Lied into war.
Captured Iraqi documents and intelligence interrogations of Saddam Hussein and two former aides “all confirmed” that Hussein’s regime was not directly cooperating with al-Qaeda before the U.S. invasion of Iraq, according to a declassified Defense Department report released yesterday.
…
The report’s release came on the same day that Vice President Cheney, appearing on Rush Limbaugh’s radio program, repeated his allegation that al-Qaeda was operating inside Iraq “before we ever launched” the war, under the direction of Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, the terrorist killed last June.
Still spinnin’, after all these years.
Cue the overall soiling wingnut rebuttal:
“MSM iz lying for teh Dhimmi-Defeatocrats!!1!1″
So Cheney doesn’t even believe his own Dept. of Defense.
Credibility? Just a distant memory.
Yes, Oliver, until we establish that link between al Qaida and Iraq, we must assume that al Qaida means us no harm.
Hey Oliver, I found your blog through the O’Reily video and I just wanted to leave a comment. You seem like a smart guy and I just wish there were more people like you. Keep up the good work.
Same old semantics. Why did you say ‘directly”? Isn’t that a full admission that there was ‘indirect’ cooperation. The VEEP has said there were links and that al Zarqawi was in Iraq working as an AQ operative. Thats still true. Cheney has always been right on this.
Veep – 1
Progressives – Zilch
Cheney has always been right on this.
Oh, stop it.
So now you don’t believe the DOD either.
He’s one of the 30 Percenters, there’s no hope for him.
Saddam breathed air. People in al qaida breath air. What more of a link does a troll need???
Brace yourselves, children, big scary historical fact coming:
When the United States struck against several reputed terrorist targets, including a pharmaceutical factory in Sudan, it was stated by the administration that the factory was being used by Al Qaeda, in conjunction with Iraqi government officials, to produce poison gas.
This strike was made in August 1998, and the point man for the administration was Richard Clarke.
So, I guess that Bush started lying to the American people about the Iraq/Al Qaeda linkage over two years before he became president, and Karl Rove arranged for the Clinton administration to start laying the groundwork for his “phony war” almost 3 years before 9/11? Dang, those guys are AMAZING.
J.
Big scary historical malarkey you mean.
If US intelligence at the time was correct (rightwingnuts spent 8 years blasting Clinton for using speculative intelligence in bombing an aspirin factory, and now it’s rock solid), the Iraq connection to the Al Shifa plant was with the Sudanese government. The Al Qaeda investment in the Al Shifa plant was fuzzy and hidden and also with the Sudanese government. There is no (zero) evidence that either side knew of the other’s connections, particularly Iraq knowing about bin Laden’s possible connection.
The Iraq connection is the surer of the intelligence. Iraq had a contract for medicine with the plant for medicines under the oil-for-food program. It is believed Iraqi scientists worked at the plant. The bin Laden connection is speculative. Bin Laden may have invested money in the plant, the Sudanese government supported bin Laden, …
That would be like saying I stole money from the troops because I once owned Halliburton stock.
Well, midder, if you sold that stock to George Soros, the guy who indirectly signs our host’s paycheck, then I might be tempted to make that connection.
The key word here is “operational” ties. That means that Iraq and Al Qaeda never worked together on any actual operations — something I don’t recall anyone ever alleging.
The way I’ve always heard it put is that Saddam was providing support to terrorists, not exclusively to Al Qaeda. Training grounds, funding, intelligence, equipment — all the little things that terrorists need to commit their terrorism. That has been pretty much indisputable, along with the fact that support for maintining the post-first Gulf War sanctions were crumbling under his oil-for-food bribery and propaganda offensive (I forget how many thousands of Iraqi babies were dying every month due to the sanctions, but was quite a few), right up until 9/11 happened.
I’ve never believed that Saddam had any foreknowledge of 9/11, by the way, for two simple reasons. For one, as noted above, it totally screwed his plans to get out of the sanctions. For another, the temptation to blow the whistle on it to the West to score major PR points would have been tremendous — in fact, it might have been just what he needed to get the sanctions lifted permanently.
But to repeat myself: I never heard “Saddam’s ties to 9/11″ cited as a reason for the invasion, nor “Saddam’s ties to Al Qaeda.” I heard “Saddam’s support of terrorists, including Al Qaeda” as one of many, many casi belli.
J.
Ok I’m confused.
