in a speech yesterday he continued to spread this lie, yet several intelligence reports state the opposite that "there was no connection between al quaeda and sadam".
2007-05-24 05:23:50 · 16 answers · asked by david c 4 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
He's stuck. Besides honesty just aint his forte!
2007-05-24 05:26:28 · answer #1 · answered by Funbags 2 · 4⤊ 3⤋
Actually as of Tuesday he released declassified information stating Al-Zarqawi was in the process of setting up a terrorist cell in Iraq. It was supposed to be the future breeding ground of future terroist cells. This was all organized by Bin Laden who passed down the orders from Afghanistan.
Every finding they have can't be shown to the public right away. You see what happened when the media was given information they were looking for the missing soldiers when they were blatantly told not to.
2007-05-24 06:25:11 · answer #2 · answered by ceadmilefailte1982 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Bush is speaking of current events. Al Qaeda has infiltrated Iraq and is influencing events by suppluing money and men. over 1,000 foriegn insurgents each year from about 50 countries are caught or killed each year. Al Qaeda number one man in Iraq has been incoraged to attack america homeland as well and not just attacks in iraq on citizens and soldiers and iraqi police etc.
2007-05-24 05:40:15 · answer #3 · answered by Ian Bach 2 · 3⤊ 0⤋
In his press conference today he took the question, and did admit, in no uncertain terms, that Al Queda was not in Iraq when we invaded. But he skirted around the point made that we wouldn't have to be fighting Al Queda in Iraq if we hadn't attacked them. He just waved that off, saying that Al Queda seeks a foothold wherever they can find it. Gee, ya think? Nice that we gave them the opportunity to FIND another foothold.
He also stated that we did not find the weapons we thought we would. But then he went straight to "Should we have just let Saddam Hussein continue to seek wmd's?" He seems to be unable to just say "Look, the reasons we went in turned out to be bogus, but now I'm going to rest my justification on Hussein's murderous agenda after the fact." I wish one of those reporters had the guts to then ask him if it wouldn't have been more in the interest of the United States to continue to focus on Al Queda in Afghanistan. Ack! What a mess.
Jacques, Jason and Booman:
Bush has stated clearly that he acknowledges that Al Queda was NOT in Iraq before we invaded. So do you all think he's lying about that?
2007-05-24 05:36:37 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
Many,many, many,many individuals have been and proceed to be misinform (Or refuse to have confidence the main present Pentagon comments) with reference to the Al-Qaeda/Iraqi link-up. My seventy 8 365 days previous father emphaticly states we could desire to combat them over there, quite than anticipate them to return over here.... NO Iraqis have been between the 911 attackers,yet, lots of human beings have confidence they have been. The Bush administration has inspired this lack of information. This makes exiting Iraq each and every of the harder. What a hornets nest of issues. the yank inhabitants needs to smart up and carry those 'Bushie' Republican Senators responsible... This administration could nicely be stopped from doing extra injury to our u . s .. Come on you Republican Senators prepare some braveness. nicely, O.ok. ALOT of braveness! concepts over Personalities.. Conviction over money....save it common stupid. Get the flow???
2016-10-13 08:18:53 · answer #5 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Bush has not lied about this.
"There is no evidence between Saddam Hussein and he Sep 11 attacks".
"bin Laden ordered attacks outside of Iraq" (What the heck does that have to do with Iraq anyway?
2007-05-24 05:27:45 · answer #6 · answered by Darth Vader 6 · 2⤊ 1⤋
He has to have something to convince himself and his minions that his great faux pas was okay.
I believe it was Josef Goebels, (Nazi) who opined that if one tells a big lie enough times and make it sound convincing that people will believe it. Guard against the truth, he warned, because that will expose the lie. So watch the military, the media and people within the government as they may be the very people to expose the lie.
Could GWB actually believe the same as that famous Nazi?
2007-05-24 05:40:28 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
you are correct but that was back in 2001. However, our presence has brought AlQaeda into Iraq so as of today there is an Iraq/AlQaeda link. Something else to consider, AlQaeda has grown significantly and even GWB says that just because we haven't been attacked since 9/11 doesn't mean that we are safe, we are in the eye of the storm. His newly de-classified intel states Bin Laden has definite plans of attacking the US which says to me that fighting them over there to keep them from coming here is hogwash.
2007-05-24 05:33:31 · answer #8 · answered by Alan S 7 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Uhhh ... what lie? You're statement implies that there was no al-quada in Iraq and yet there was and still is. And if there was al-quada in Iraq while Saddam was in charge he obviously knew about it and allowed it. That's a link.
Your question illustrates why liberals have so much trouble understanding what the world is like outside of 30-second sound bites on the news.
2007-05-24 05:28:50 · answer #9 · answered by Jacques LeStrapp 2 · 7⤊ 3⤋
Why do you continue to deny a link that has been widely reported? Oh, I forgot, you don't listen to reputable news agencies the BBC......probably just CNN (Clinton News Network) or Airhead America.
2007-05-24 05:33:20 · answer #10 · answered by booman17 7 · 3⤊ 1⤋