WAR: Rumsfeld: No Evidence Of Link Between Al Qaeda and Iraq.

In New York last night Donald Rumsfeld said, "To my knowledge, I have not seen any strong, hard evidence that links the two," when asked about any connection between Al Qaeda and Saddam Hussein.

Before the war, in a speech in Atlanta in September 2002, Rumsfeld said he the CIA provided "bulletproof" evidence demonstrating "that there are in fact al Qaeda in Iraq." While Vice-President Dick Cheney regularly goes further and talks of Saddam Hussein having provided safe harbour and sanctuary for al-Qaeda.




A statement on the Pentagon website quickly tried to deflect the implication of the statement written by Mr Rumsfeld it said his comments had been "regrettably misunderstood".


[edit on 5-10-2004 by John bull 1]

So what.. its too late and they know that. The damage has been done, the minds of the people have been poisoned with the falsehoods and the fallacies. Admitting this now will do nothing, Joe Public will still think this has something to do with the war on terror.

Same thing EVERYTIME the US goes to war... get the CIA to "invent" a reason.. i.e. "find" a link between A and B.

Hanoi and Peking OR Moscow.

Nicaragua and Soviet arms.

Iraq and WMD OR Al-queada.

Most of the time the CIA comes back with... well there isn't a link... but they have to "find" one in other words MAKE ONE UP!

In the past, Mr Rumsfeld has spoken of credible information about a link, while Vice-President Dick Cheney regularly goes further and talks of Saddam Hussein having provided safe harbour and sanctuary for al-Qaeda.

Wonder what he (Cheney) will say about this tonight at the debate??
(If they are allowed to ask him)

Its kinda late, isnt it, doesnt this show that it was all lies?

well to me this proves that Iraq was a lie and just a grab for oil by the neo-cons and revenge for bush jnr.

Lets get the war crimes trials starting! death penalty doesn't seem unreasonable considering the massive loss of life for no reason

thanks,
drfunk

If they lied, then the following people lied also.....before this administration...

October 10, 2002
Floor Speech of Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton
on S.J. Res. 45, A Resolution to Authorize the Use of
United States Armed Forces Against Iraq

In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including Al Qaeda members, though there is apparently no evidence of his involvement in the terrible events of September 11, 2001.

Even in 1998 the Clinton administration was saying the same thing....
Excerpted from.
clinton.senate.gov...

Democrats have cited the staff report to accuse Mr. Bush of making inaccurate statements about a linkage. Commission members, including a Democrat and two Republicans, quickly came to the administration's defense by saying there had been such contacts.
In fact, during President Clinton's eight years in office, there were at least two official pronouncements of an alarming alliance between Baghdad and al Qaeda. One came from William S. Cohen, Mr. Clinton's defense secretary. He cited an al Qaeda-Baghdad link to justify the bombing of a pharmaceutical plant in Sudan.
.................
The 1998 indictment said: "Al Qaeda also forged alliances with the National Islamic Front in the Sudan and with the government of Iran and its associated terrorist group Hezbollah for the purpose of working together against their perceived common enemies in the West, particularly the United States. In addition, al Qaeda reached an understanding with the government of Iraq that al Qaeda would not work against that government and that on particular projects, specifically including weapons development, al Qaeda would work cooperatively with the government of Iraq."

Excerpted from.
www.washtimes.com...

We also have the following evidence...

"Iraqi intelligence documents from 1992 list Osama bin Laden as an Iraqi intelligence asset. Numerous sources have reported a 1993 nonaggression pact between Iraq and al Qaeda. The former deputy director of Iraqi intelligence now in U.S. custody says that bin Laden asked the Iraqi regime for arms and training in a face-to-face meeting in 1994. Senior al Qaeda leader Abu Hajer al Iraqi met with Iraqi intelligence officials in 1995.

Excerpted from.
www.techcentralstation.com...



[edit on 5-10-2004 by Muaddib]

What's the sense of your post?
It's not like we all don't know this information.

Probably because you spam the board with it every day. Anyway, kids do have time to waste. But explain me what we/the world/whoever should do or think now after having read your copy & paste anti-democrat statement?

Should we blame Clinton because he lied and didn't start a war with Iraq?
Clinton didn't start a war - why? We don't know. Maybe he was intelligent enough or he was just pissing his pants. After all it's about making right or wrong decissions and not about false statements.

