavily disputed assertion that the FBI and CIA have questioned):

 

BORGER: Well, let's get to Mohamed Atta for a minute because you mentioned him as well. You have said in the past that it was, quote, "pretty well confirmed."

CHENEY: No, I never said that.

BORGER: OK.

CHENEY: I never said that.

BORGER: I think that is...

CHENEY: Absolutely not. What I said was the Czech intelligence service reported after 9/11 that Atta had been in Prague on April 9 of 2001, where he allegedly met with an Iraqi intelligence official. We have never been able to confirm that nor have we been able to knock it down, we just don't know.

But as a White House transcript demonstrates, Cheney said in a December 9, 2001 interview on "Meet the Press" that, "Well, what we now have that's developed since you and I last talked, Tim, of course, was that report that's been pretty well confirmed, that [Atta] did go to Prague and he did meet with a senior official of the Iraqi intelligence service in Czechoslovakia last April, several months before the attack." (our emphasis)

 

Before it continues accusing others of misrepresenting the Commisson staff’s statements and revising the history of its case for war in Iraq, the Bush White House should engage in some self-examination.

 

As John Stewart said on the Daily Show, "Mr. Vice President, I must inform you. Your pants are on fire."

I was watching that too.

 

Also,

 

Portholes, dammit! We need more portholes!

Let's cut to the chase here, shall we?

 

You don't think that Al Queda had any dealings with Iraq? They were in Syria, Iran, Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia, the Phillapeans (spelling sucks but I am in a hurry), Malaysia, etc, etc, etc, and hell, IN SOUTH FRICKIN' FLORIDA! But they weren't in Iraq? Excuse me? That's a load of s*** to think that they didn't ever have connections of some sort...

Let's cut to the chase here, shall we?

 

You don't think that Al Queda had any dealings with Iraq?  They were in Syria, Iran, Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia, the Phillapeans (spelling sucks but I am in a hurry), Malaysia, etc, etc, etc, and hell, IN SOUTH FRICKIN' FLORIDA!  But they weren't in Iraq?  Excuse me?  That's a load of s*** to think that they didn't ever have connections of some sort...

Then why the hell aren't we in the other countries invading that have more obvious ties? (yeah, I know we are in Afghanistan, but I am referring to the other countries)

 

INVADE FLORIDA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Then why the hell aren't we in the other countries invading that have more obvious ties?  (yeah, I know we are in Afghanistan, but I am referring to the other countries)

 

INVADE FLORIDA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!   

If we invade Iran I am buying a gun...

 

btw, nice picture of your hamster, very cute. If that is a guinea pig please don't yell at me for mistaking it as a hamster

If we invade Iran I am buying a gun...

 

btw, nice picture of your hamster, very cute.  If that is a guinea pig please don't yell at me for mistaking it as a hamster

No, you're correct - he's a hamster.

No, you're correct - he's a hamster.

have you put up pics of guinea pigs in the past? or were they all hamsters

have you put up pics of guinea pigs in the past? or were they all hamsters

All hamsters.

http://www.spinsanity.org/post.html?2004_0...780918427108137

 

SpinSanity is a site that tears apart anything stated by any party.

 

Here's a part of the article:

 

But the administration in fact did suggest that Iraq might be linked to 9/11. Vice President Cheney left open the possibility that Iraq was involved with September 11 on several occasions, most recently last week. During his June 17 CNBC appearance, host Gloria Borger asked, "Was Iraq involved [with Al Qaeda in the attack on 9/11]?" Cheney responded, "We don't know. You know, what the commission says is they can't find any evidence of that." It’s the same line Cheney has been taking since major combat operations ended. During a September 14, 2003 interview on NBC’s "Meet the Press," host Tim Russert asked Cheney, "Is there a connection [between Iraq and Al Qaeda]?" The Vice President responded, "We don’t know," and then listed heavily disputed evidence indicating that it was a possibility. In addition, the administration repeatedly made strategically ambiguous statements implying a link between Iraq and Al Qaeda.

 

During the CNBC interview, Cheney also dissembled in the following exchange about Mohammed Atta, an Al Qaeda member who was allegedly involved in the September 11 attacks (a witness claimed that Atta met with an Iraqi intelligence officer in Prague in the spring of 2001, a heavily disputed assertion that the FBI and CIA have questioned):

 

BORGER: Well, let's get to Mohamed Atta for a minute because you mentioned him as well. You have said in the past that it was, quote, "pretty well confirmed."

CHENEY: No, I never said that.

BORGER: OK.

CHENEY: I never said that.

BORGER: I think that is...

CHENEY: Absolutely not. What I said was the Czech intelligence service reported after 9/11 that Atta had been in Prague on April 9 of 2001, where he allegedly met with an Iraqi intelligence official. We have never been able to confirm that nor have we been able to knock it down, we just don't know.

But as a White House transcript demonstrates, Cheney said in a December 9, 2001 interview on "Meet the Press" that, "Well, what we now have that's developed since you and I last talked, Tim, of course, was that report that's been pretty well confirmed, that [Atta] did go to Prague and he did meet with a senior official of the Iraqi intelligence service in Czechoslovakia last April, several months before the attack." (our emphasis)

 

Before it continues accusing others of misrepresenting the Commisson staff’s statements and revising the history of its case for war in Iraq, the Bush White House should engage in some self-examination.

 

As John Stewart said on the Daily Show, "Mr. Vice President, I must inform you. Your pants are on fire." 

Distortions by the White House?!?! How about distortions by the media???

 

 

How bout the fact that the NY Times and Washington Post are running headlines that say the 9-11 commission found no links whatsoever between Iraq and Al Quaeda when that was totally untrue? How bout the fact that the chairman of the commission himself said there was a long standing relationship between the 2 and that Al Quaeda repeatedly asked Iraq about acquiring WMD.

