Why do rightwingers keep repeating the lie that Saddam was connected to 9/11 and Al Qaeda?

Question

http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2007/04/06/344/
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/usiraqqaeda

Pentagon report says no link between Saddam and Al-Qaeda
Fri Apr 6, 11:46 AM ET
WASHINGTON (AFP) -Interrogations of Saddam Hussein and seized documents confirmed the former Iraqi regime had no links with Al-Qaeda, a Pentagon report said Friday, contradicting the US case for the 2003 invasion.

A two-page resume of the report was published in February, but on Friday the Pentagon declassified the whole 120-page document.

THE ABOVE LINK IS TO A WIRE STORY DESCRIBING A PENTAGON REPORT, NOT AN OPINION PIECE. HERE IS ANOTHER WIRE STORY ABOUT BUSH MAKING THIS LIE-CLAIM:


http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/06/15/bush.alqaeda/


Bush stands by al Qaeda, Saddam link
Tuesday, June 15, 2004 Posted: 6:06 PM EDT (2206 GMT)


WASHINGTON (CNN) -- President Bush repeated his administration's claim that Iraq was in league with al Qaeda under Saddam Hussein's rule, saying Tuesday that fugitive Islamic militant Abu Musab al-Zarqawi ties Saddam to the terrorist network.

Vice President Dick Cheney, in a speech Monday in Florida, raised eyebrows by reasserting claims that Saddam "had long-established ties with al Qaeda."

Bush said Tuesday that Saddam also had ties to Palestinian militant groups and was making payments to the families of suicide bombers in Israel.

"We did the absolute right thing in removing him from power, and the world is better off with him not in power," he said.

Bush has tried to portray the war in Iraq as the "central front" in the war on terrorism that began with al Qaeda's September 11, 2001, attacks on New York and Washington.

In September, after Cheney asserted that Iraq had been "the geographic base of the terrorists who have had us under assault now for many years, but most especially on 9/11," Bush acknowledged there was no evidence that Saddam's government was connected to those attacks.

U.S. officials blame Zarqawi for a series of attacks on U.S. forces, Iraqi civilians and others since the American-led inv

Answer 1

What BS that right wing didn't say this, Cheney is STILL saying it, he said it on Meet Press a couple of weeks ago, Bush said we were fighting the people in Iraq who were responsible for 9/11 recently -- they continue to connect Iraq and 9/11, even though Bush has said "we have no evidence that Saddam Hussien was responsible for September the 11th. Romney even said it in one of the debates. Guilani keeps saying that Iraq is an intregal part of the War on Terror. Almost all of them use war on terror and War in Iraq in same context, contiuing to link Iraq and terror and by extention 9/11.

Those that "haven't heard it" are either FOS, aren't listening or perhaps they just "don't recall" -- seems a lot of Republicans have very bad memories.

Why do 50% of the American people STILL think Iraq and/or Saddam Hussein did 9/11 if no one ever said they did or if no one constantly implied it.

Answer 2

i in my view have self belief there grew to become right into a connection between saddam and the terrorist communities... There are numerous you recognize, no longer basically Al-Qaeda.... keep in mind the Taliban, Hezzbaluah and many greater that are no longer besides popular to us. keywords: the Iraq government Had "HAD" no "important" contacts with Al-Qaeda So in the 1st be conscious "HAD" meaning they did no longer earlier the conflict, yet did after the conflict? And 2nd "important" meaning they did no longer posses adequate reliable information to make a actual judgement, yet they did have some much less significant information that al-qaeda had touch with the Iraq government? i think of they could take a deeper seem into this... i think of Saddam did have terrorist ties, yet save it so low key and hush, hush that it grew to become into to no longer basic to assemble adequate information to assert he grew to become into in with the terrorists. I do agree that the present Administrations jumped a sprint to directly than they could have... yet I promise we would have ending up going to Iraq in any case, and the best factor could have been that Bush had adequate information to returned up what he has been asserting.

Answer 3

Actually "rightwingers" never made that claim that I've heard. I haven't checked your links, but maybe you have someone on the right saying that.
My question is, why does the left keep saying that the right said Saddam Hussein was connected to 9/11?