Corinthas
Admitting this now will do nothing, Joe Public will still think this has something to do with the war on terror.

Rather call it "war for more terror and profit."
Does anyone know how United Defense (The Carlyle Group) has been doing lately.

It's funny that you just won't stop, Muaddib you should rename yourself into TheExcerptKid!

Can we stop living in the past and blaming people for once? We are currently in a war where more people have died since GW's declaration that the war is over, than before this statement was made. Hundreds of innocent people have been kidnapped, and dozens murdered. FOR WHAT??? It's time to stop the blame and take reponsibilty for what is "Currently" going on, regardless of who's fault it is. Taking ownership and fixing the problem is what a Leader would do.

Now what was that term they kept applying to Kerry all the time......errrr......."flip flopping", yeah that was it "flip flopping"

It's a political thing. Everything they say, when proved to be complete crap. turns out to have been taken out of context or misunderstood / misreported.

Originally posted by shoo
What's the sense of your post?
It's not like we all don't know this information.

The anwser is simple, just like TrickmasterTrick said, the blame has to stop, because if you want to blame someone then you have to start with the previous administration and most of the world... Why do I keep bringing up facts? Because many members in these forums keep forgetting the past, and decide that they should keep trying to bash and blame only this administration.... When the blaming stops i will stop bringing up all these "facts."

And for your information Clinton did start a war with Iraq..what do you think happens when a nation fires missiles at another nation? even thou most of what those missiles hit were empty buildings or "supposedly" milk factories?

Didn't the Iraqi officials mention this was an act of war by the US on Iraq? Didn't Clinton start a coalition in 2000 to deal with Iraq? What Clinton didn't do, was send combat troops into Iraq, as well as he decided to ignore terrorism, among other things. He left that job for the current administration.

The failures that we have had up to today are not the fault of just one administration. Did this administration make mistakes? does any administration make mistakes? you betcha. But the intelligence failures, as well as the reason why Osama is still alive, rests not only on this administration, but the previous one as well. More so because they let go of Osama three times, when he was being given in a silver platter to the US. More so because the previous administration decided that terrorism was not an issue when we were systematically attacked, several times, by terrorists.

Whe need to find solutions. Choose the candidate you feel has a better chance to do this. The best choice to fight against terrorism... and if you want people to vote for who you think is the best choice, bringing up "useful facts" and debating the "issues" they stand for, is much better imo, than just bashing, and name-calling.

BTW shoo, you are the last person that should be calling anyone a kid with some of the stuff you have pulled in these boards... but of course, like always, instead of debating the issue, you have to resort to name calling...


[edit on 5-10-2004 by Muaddib]

A few years back there was a terrorist act committed in Oklahoma City.
The terrorist was a citizen of the United States, he lived here, worked here, and was even a member of our armed services. Last Saturday in Ohio, Dubya said that Zarqawi was living and operating in Bhagdad and Iraq was known to use WMD's. This was enough for him to invade Iraq. I know I'm just a stupid stoner - but - didn't WE invent most of the WMD's everybody's screamin' about? Aren't WE the folks who used atomic weapons against non-military targets in Hiroshima and Nagasaki? Man- it must be the smoke in my eyes cause I can't see the difference.

Originally posted by hooligan13
I know I'm just a stupid stoner - but - didn't WE invent most of the WMD's everybody's screamin' about? Aren't WE the folks who used atomic weapons against non-military targets in Hiroshima and Nagasaki? Man- it must be the smoke in my eyes cause I can't see the difference.

First off, there is evidence that there was a third terrorist in the OKC bombing with links to terrorist groups in the Middle East, there is one book on the internet that brings forth this information. I forget the name at this moment.

Second, althou Hiroshima and Nagasaki was a real tragedy, it was the response that the US thought was best back then to the surprise attack the Japanese did on the US. Japan committed an act of war, attacking Pearl Harbor. More than 2,400 servicemen and servicewomen were killed, and 1,200 were wounded. In 9/11 we lost more people than we lost in Pearl Harbor, and as the president said, we are going not only after those who made these atacks, but after those who keep harboring these terrorists and providing training/funds to commit more violent attacks.

[edit on 5-10-2004 by Muaddib]

Very sad how the truth comes littler by littler It proves that the administration went on a blind day and end up with the worst of the two choices.