 

How about the fact that Iraq was planning attacks inside the United States? Who said that? The VP? The CIA? Nope, the Russian intelligence service.

 

While Iraq and Al Queada may not have jointly planned 9-11 they were defenitely working together. The CIA says so & the 9-11 commission does as well. The media and people like you with your anti-Bush, anti-war rhetoric are distorting the truth and it's hurting the war against terrorism.

 

You guys love to make Iraq look like an innocent victim just so you can trash the war and Bush.

Let's cut to the chase here, shall we?

 

You don't think that Al Queda had any dealings with Iraq?  They were in Syria, Iran, Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia, the Phillapeans (spelling sucks but I am in a hurry), Malaysia, etc, etc, etc, and hell, IN SOUTH FRICKIN' FLORIDA!  But they weren't in Iraq?  Excuse me?  That's a load of s*** to think that they didn't ever have connections of some sort...

That settles it. INVADE FLORIDA!!!!

Nuke, SpinSanity nails everybody. It was the site I sent you when Dean was being a douche.

 

But way to disregard the fact that Cheney lied like a douche to the nation and you just swallow it.

Distortions by the White House?!?! How about distortions by the media???

 

 

How bout the fact that the NY Times and Washington Post are running headlines that say the 9-11 commission found no links whatsoever between Iraq and Al Quaeda when that was totally untrue?  How bout the fact that the chairman of the commission himself said there was a long standing relationship between the 2 and that Al Quaeda repeatedly asked Iraq about acquiring WMD. 

 

How about the fact that Iraq was planning attacks inside the United States?  Who said that?  The VP? The CIA?  Nope,  the Russian intelligence service. 

 

While Iraq and Al Queada may not have jointly planned 9-11 they were defenitely working together.  The CIA says so & the 9-11 commission does as well.  The media and people like you with your anti-Bush, anti-war rhetoric are distorting the truth and it's hurting the war against terrorism.

 

You guys love to make Iraq look like an innocent victim just so you can trash the war and Bush.

The staff report says that Qaeda and Iraq had no active relationship. Had their been contacts? Probably. It seems that Qaeda had contacts and still does in many states, including Iran, Syria, and our allies Saudi Arabia and Pakistan. Knowledge of specific people does not necessarily denote an active relationship. I heard a bunch of comission members on a radio interview respond to the administration's disagreements. "I think our staffers would disagree with the Vice President's position."

 

The Russian intelligence report was pretty much, "we heard that they might be planning attacks in the US sometime at some point with something." I think the phrase purple monkey dishwasher might have been in there too but im not sure.

 

Listen dude, the administration hurts itself when it gets caught in such ridiculous lies. Cheney claiming he never said what White House transcripts say he said, Wolfowitz not knowing an approximation of how many people died in Afghanistan. Bush saying he hardly knew Chalabi when he was sitting directly behind Laura Bush at the State of the Union - what did he win a contest or something? Cheney is out and out lying, but what Bush is doing isn't a lie, just a mislead... I read a recent article by Fred Kaplan where he compares it to what Clinton did. "It depends on what your meaning of relationship is." "It depends on what your meaning of prisoner of war is." "It depends on what your meaning of meeting in Prague with an Iraqi official is." Notice a pattern here?

 

Finally, public criticism of a policy does not hurt the policy when it isn't coming from a government official carrying out said policy. We live in a democratic state where an open exchange of ideas is vital to shaping our future. Nobody here is saying that this Bin Laden dude is an alright guy here. What people are saying is that we are running the risk of changing our way of political life to fight terrorism... and if we do that, they win.

That settles it. INVADE FLORIDA!!!!

Alright! There's two of us now - who else is in?!

Alright!  There's two of us now - who else is in?! 

Let me get my sister and neice out first.

Let me get my sister and neice out first. 

Don't worry - we'll give plenty of advance notice (you get the first notice tho! ).

Let's cut to the chase here, shall we?

 

You don't think that Al Queda had any dealings with Iraq?  They were in Syria, Iran, Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia, the Phillapeans (spelling sucks but I am in a hurry), Malaysia, etc, etc, etc, and hell, IN SOUTH FRICKIN' FLORIDA!  But they weren't in Iraq?  Excuse me?  That's a load of s*** to think that they didn't ever have connections of some sort...

you and I have connections - what does that prove?

 

what is known is that the connections between Iraq and Al Qeada were all negative, hostile, because Saddam was an out and out secularist and Al Qeada was the total opposite and Iraq rebuffed Al Qeada at every opportunity

 

so if A totally rejects B, then in Bush-lie-world, A is guilty of helping B - only in Bush lie fantasy immoral land

 

but please don't reality disturb the Bush fictions though since Bush did something that is all his: make the world far more unsafe than it ever was

Let me take this in a totally different direction.

 

Please tell me the "mistakes" that Bill Clinton made?

Please tell me the "mistakes" that Bill Clinton made?

 

Bush is now correcting Clinton's "mistake" of not killing Muslims and for allowing Sadaam to start backing the Iraqi oil with the Euro instead of American currency. We should have went in and destroyed Al Qaeda in Somalia and squished the Islam extremists right then and there. Now that we have the Middle East stirred up, let's get the draft going and eliminate all the religious fanatics over there that just want to kill us and put the Kurds in charge. We can start sending the prisoners in Guatanemo Bay to Israel to stand trial for connections with suicide bombings. If they don't want to live peacefully with other religions, then screw em, they can sit in hell with the rest of the suiciders.

Roll call!

 

Bush...Scum bag

Cheney...Scum Bag

Rumsfeld...Scum Bag

Powell...Scum Bag

Ridge....

 

You get the picture!