Why did Bush lie about Saddam being connected to 9/11?

[Lakhota]

If a chain doesn't have LINKS - how can it be CONNECTED?

LINK
1. one of the rings or separate pieces of which a chain is composed.

Synonyms
2. connection, connective, copula.

Link Define Link at Dictionary.com

So, can you NaziCon retards stop your nonsense about the thread title? The thread title is accurate.

 

[paulitician]

An L.A. Times op-ed of April 22 said, "Halliburton Received No-Bid Contracts During Clinton Administration For Work In Bosnia And Kosovo." An October 2003 article in the (Raleigh, NC) News & Observer quoted Bill Clinton's Undersecretary Of Commerce William Reinsch as saying "'Halliburton has a distinguished track record,' he said. 'They do business in some 120 countries. This is a group of people who know what they're doing in a difficult business. It's a particularly difficult business when people are shooting at you.'"

If Democrats want to investigate a scandal involving Iraq they should devote their efforts to the UN "Oil-for-Food" program instead of Halliburton. However, they will not because Saddam Hussein is not a candidate in this presidential election.

And they should also investigate VP Biden and his brat son getting rich in Ukraine. They're getting richer, while at the same time forcing American Taxpayers to fund their schemes. People need to get over their 'Party before Country' mentality. Both parties are controlled by Ruling-Class Globalist Elites.

 

[Redfish]

An L.A. Times op-ed of April 22 said, "Halliburton Received No-Bid Contracts During Clinton Administration For Work In Bosnia And Kosovo." An October 2003 article in the (Raleigh, NC) News & Observer quoted Bill Clinton's Undersecretary Of Commerce William Reinsch as saying "'Halliburton has a distinguished track record,' he said. 'They do business in some 120 countries. This is a group of people who know what they're doing in a difficult business. It's a particularly difficult business when people are shooting at you.'"

If Democrats want to investigate a scandal involving Iraq they should devote their efforts to the UN "Oil-for-Food" program instead of Halliburton. However, they will not because Saddam Hussein is not a candidate in this presidential election.

True, Halliburton gets no bid contracts because no other company in the world will do what they do. And, what libtards don't understand is that the price of those contracts is nogotiated with the government procurement office by government contracting officers who are charged with getting the best deal possible for the government.

 

[Tuatara]

Lot's of reasons. He wanted revenge on the man who plotted to kill his daddy. He felt Saddam was an easy target to take down. But the number one reason....IMHO was

DICK Cheney convinced the recovering alcoholic that the invasion was necessary, while in actuality it was only necessary for Cheney to become unbelievably rich and to stuff the pockets of all his Halliburton friends and associates. Oh and OIL.

Yes! That post needs to go in the thread Stupid things Democrats Say. All the talking points.

LOL.

Halliburton.

The cliches.

Notice how they never bring up how Clinton awarded Halliburton no bid contracts in the 90s? As if any of them knew or cared about that.

Factcheck has disproved all of their lame claims of Haliburton.

Such losers.

Well, as long as you are cool with Factcheck......

factcheck.org/UploadedFiles/they-lied-they-died.pdf

sigh

Why do leftists demonize Halliburton? What proof exists of their claims of corruption? What exactly has Halliburton done to profit from American military casualties? Indeed, have they profited from military casualties? Is there a special relationship between the Bush administration and Halliburton so that the company receives contracts without observing the normal bidding process?

From your own link.


On March 24, 2003, the Army Corps announced publicly that KBR (A Subsidiary of Halliburton) had been awarded a contract to restore oil-infrastructure in Iraq, potentially worth $7 billion. The contract KBR received…would eventually include 10 distinct task orders. KBR did not come close to reaching the contract ceiling, billing just over $2.5 billion…The contract was awarded without submission for public bids or congressional notification. In their response to congressional inquiries, Army officials said they determined that extinguishing oil fires fell under the range of services provided under LOGCAP, meaning that KBR could deploy quickly and without additional security clearances.

