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

[peach174]

Bush never claimed that Saddam was responsible for 9/11.
He did claim that Saddam supported terrorists.
He did say that 9/11 taught us that we can't just sit back and wait for them to attack us first that 9/11 shows us we need to hit them before they hit us. Which is a reason we went after Saddam, to hit him before he hit us.

Liberals don't understand logic.

The Bush administration falsely established a connection between a 9.11 terrorist and Iraq. The purpose was to plant the seeds in the American conscious that Iraq was involved in 9.11; and it worked since more than 70% of people polled believed Iraq was involved.

No
That is what the mainstream media did.
Bush never tired Saddam with 9/11.

The mainstream media put those words in Cheney's mouth?

Of course not. The MSM merely broadcast the Bush Administration's attempt to establish the connection.

They spun it.

 

[Faun]

Bush never claimed that Saddam was responsible for 9/11.
He did claim that Saddam supported terrorists.
He did say that 9/11 taught us that we can't just sit back and wait for them to attack us first that 9/11 shows us we need to hit them before they hit us. Which is a reason we went after Saddam, to hit him before he hit us.

Liberals don't understand logic.

The Bush administration falsely established a connection between a 9.11 terrorist and Iraq. The purpose was to plant the seeds in the American conscious that Iraq was involved in 9.11; and it worked since more than 70% of people polled believed Iraq was involved.

No
That is what the mainstream media did.
Bush never tired Saddam with 9/11.

The mainstream media put those words in Cheney's mouth?

Of course not. The MSM merely broadcast the Bush Administration's attempt to establish the connection.

They spun it.

They quoted Cheney.

 

[Katzndogz]

Bush never said that. Democrats just said he did.

 

[Faun]

Bush never said that. Democrats just said he did.

Cheney (i.e., the Bush Administration) said it.

 

[peach174]

Bush never said that. Democrats just said he did.

Cheney (i.e., the Bush Administration) said it.

Then that is what they should have said.
They kept saying it was Bush and they never emphasized that Cheney corrected it.
Thus - spun it, just like all the mainstream media does.
They all do it CNN, MSNBC, Fox, CBS and ABC.

 

[Slyhunter]

Bush never claimed that Saddam was responsible for 9/11.
He did claim that Saddam supported terrorists.
He did say that 9/11 taught us that we can't just sit back and wait for them to attack us first that 9/11 shows us we need to hit them before they hit us. Which is a reason we went after Saddam, to hit him before he hit us.

Liberals don't understand logic.

The Bush administration falsely established a connection between a 9.11 terrorist and Iraq. The purpose was to plant the seeds in the American conscious that Iraq was involved in 9.11; and it worked since more than 70% of people polled believed Iraq was involved.

No he didn't and you saying he did doesn't make it so.

Saddam financed Terrorism.
Terrorist did 9/11.
That is the only connection he made. He never said they were the same terrorists.

 

[Slyhunter]

Bush never claimed that Saddam was responsible for 9/11.
He did claim that Saddam supported terrorists.
He did say that 9/11 taught us that we can't just sit back and wait for them to attack us first that 9/11 shows us we need to hit them before they hit us. Which is a reason we went after Saddam, to hit him before he hit us.

Liberals don't understand logic.

Logic? With the reasoning expressed by Bush (and you?) why didn't Bush go after Iran and N. Korea? This logic is the same used as an excuse to go into Vietnam, another mistake which cost our nation lives, treasure and prestige.

The mistake was in not fighting the war to win. We fought to make the enemy capitulate not eradicate the enemy which is what we should've done.

You don't win wars against those who aren't afraid to die by hoping they'll give in with logic or common sense. You eradicate them until none of them are left alive.

 

[Faun]

Bush never said that. Democrats just said he did.

Cheney (i.e., the Bush Administration) said it.

Then that is what they should have said.
They kept saying it was Bush and they never emphasized that Cheney corrected it.
Thus - spun it, just like all the mainstream media does.
They all do it CNN, MSNBC, Fox, CBS and ABC.

Post some links then to such articles...

 

[Faun]

Bush never claimed that Saddam was responsible for 9/11.
He did claim that Saddam supported terrorists.
He did say that 9/11 taught us that we can't just sit back and wait for them to attack us first that 9/11 shows us we need to hit them before they hit us. Which is a reason we went after Saddam, to hit him before he hit us.

Liberals don't understand logic.