You alleged operational ties between Al Qaeda and Iraq in Sudan’s Al Shifa plant that Clinton bombed.
I refuted the operational ties.
then you said no one alleged operational ties?
So are you admitting the latest right wing talking point about Al Shifa is just a desperate attempt to confuse the issue of false or misleading Bush administration Iraq claims?
No one ever claimed Saddam had ties to 9-11. They just said 9-11 showed we have to invade Iraq about 40 billion times until people associated 9-11 with Hussein.
I’m still waiting to see that Saddam’s support of Al Qaeda.
On a side note: you mentioned Hussein’s oil-for-food program. It bears mentioning that the corruption mechanism remained in place after the invasion, first under the CPA and now under Bush buddy and source for much pre-invasion false Iraq intelligence; Iraqi Oil Minister Ahmed Chalabi where the corruption has soared to new heights.
Midder, not to belabor a point, but “operational” ties kind of involve operations, by definition. Allegedly co-producing poison gas is NOT an operation, it is prep work.
J.
Alleging Al Qaeda and Iraq were co-producing poison gas is not alleging an “operational tie”? You have to be kidding. That is a joint [relationship or union = tie] process for achieving a result [operational], to wit poison gas [of or intended for or involved in military operations = operational]. You want to narrow the definition of operation down to “field operations” which is a ridiculous standard given your use of words like “Brace yourselves, children, big scary historical fact coming:” and “that the factory was being used by Al Qaeda, in conjunction with Iraqi government officials, to produce poison gas” and “the Iraq/Al Qaeda linkage”.
Side note for late comers: Al Qaeda did not work in conjunction with Iraq at the Al Shifa plant. There is a tenuous and unproven possibility that bin Laden may have invested in the plant, and a tenuous and unproven possibility Iraqi WmD scientists worked at the plant, and a concrete contract for the plant to sell medicines to Iraq. There is no proof of any kind that either side was aware of the other’s possible involvement.
“You have to be kidding.”
Sadly, he isn’t.
Oh, sorry to have skipped this:
The way I’ve always heard it put is that Saddam was providing support to terrorists, not exclusively to Al Qaeda. Training grounds, funding, intelligence, equipment — all the little things that terrorists need to commit their terrorism. That has been pretty much indisputable
Is completely wrong. Most of what you list is disputed. Training grounds for terrorists; Disputed. Funding; Disputed (although he did provide funds to the families of dead suicide bombers). Intelligence to terrorists; I don’t think I’ve really seen anyone make that case. Equipment; I have not seen anyone make that case.
Whatever. Invading Iraq was the best thing that ever happened.
Dick cheney has had 4 heart attacks. With all of the meds he’s on, maybe he really believes his own bullshit.
I really hope he runs for Pres in ‘08. With the shoe shopper as his VP.
Funding for the families of suicide bombers: Disputed.
The only link made there is through a third party, the Gaza-based Palestinian Arab Liberation Front, which claimed, but may or may not have had direct operational ties to Saddam.
MOst of the links to Saddam were obtained through Israeli intelligence, and disseminated as the Bush Administration tried to make the case for war in 2002.
Wellstone: Israel has some of the best intelligence operatives, and the best intelligence, in the world.
If they said the sun will be going supernova tomorrow, I’d run out and buy dark glasses!
How the Dems want to fight the Global War on Terror
As opposed to the Republicans who want to create terrorist havens, alienate most of the free world, and pass out contracts to their donors and friends.
Although there were certainly disagreements between the CIA and Feith’s shop, both argued in 2002 that there was a relationship between Saddam’s Iraq and al Qaeda. George Tenet, then the director of central intelligence, stated the CIA’s position quite clearly in an October 7, 2002 letter to then head of the Senate Intelligence Committee, Senator Bob Graham (D-FL). Tenet explained, “We have solid reporting of senior level contacts between Iraq and al-Qaeda going back a decade.” Iraq and al Qaeda “have discussed safe haven and reciprocal non-aggression.” Tenet warned, “We have credible reporting that al-Qaeda leaders sought contacts in Iraq who could help them acquire WMD capabilities. The reporting also stated that Iraq has provided training to al-Qaeda members in the areas of poisons and gases and making conventional bombs.” And, “Iraq’s increasing support to extremist Palestinians, coupled with growing indications of a relationship with al-Qaeda, suggest that Baghdad’s links to terrorists will increase, even absent US military action.”
http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/013/510ixmdf.asp