 

[Redfish]

If a chain doesn't have LINKS - how can it be CONNECTED?

LINK
1. one of the rings or separate pieces of which a chain is composed.

Synonyms
2. connection, connective, copula.

Link Define Link at Dictionary.com

So, can you NaziCon retards stop your nonsense about the thread title? The thread title is accurate.

If Bush lied so did both clintons and the UN. They all had the same intel and came to the same conclusions.

 

[Lakhota]

If a chain doesn't have LINKS - how can it be CONNECTED?

LINK
1. one of the rings or separate pieces of which a chain is composed.

Synonyms
2. connection, connective, copula.

Link Define Link at Dictionary.com

So, can you NaziCon retards stop your nonsense about the thread title? The thread title is accurate.

If Bush lied so did both clintons and the UN. They all had the same intel and came to the same conclusions.

Remember CIA Director George Tenet? BTW, the Clintons never invaded Iraq - Bush did.

George Tenet: At The Center Of The Storm - CBS News

 

[Redfish]

If a chain doesn't have LINKS - how can it be CONNECTED?

LINK
1. one of the rings or separate pieces of which a chain is composed.

Synonyms
2. connection, connective, copula.

Link Define Link at Dictionary.com

So, can you NaziCon retards stop your nonsense about the thread title? The thread title is accurate.

If Bush lied so did both clintons and the UN. They all had the same intel and came to the same conclusions.

Remember CIA Director George Tenet? BTW, the Clintons never invaded Iraq - Bush did.

George Tenet: At The Center Of The Storm - CBS News

So, in your small mind Bush personally invaded Iraq???????????? are you that much of a partisan loon? Both parties authorized and funded that lunacy, and they all had access to the same intel that Bush had. Both clintons are on record supporting the invasion in several speeches.

They were all wrong. Why not deal with this truthfully so we can learn from our mistakes? Get over the partisan bullshit and deal with reality.

If not, we wil continue to lose our young people and billions of dollars in foolish escapades like Iraq and Viet Nam.

 

[Theowl32]

If a chain doesn't have LINKS - how can it be CONNECTED?

LINK
1. one of the rings or separate pieces of which a chain is composed.

Synonyms
2. connection, connective, copula.

Link Define Link at Dictionary.com

So, can you NaziCon retards stop your nonsense about the thread title? The thread title is accurate.

If Bush lied so did both clintons and the UN. They all had the same intel and came to the same conclusions.

Remember CIA Director George Tenet? BTW, the Clintons never invaded Iraq - Bush did.

George Tenet: At The Center Of The Storm - CBS News

So, in your small mind Bush personally invaded Iraq???????????? are you that much of a partisan loon? Both parties authorized and funded that lunacy, and they all had access to the same intel that Bush had. Both clintons are on record supporting the invasion in several speeches.

They were all wrong. Why not deal with this truthfully so we can learn from our mistakes? Get over the partisan bullshit and deal with reality.

If not, we wil continue to lose our young people and billions of dollars in foolish escapades like Iraq and Viet Nam.

Yes, the idiot is that much of a brainwashed moron.

 

[Theowl32]

Lot's of reasons. He wanted revenge on the man who plotted to kill his daddy. He felt Saddam was an easy target to take down. But the number one reason....IMHO was

DICK Cheney convinced the recovering alcoholic that the invasion was necessary, while in actuality it was only necessary for Cheney to become unbelievably rich and to stuff the pockets of all his Halliburton friends and associates. Oh and OIL.

Yes! That post needs to go in the thread Stupid things Democrats Say. All the talking points.

LOL.

Halliburton.

The cliches.

Notice how they never bring up how Clinton awarded Halliburton no bid contracts in the 90s? As if any of them knew or cared about that.

Factcheck has disproved all of their lame claims of Haliburton.

Such losers.