Al-qaeda may been in Iraq before 9/11, but that was never the reason for the war. So many people just don't get it. We had legitimate reasons to overthrow Saddam; his repeated violations of the terms of peace of the Gulf War of 1991; and intelligence from many sources that said there were WMD's and Saddam was working toward getting nuclear weapons. Many US politicians strongly believed this to be true in the late 1990's and early 2000's, including many prominent Democrats.

(see Youtube "Democrat Hypocrisy On Iraq" - you can hear and see them saying it themselves)

No one lied. They may have been mistaken. Or Saddam, once he realized the inevitability of a US/British led invasion (a war he knew he couldn't win) may have moved and/or destroyed the evidence prior to the invasion in order to undermine the West's credibility (he wasn't in power for 30 years because he was stupid). But WMD's, UN resolution violations, etc. were only the legitimate excuses for invading Iraq. The real reason was to set up a free society in the middle of the Middle East. Islamic governments breed Islamic extremists. It was/is the hope of Bush and Blair that a free society would give rise to more rational thought. Iran has a young generation that longs for a free society as well. If Iraq becomes a stable democracy, Iran may not be far behind. Iran knows this, which is why they are undermining our efforts by funding, training, and supplying the insurgency in Iraq. That's why it is the central front of the war on terrorism. We're trying to get to the root on the problem by transforming the Middle East. This is an attempt at a long term solution. Our division at home and calls for withdrawal because of the deaths of our soldiers and the violence in Iraq plays right into the hands of Iran and Al Qaeda. They are encouraged that their strategy is working and only kill more of our soldiers and cause more mayhem. If we were strongly committed to winning the war and united, Iran would back way off because they would fear US military action against them. But with the war in Iraq so unpopular they can undermine our efforts with little fear of any meaningful consequences.
This is why I wish Democrats would publicly support the war and express commitment to winning in Iraq, instead of so frequently expressing hopelessness and wringing their hands over the US military deaths, and Abu-graib and saying Bush lied, etc. I wish they would publicly support the war and express their concerns and criticisms to president Bush privately. I think this would go a long, long way in turning things around in Iraq.
This is how I see the big picture. Your question seems trivial to me in comparison, which I don't mean to be insulting to you. I just think you don't get what's really going on and what's really at stake. I'd be interested in your thoughts, although this isn't really a very good forum for back and forth dialogue.

dinodino, below, is a perfect example of someone that doesn't get it (which I don't mean to be insulting; he just doesn't).

Answer 4

who really cares - the ends sometimes justify the means (sometimes.. but I wouldn't use this as justifiction - just maybe an explaination after the fact - like these lies....) but can anyone really regret that the US got rid of sadam? or made a foothold in the middle east or distracted the terroists so they are trying to attack americans in iraq instead of tourist resorts?

and people forget that 9/11 was planned on Clinton's watch (he was busy getting a blowie I guess...)

Answer 5

That is the technique that Newt taught them. Say it loud, say it often and when someone questions you, say it again. It seems to work for them, that's how Bush got us into Iraq to begin with. Of course he had to change his lie to keep us there but that too seems to be working for them.

Go to pbs.org and watch last night's Frontline. I thought I hated Bush, Rumsfeld and Cheney before but this will really turn your stomach. Every Repubic should be forced to watch some of the facts about our "little war" in Iraq and what we have done and are doing to those people.

Answer 6

For the 10 billionth time no one said Saddam caused 9/11. It's a liberal lie that anyone said he did.

Answer 7

I see it plenty on here. Just like the cons do not like to be reminded that in Feb of 2001, Bush was offered OBL by the Taliban if he would lift sanctions on Saudi Arabia. They were going to hand OBL over on a silver platter........just think, 9/11 was after this.

Answer 8

Which rightwingers are you referring to as W started chanting the "he's a war criminal' mantra when they didnt find WMD's or any connection to Al Qaida

Answer 9

It is you who repeats this story. The right wingers never made this assertion. You keep repeating it until you believe yourself that we ever claimed this.

Answer 10

The Big Lie is an old tactic.

Tell a Lie, the bigger the better.

Repeat the lie.

People will believe the lie, no matter how much evidence is stacked against it.