Saddam not part of Sept. 11th...from George's own mouth... (page 4)

freeman

Here is something interesting concerning the linkage of Saddam to 9-11.

These are the words of our latest presidential candidate, General Wesley Clark on June 15, 2003 during a Meet the Press appearance. General Clark stated that on 9-11 he was he was being pressured by the white house to link Saddam and 9-11. This is what he said:

"It came from the White House; it came from people around the White House, it came from all over. I got a call on 9/11 - I was on CNN, and I got a call at my home saying, 'You've got to say this is connected. This is state sponsored terrorism. This has to be connected to Saddam Hussein.'"

Unfortunately for General Clark he is not a very skilled ~~liar~~ political conversationalist, further Tim Russert who was interviewing the General is an excellent interviewer and proceeded to put the General on the spot as he should. Now asking him to be specific about his assertion, Russert wanted the General to name names. He could not name a single person in the administration that asked him to make such a linkage or even name a single person he talked to.

Under pressure from Russert, the General reluctantly changed his story to "No one from the White House asked me to link Saddam to September 11th." Folks the good General just did a major flip flop on national television. But wait there is more!

Russert smelling the blood in the water hammered at the General again and again. The General now said: "It was a "friend in the administration" but he couldn't name that friend, so he then changed his story once again to say it was "some other sources." OK we went from administration members, to no one from the White House, the back to a "friend in the administration", the to "some other sources"

Wait wait, it gets even better. He then says "No, it was a friend at a Muslim think-tank in Canada." Are these the words of a liar, a deranged person, or something in between? I leave that for you to decide. All I can say is: Oh My God!

Freeman

Edited to add: Sorry DakotaRed I passed your post without realizing you already referenced the interview with the General.

SixofNine

freeman, when you get that text working, please be sure and include a source. thanks

maybesbabies

As for WMDs, it seems everyone believed they were there until recently

http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=topNews&storyID=3466861

hope this link works! Hans Blix never thought we'd find WMD.

crownboy

I agree with your first post, Six. That 70% number should have suprised me, but I've grown used to the American public being generally ignorant on any issues international.

Most people probably figured Saddam=Arab=AlQueda=Sept. 11=let's get him!!!! Even the supposed other "Al Queda connections" are based on extremely questionable evidence (the supposed Mohamed Atta meeting with an Iraqi intelliegence officer that has never come close to being confirmed, and of course the Iraqi terrorist group that has some weak Al Queda connection. Forget the fact that the group is located and affiliated with the Kurdish territory that was not under Saddam's control. Also ignore Al-Queda's and Saddam's differing goals and acrimonious history. They're both Arabs and both kill people, and that's good enough ).

I guess the situation just got a little too embarrassing for Bush, just like when he lied about the forged Niger documents and had to eventually apologize after the "George Tenet as fall guy" plan didn't pan out.

DakotaRed

...just can't find a single quote where Bush stated Saddam was actually behind Sept 11.
Right. And the JWs NEVER ACTUALLY SAID that 1975 was "the end" of this system of things either....

Very simple to counter, Swickley, just supply the quote and a link to it. Easy!

teenyuck

I never thought or heard that Saddam was involved with Sept. 11th. Strange that 70% of Americans would.

Maybe Wes Clark let it slip during an interview.....

DakotaRed

Hans Blix never thought we'd find WMD.

The following quotes are some I took off of the UN Website from Hans Blix himself prior to the war in Iraq. I have been hearing Mr. Blix say today that he knew there wouldn’t be any WMDs found. But, is that what he was saying to the UN before?

"Another matter, and one of great significance, is that many proscribed weapons and items are not accounted for,"

“If they exist they should be presented for destruction. If they do not exist, credible evidence to that effect should be presented."

"In the current situation, one would expect Iraq to be eager to comply,"

“…some 300 chemical and biological samples have been collected and the destruction of approximately 50 litres of mustard gas has begun.”

"Today, three months after the adoption of resolution 1441, the period of disarmament through inspection could still be short, if 'immediate, active and unconditional cooperation' with UNMOVIC and the IAEA were to be forthcoming,"

http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=6169&Cr=iraq&Cr1=inspect

The link now goes to a blank page on the UN site. I guess they periodically remove transcripts. Here are some others if you wish to check it out;

http://www.newsmax.com/showinsidecover.shtml?a=2003/6/16/11554

http://www.twin-towers.net/wmd.htm

http://www.greenleft.org.au/back/2000/398/398p20b.htm

http://66.216.126.164/kurtz/kurtz060903.asp

http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/952917/posts

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&node=&contentId=A26671-2003Jun6&notFound=true

http://www.fas.org/man/crs/IB92117.pdf

http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/library/news/iraq/2002/Iraq_Oct_2002.htm

http://www.iraqwatch.org/wmd/