Well, as long as you are cool with Factcheck......

factcheck.org/UploadedFiles/they-lied-they-died.pdf

sigh

Why do leftists demonize Halliburton? What proof exists of their claims of corruption? What exactly has Halliburton done to profit from American military casualties? Indeed, have they profited from military casualties? Is there a special relationship between the Bush administration and Halliburton so that the company receives contracts without observing the normal bidding process?

From your own link.


On March 24, 2003, the Army Corps announced publicly that KBR (A Subsidiary of Halliburton) had been awarded a contract to restore oil-infrastructure in Iraq, potentially worth $7 billion. The contract KBR received…would eventually include 10 distinct task orders. KBR did not come close to reaching the contract ceiling, billing just over $2.5 billion…The contract was awarded without submission for public bids or congressional notification. In their response to congressional inquiries, Army officials said they determined that extinguishing oil fires fell under the range of services provided under LOGCAP, meaning that KBR could deploy quickly and without additional security clearances.

Also from my link and from Factcheck.org.

When Factcheck.org checked the facts about allegations by Democrats that there was a scandal because of the "no-bid" contracts awarded to Halliburton they stated, "It is false to imply that Bush personally awarded a contract to Halliburton. The ‘no-bid contract’ in question is actually an extension of an earlier contract to support U.S. troops overseas that Halliburton won under open bidding. In fact, the notion that Halliburton benefited from any cronyism has been poo-poohed by a Harvard University professor, Steven Kelman, who was administrator of the Office of Federal Procurement Policy in the Clinton administration. ‘One would be hard-pressed to discover anyone with a working knowledge of how federal contracts are awarded...who doesn't regard these allegations as being somewhere between highly improbable and utterly absurd,’ Kelman wrote in the Washington Post last November."

 

[Theowl32]

So, when I asked why Booooosh did not plant the WMDs in Iraq, since he knew all along that there were no WMDs, what was the response?

I mean, somehow (according to liberals) Booooosh and Cheney rigged WTC#7 for 911 and set the demolition bombs off.

Believe this. They believe that right now to this day. They all have a copy of Fahrenheit 911 and can recite every word of it.

What they do not know is it would take approximately 9 months to rig a building of that size. Oh, never mind. Plus, the noise controlled demolition reaches a decibel level of 140, which is something that can be heard on half a mile away. You know how many demolition charges were heard (the pancaking noise is not demolition charge)? None.

Here, watch this starting at 2:15 about the noise of demolition charges.



Anyway, I needed to point out that the liberals who will ignore ALL of that, and will still claim 911 was an inside job "for oil" (liberals and their perpetual cliches) cannot answer why Booooooosh would not have planted WMDs in Iraq.

Would that have been that hard for him to do that?

 

[Tuatara]

So, when I asked why Booooosh did not plant the WMDs in Iraq, since he knew all along that there were no WMDs, what was the response?

I mean, somehow (according to liberals) Booooosh and Cheney rigged WTC#7 for 911 and set the demolition bombs off.

Believe this. They believe that right now to this day. They all have a copy of Fahrenheit 911 and can recite every word of it.

What they do not know is it would take approximately 9 months to rig a building of that size. Oh, never mind. Plus, the noise controlled demolition reaches a decibel level of 140, which is something that can be heard on half a mile away. You know how many demolition charges were heard (the pancaking noise is not demolition charge)? None.

Here, watch this starting at 2:15 about the noise of demolition charges.



Anyway, I needed to point out that the liberals who will ignore ALL of that, and will still claim 911 was an inside job "for oil" (liberals and their perpetual cliches) cannot answer why Booooooosh would not have planted WMDs in Iraq.

Would that have been that hard for him to do that?

Red Herring. This is not a debate about WTC#7 and liberals and conservatives believe both sides of that argument. As for the Bush planting WMD's, that's the very first I've seen of that ridiculous claim. It is your claim, no one elses.

 

[JimH52]

The following link is a great timeline: It begins on 8/14/92 and ends on 3/20/03 when the war begins.

Here's a great timeline as well. It's the occupant of the White House in Six Month intervals before 9/11.

