How many rightwingers would be STUNNED to learn that SADDAM HAD NO TIES TO AL QAEDA OR 9/11?

Question

And when will the GOP quit repeating the lie?

http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2007/04/06/344/

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.

According to the inspector general of the US Defense Department, information obtained after Saddam's fall confirmed the prewar position of the Central Intelligence Agency and Pentagon intelligence that the Iraqi government had had no substantial contacts with Al-Qaeda.

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.

"Zarqawi's the best evidence of a connection to al Qaeda affiliates and al Qaeda," Bush told reporters at the White House. "He's the person who's still killing."

Answer 1

Right wingers don't care because they are blinded by their own stupidity...they know there has never been a tie to Al Qaeda, but they'll still support President Numb Nuts because they're idiots...

Answer 2

9/11? None. Well, none sane, anyway: "Saddam plotted 9/11" is just as much Conspiracy Theory as "Bush allowed 9/11 to happen."

Al Qaeda? maybe a few. There were Al Qaeda members hiding out in Iraq, and that's close enough to 'ties' for some on the right. Also some may be confused by the prevelence of 'Al Qaeda in Iraq' since the invasion - they have to realize that it didn't start out as an Al Qaeda affiliate.

Answer 3

Dude you quoted a French article. You know, as in the "Don't go into Iraq (Because we're violating the Food For Oil program and giving Saddam Illegal weapons) France"

Though Al Qaeda or not, Saddam needed to die. Mission Accomplished!

Answer 4

i in my view have self theory there grew to become good right into a connection between saddam and the terrorist communities... there are dissimilar you be attentive to, now no longer incredibly Al-Qaeda.... remember the Taliban, Hezzbaluah and an incredible style of greater desirable that are no longer any further besides universal to us. keyword phrases: the Iraq government Had "HAD" no "important" contacts with Al-Qaeda So interior the 1st be wakeful "HAD" which potential they did now no longer till now the conflict, yet did after the conflict? And 2d "important" which potential they did now no longer posses sufficient stable tips to make a easily judgement, yet they did have some much less important tips that al-qaeda had touch with the Iraq government? i think of of they could take a deeper seem into this... i think of of Saddam did have terrorist ties, yet keep it so low key and hush, hush that it grew to become into to now no longer consumer-friendly to collect sufficient tips to declare he grew to become into in with the terrorists. I do agree that the present Administrations jumped a sprint to straight away than they could have... yet I promise we would have ending up going to Iraq in spite of everything, and the terrific component could have been that Bush had sufficient tips to back up what he has been retaining.

Answer 5

Look at the response of cons here such as Ritch and Dylan and the rest. Denial. The admin have admitted to make granidose claims and then have to backpedal. Again, these claims were used as justification for war. So forget about the semantic games that you rightwingers play and quit justifying the WAR CRIME that the US committed in lying to engage in a war that was preplanned for the interest of oil and war profiteering. Oh yeah, you guys have no memory when it doesn't serve you. Downing Street anyone? And there were people, UN INSPECTORS, who already were saying that there were no WMDS.

RitchWilliams, what kind of garbage website is that? Joking I hope? Go straight to the white house website to press releases and transcripts and do some RESEARCH. IDIOT!!!

Answer 6

Heavy sigh. We have a reading comprehension and a listening problem. 'No substantial contact' is not the same as no contact. Secondly, for the thousandth time, "It's not just al Qaeda stupid." Geez, I'm going to make this short because you're a waste of time. Saddam did have ties to terrorist organizations. He was a terrorist himself. Still, read the following. It's from the folks at Stanford, a 'conservative hotbed'.

Deny, spin and deny again if you must, but if you were to accept the reality, you would be STUNNED!

Answer 7

What rock have you been under? We've known that for more than 4 years. What's funny is that you liberals keep repeating the lie, which itself was never said before by the administration. YOU'RE the one repeating a lie.

Answer 8

I wonder if you can uncover any reports that debunk the myth's perpetrated by the UN inspectors and the UN that Saddam was not abiding by the arms inspection treaty of 1991? If he didn't have any weapons of mass destruction, it would have been a more rational move to cooperate with the inspectors, right? And wasn't that the primary rationale for invading Iraq?

Now who is stunned?

Answer 9

People on both extremes would be shocked to learn the truth about their beliefs. How many people on the far left would be shocked to learn that the US economy is stronger than the post-WWII average? Or that global warming is far too slow to be noticable by anything but complicated computers, so that anybody who says that they can "feel" it getting warmer are just full of hot air?



The idiocy on the extremes always goes both ways. Left AND right.

Answer 10

Not nearly as many as there are left wingers in denial that Saddam was a long-time sponsor of several other terrorist groups.

I would also recommend you reread that report. It wasn't "NO TIES TO AL QAEDA", it was just that the ties that did, in fact, exist had not evolved to an operational support mode.