The Bush administration falsely established a connection between a 9.11 terrorist and Iraq. The purpose was to plant the seeds in the American conscious that Iraq was involved in 9.11; and it worked since more than 70% of people polled believed Iraq was involved.

No he didn't and you saying he did doesn't make it so.

Saddam financed Terrorism.
Terrorist did 9/11.
That is the only connection he made. He never said they were the same terrorists.

Read again, this time for clarity. The "Bush administration." Cheney said it. Although, he later lied and denied saying it...

 

[Tuatara]

Funny how we can provide direct quotes and the Bush supporters still grasp at straws with "the media spun it".

 

[asterism]

What Bush said was this that there was a relationship between Saddam Hussein's Iraq and Osama bin Laden's Al Qaeda he never said that the 9/11 attacks were orchestrated between Saddam and Al Qaeda. Please stop with the lying.

He certainly implied it and every single Bush supporter at the time was eating it up and believing it.

Actually he didn't that is claim repeated by the far left in an attempt to make their fantasy talking point a reality. It's like how they claimed over and over Sarah Palin said she could see Russia from her backyard when in fact that was Tina Fey in an SNL skit.

Again you are wrong. I was on a couple or political forums when Bush declared war on Iraq and every single Bush supporter was spouting out "there are ties between Saddam and Osama, some were even saying Saddam was resonsible for 911. The site is down now but if Whistlestopper Forums still had all their history you would be eating your words right now.

That claim was repeatedly made by noobs on some of the forums I read back then but it was always debunked by the more senior (in terms of time posting) right of center members. Specifically ConservativeUnderground, Free Republic, and Hannity.

 

[Darkwind]

I consider this to be Bush's biggest lie about Iraq and Saddam.

Rightwingers like to distract from the event that Bush tried to link Saddam to - 9/11. Even the dumbest of rightwingers should now be convinced that Saddam HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH 9/11. However, if any of them still think so - please provide credible proof.

I heard and saw Bush live on TV when he first tried to make this link. If there are any doubters - just Google "bush links saddam to 9/11"...

He never did. Squeeze another one...

 

[asterism]

Bush never claimed that Saddam was responsible for 9/11.
He did claim that Saddam supported terrorists.
He did say that 9/11 taught us that we can't just sit back and wait for them to attack us first that 9/11 shows us we need to hit them before they hit us. Which is a reason we went after Saddam, to hit him before he hit us.

Liberals don't understand logic.

It's always funny that when challenged to prove that Bush directly linked 9-11 to Saddam the fallback was "conflating." Then the next strategy was to criticize being attacked by one country and invading another.

Well we invaded France and then Germany after we were attacked by Japan. DOH!

 

[Lakhota]

Jeb should explain why his brother lied about Saddam being connected to 9/11.

 

[healthmyths]

Jeb should explain why his brother lied about Saddam being connected to 9/11.

Remember what these people said in context with the Iranian Nuclear Agreement :

Remember these words when Iran does exactly what Iraq does as these DEMOCRATS warn!

Reid is describing the 1991 Cease Fire...
"We stopped the fighting [in 1991] on an agreement that Iraq would take steps to assure the world that it would not engage in further aggression and that it would destroy its weapons of mass destruction. It has refused to take those steps. That refusal constitutes a breach of the armistice which renders it void and justifies resumption of the armed conflict."

Senator Harry Reid (Democrat, Nevada)
Addressing the US Senate
October 9, 2002
Congressional Record, p. S10145

"It appears that with the deadline for exile come and gone, Saddam Hussein has chosen to make military force the ultimate weapons inspections enforcement mechanism. If so, the only exit strategy is victory, this is our common mission and the world's cause."

Senator John Kerry (Democrat, Massachusetts)
Statement on commencement of military strikes against Iraq
March 20, 2003


Senator John Edwards, when asked about "Axis of Evil" countries Iran, Iraq, and North Korea:

"I mean, we have three different countries that, while they all present serious problems for the United States -- they're dictatorships, they're involved in the development and proliferation of weapons of mass destruction -- you know, the most imminent, clear and present threat to our country is not the same from those three countries. I think Iraq is the most serious and imminent threat to our country."

Senator John Edwards (Democrat, North Carolina)
During an interview on CNN's "Late Edition"
February 24, 2002


"I think it was the right decision to disarm Saddam Hussein. And when the president made the decision, I supported him, and I support the fact that we did disarm him."