Clinton
Clinton
Clinton
Clinton
Clinton
Clinton
Clinton
Clinton
Clinton
Clinton
Clinton
Clinton
Clinton
Clinton
Clinton
Clinton
Bush

And apparently according to you, W just completely fooled you. Damn you people are dumb, and that's according to you.

Actually Bush became President in January 2001, months before 9/11. He was also warned by intelligence that there may be plans to fly planes into buildings.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_inauguration_of_George_W._Bush
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/what-bush-knew-before-sept-11/

You Repubs should do like to rewrite history, don't you? Are just DUMB are you just a liar?

 

[JimH52]

Poll: 70% believe Saddam, 9-11 link

WASHINGTON (AP) — Nearly seven in 10 Americans believe it is likely that ousted Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein was personally involved in the Sept. 11 attacks, says a poll out almost two years after the terrorists' strike against this country.

Sixty-nine percent in a Washington Post poll published Saturday said they believe it is likely the Iraqi leader was personally involved in the attacks carried out by al-Qaeda. A majority of Democrats, Republicans and independents believe it's likely Saddam was involved.

The belief in the connection persists even though there has been no proof of a link between the two.

More: USATODAY.com - Poll: 70% believe Saddam, 9-11 link

Gee, I wonder why so many Americans believed there was a link (connection) between Saddam Hussein and 9/11?

Government/Corporate Media Propaganda. It's very powerful.

FOX does have a large following....

 

[Theowl32]

So, when I asked why Booooosh did not plant the WMDs in Iraq, since he knew all along that there were no WMDs, what was the response?

I mean, somehow (according to liberals) Booooosh and Cheney rigged WTC#7 for 911 and set the demolition bombs off.

Believe this. They believe that right now to this day. They all have a copy of Fahrenheit 911 and can recite every word of it.

What they do not know is it would take approximately 9 months to rig a building of that size. Oh, never mind. Plus, the noise controlled demolition reaches a decibel level of 140, which is something that can be heard on half a mile away. You know how many demolition charges were heard (the pancaking noise is not demolition charge)? None.

Here, watch this starting at 2:15 about the noise of demolition charges.



Anyway, I needed to point out that the liberals who will ignore ALL of that, and will still claim 911 was an inside job "for oil" (liberals and their perpetual cliches) cannot answer why Booooooosh would not have planted WMDs in Iraq.

Would that have been that hard for him to do that?

Red Herring. This is not a debate about WTC#7 and liberals and conservatives believe both sides of that argument. As for the Bush planting WMD's, that's the very first I've seen of that ridiculous claim. It is your claim, no one elses.

Really? A lot of conservatives believe Bush rigged WTC 7?

Almost every liberal I talked to during those days (especially after watching the movie from that blob Michael Moore) thought BOOOOOSH and Cheney caused 911 and rigged WTC7.

I also believe that most liberals believe that to this day.

Tell me, how hard would it have really been for Bush to have had WMDs planted in Iraq? Why is that such a stretch? Remember it is YOU that claims BOOOOOOOSH lied and that it was BOOOOOOSH that KNEW they were not there.

Think about that, if you are capable. The left clearly believe BOOOOOSH deliberately lied. That means before the "invasion" Boooooosh knew there were NO WMDS. So, how hard would it have been for BOOOOOSH to have a team (perhaps the same black ops team that rigged WTC7 over a 9 month period with out anyone noticing) plant them there?

It is that absurd. Well, the fact is it is not anymore absurd than thinking BOOOOOSH deliberately lied about the WMDs being there and that he knew they were not there. It is not any more absurd, and yet you people still make your utterly false claims.

Being WRONG about WMDs is not the same thing about LYING about them. YOU DO NOT FUCKING GET THAT, and you come across as though you are some kind of academic. What you cannot see is the double standard (typical). Just because you have a bandwagon of like minded thinkers does not make it any less absurd. It just makes you feel better about your absurd disposition.