It should has stick with Bin-laden but Sadam and Iraq was more attractive.

Abraham Lincoln writes to Mrs. Bixby of Boston:


Executive Mansion
Washington, Nov. 21, 1864

To Mrs. Bixby, Boston, Massachusetts

Dear Madam,

I have been shown in the files of the War Department a statement of the Adjutant General of Massachusetts that you are the mother of five sons who have died gloriously on the field of battle. I feel how weak and fruitless must be any word of mine which should attempt to beguile you from the grief of a loss so overwhelming. But I cannot refrain from tendering you the consolation that may be found in the thanks of the republic they died to save. I pray that our Heavenly Father may assuage the anguish of your bereavement, and leave you only the cherished memory of the loved and lost, and the solemn pride that must be yours to have laid so costly a sacrifice upon the altar of freedom.

Yours very sincerely and respectfully,

A. Lincoln

Freedom cost The Iracies need us.

Originally posted by Muaddib

Originally posted by hooligan13
I know I'm just a stupid stoner - but - didn't WE invent most of the WMD's everybody's screamin' about? Aren't WE the folks who used atomic weapons against non-military targets in Hiroshima and Nagasaki? Man- it must be the smoke in my eyes cause I can't see the difference.

First off, there is evidence that there was a third terrorist in the OKC bombing with links to terrorist groups in the Middle East, there is one book on the internet that brings forth this information. I forget the name at this moment.

Second, althou Hiroshima and Nagasaki was a real tragedy, it was the response that the US thought was best back then to the surprise attack the Japanese did on the US. Japan committed an act of war, attacking Pearl Harbor. More than 2,400 servicemen and servicewomen were killed, and 1,200 were wounded. In 9/11 we lost more people than we lost in Pearl Harbor, and as the president said, we are going not only after those who made these atacks, but after those who keep harboring these terrorists and providing training/funds to commit more violent attacks.

[edit on 5-10-2004 by Muaddib]

I must be the stupidist stoner, 'cause most of the terrorism right now seems to be comming from the CURRENT administration!

ALL are tragic, and NONE forthcoming of any thruth!

. . .Peace

Originally posted by Muaddib

Originally posted by hooligan13
I know I'm just a stupid stoner - but - didn't WE invent most of the WMD's everybody's screamin' about? Aren't WE the folks who used atomic weapons against non-military targets in Hiroshima and Nagasaki? Man- it must be the smoke in my eyes cause I can't see the difference.

First off, there is evidence that there was a third terrorist in the OKC bombing with links to terrorist groups in the Middle East, there is one book on the internet that brings forth this information. I forget the name at this moment.

Second, althou Hiroshima and Nagasaki was a real tragedy, it was the response that the US thought was best back then to the surprise attack the Japanese did on the US. Japan committed an act of war, attacking Pearl Harbor. More than 2,400 servicemen and servicewomen were killed, and 1,200 were wounded. In 9/11 we lost more people than we lost in Pearl Harbor, and as the president said, we are going not only after those who made these atacks, but after those who keep harboring these terrorists and providing training/funds to commit more violent attacks.

[edit on 5-10-2004 by Muaddib]

Plus that act on Japan was or could have been avoided, FDR knew 12 days before. So this statement well hold very little water. So if anyone killed those people at Pearl Harbor then it was the President then.

ohh yes forgot to add something for myself in here.

Like this is News we already knew about this in 2001 when they took office, the whole bush administration stated time and time again that Saddam was no treat to us.

[edit on 7-10-2004 by ThichHeaded]

Just a little comment:

notice TWO things about the article, and the video clip.

1. In the article, the questioner was NOT quoted directly, Rumsfeld WAS!
2. In the video clip, there was NO audio of the question either! Rumsfeld was on the clip, as was his audio..

SO, Is there a link to the text of this exchange, or a more COMPLETE audio clip?

Why?

Because The wording that Rumsfeld used to answer the "query" is pretty close to the wording he uses when aswering a DIFFERENT QUESTION.

something like:
" Is there a link between 9/11 and Saddams Iraq.?"
He usually says, "Theres no evidence of a link between the two"

Anyone have a transcript? or a more complete video?
If I hear the whole exchange I'll believe it..

If not, it's an intentional Mis-quote..



[edit on 7-10-2004 by spacedoubt]