Senator John Kerry (Democrat, Massachusetts)
During a Democratic Primary Debate at the University of South Carolina
May 3, 2003


John Kerry, while voting YES to the Resolution authorizing US military force against Iraq:

"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force - if necessary - to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security."

Senator John Kerry (Democrat, Massachusetts)
Addressing the US Senate
October 9, 2002


CNN
November 5, 1998

U.N. Security Council votes to condemn Iraq

The United Nations Security Council late Thursday voted unanimously to condemn Iraq and to demand that Baghdad immediately resume cooperation with U.N. weapons inspectors.
Baghdad has already said it will not comply.

The resolution called Iraq's decision last week to halt cooperation with the U.N. Special Commission a "flagrant violation" of the 1991 resolution on Iraqi disarmament. It is the 45th U.N. resolution involving Iraq since the country invaded Kuwait in 1990.

Freedom Agenda - Quotes and Facts on Iraq

 

[healthmyths]

Dear Mr. President:

The events of September 11 have highlighted the vulnerability of the United States to determined terrorists. As we work to clean up Afghanistan and destroy al Qaeda, it is imperative that we plan to eliminate the threat from Iraq.

This December will mark three years since United Nations inspectors last visited Iraq. There is no doubt that since that time, Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs.

The threat from Iraq is real, and it cannot be permanently contained. For as long as Saddam Hussein is in power in Baghdad, he will seek to acquire weapons of mass destruction and the means to deliver them. We have no doubt that these deadly weapons are intended for use against the United States and its allies. Consequently, we believe we must directly confront Saddam, sooner rather than later.

Mr. President, all indications are that in the interest of our own national security, Saddam Hussein must be removed from power."

Sincerely,

Congressman Harold Ford (Democrat, Tennessee)
Senator Bob Graham (Democrat, Florida)
Congressman Tom Lantos (Democrat, California)
Senator Joseph Lieberman (Democrat, Connecticut)

Senator Sam Brownback (Republican, Kansas)
Senator Jesse Helms (Republican, North Carolina)
Congressman Henry Hyde (Republican, Illinois)
Senator Trent Lott (Republican, Mississippi)
Senator John McCain (Republican, Arizona)
Senator Richard Shelby (Republican, Alabama)

 

[healthmyths]

"He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do. He lies and cheats; he snubs the mandate and authority of international weapons inspectors; and he games the system to keep buying time against enforcement of the just and legitimate demands of the United Nations, the Security Council, the United States and our allies. Those are simply the facts."

Congressman Henry Waxman (Democrat, California)
Addressing the US Congress
October 10, 2002

"Heavy as they are, the costs of action must be weighed against the price of inaction. If Saddam defies the world and we fail to respond, we will face a far greater threat in the future. Saddam will strike again at his neighbors; he will make war on his own people. And mark my words, he will develop weapons of mass destruction. He will deploy them, and he will use them."

President Clinton
National Address from the Oval Office
December 16, 1998

Freedom Agenda - Quotes and Facts on Iraq

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

Not this stupid debunked shit again....
good grief.

 

[bedowin62]

rehashing an old thread from 3 months ago; you ought to banned for that.

the OP is a canard anyway; if you had some evidence, ANY EVIDENCE, Bush lied about anything you would have had that impeachment you dreamed about, that war crimes trial you wanted.............................instead all you got is the MoveOn.org "IMPEACH BUSH!!" bumper-sticker, coffee mug, and sun-visor hat collection

 

[healthmyths]

QUESTION: What is your response to the suggestion in the [Aug 12, 2002] Time [magazine] article that the Bush administration was unwilling to take on board the suggestions made in the Clinton administration because of animus against the -- general animus against the foreign policy?

CLARKE: I think if there was a general animus that clouded their vision, they might not have kept the same guy dealing with terrorism issue.
This is the one issue where the National Security Council leadership decided continuity was important and kept the same guy around, the same team in place.
That doesn't sound like animus against, uh, the previous team to me.

JIM ANGLE: You're saying that the Bush administration did not stop anything that the Clinton administration was doing while it was making these decisions,
and by the end of the summer had increased money for covert action five-fold. Is that correct?

CLARKE: All of that's correct.

ANGLE: So, just to finish up if we could then, so what you're saying is that there was no -- one, there was no plan; two, there was no delay; and that actually the first changes since October of '98 were made in the spring months just after the administration came into office?

CLARKE: You got it. That's right.

Richard A. Clarke
Former chief counter-terrorism adviser
August, 2002