 

[Wry Catcher]

The following link is a great timeline: It begins on 8/14/92 and ends on 3/20/03 when the war begins.

Here's a great timeline as well. It's the occupant of the White House in Six Month intervals before 9/11.

Clinton
Clinton
Clinton
Clinton
Clinton
Clinton
Clinton
Clinton
Clinton
Clinton
Clinton
Clinton
Clinton
Clinton
Clinton
Clinton
Bush

And apparently according to you, W just completely fooled you. Damn you people are dumb, and that's according to you.

And you wonder why I stated you were dumb, partisan and insane? It was a result of stupid posts, maybe not Idiot-Grams but you are pretty much like CrusaderFrank and Stephanie.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Poll: 70% believe Saddam, 9-11 link

WASHINGTON (AP) — Nearly seven in 10 Americans believe it is likely that ousted Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein was personally involved in the Sept. 11 attacks, says a poll out almost two years after the terrorists' strike against this country.

Sixty-nine percent in a Washington Post poll published Saturday said they believe it is likely the Iraqi leader was personally involved in the attacks carried out by al-Qaeda. A majority of Democrats, Republicans and independents believe it's likely Saddam was involved.

The belief in the connection persists even though there has been no proof of a link between the two.

More: USATODAY.com - Poll: 70% believe Saddam, 9-11 link

Gee, I wonder why so many Americans believed there was a link (connection) between Saddam Hussein and 9/11?

That's nice - you still lied when you claimed that Bush said Saddam was connected to 9/11.

But hey, you lie about being an Indian too - you have no honor or integrity. IOW, you're a democrat.

 

[Lakhota]

The following link is a great timeline: It begins on 8/14/92 and ends on 3/20/03 when the war begins.

Here's a great timeline as well. It's the occupant of the White House in Six Month intervals before 9/11.

Clinton
Clinton
Clinton
Clinton
Clinton
Clinton
Clinton
Clinton
Clinton
Clinton
Clinton
Clinton
Clinton
Clinton
Clinton
Clinton
Bush

And apparently according to you, W just completely fooled you. Damn you people are dumb, and that's according to you.

And you wonder why I stated you were dumb, partisan and insane? It was a result of stupid posts, maybe not Idiot-Grams but you are pretty much like CrusaderFrank and Stephanie.

Yep, ole kaz is a world class idiot.

 

[frigidweirdo]

BTW, your user name is very telling. At least you are honest about something.

Welcome to High School.

Are you seriously going with that? I'm presuming you're a grown adult, now I'm going to have to re-think this.

We're talking POLITICS and you're talking petty insults.

Actually it does say quite a bit about me, but it's probably WAY over your head.

 

[Theowl32]

BTW, your user name is very telling. At least you are honest about something.

Welcome to High School.

Are you seriously going with that? I'm presuming you're a grown adult, now I'm going to have to re-think this.

We're talking POLITICS and you're talking petty insults.

Actually it does say quite a bit about me, but it's probably WAY over your head.

Holy shit!

 

[Camp]

If a chain doesn't have LINKS - how can it be CONNECTED?

LINK
1. one of the rings or separate pieces of which a chain is composed.

Synonyms
2. connection, connective, copula.

Link Define Link at Dictionary.com

So, can you NaziCon retards stop your nonsense about the thread title? The thread title is accurate.

If Bush lied so did both clintons and the UN. They all had the same intel and came to the same conclusions.

The Clinton's and the UN did not have the same intelligence as the Bush administration. Intelligence data that put the administrations claims under question was withheld from Congress and only discovered after the invasion. The VP's top aid was convicted for part of that fiasco and successful effort to hide intelligence data. In addition Bush presented the selected and cherry picked intelligence data as "actionable intelligence" when it in fact it didn't come close to reaching that standard. Actionable intelligence is the term that must be achieved before taking action. Is the intelligence reliable enough to take action that will risk lives to accomplish a predetermined goal?