Condoleezza Rice: U.S. Never Said Saddam Was Behind 9/11

I don't get this? Are they getting ready to put Saddam back in charge of Iraq again or something? Something is up here.

Don

Is Rice a lesbian?

eom

I find your comment highly offensive.

does that have to do with this news story?

Is this yet another "women I don't like are all lesbians" slam? Aren't you just a sweety? Amazing how one cheap shot can reveal both homophobia and sexism so clearly.

The hell you didn't! AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGH!!!!

Okay, I'm better now. Sorry for the outburst.

Just more vile Republican word playing. They never said it directly they simply had the their bitches Hannity, Limbaugh, O'Really, etc do it for them.
The public's getting wise to them.

Same way Rummy answered when Jim Lehrer was complaining that the Administration had given the impression that the post-war would be a piece of cake. "Never said it" he said. Other people may have said it, but I did not. he said he knew he did not know how difficult it would be to rebuild Iraq.
You see? With this BS it become clear how irresponsible these people are. If he knew he did not know, then why didn't he question those people who claimed they knew for sure the post-war would be a piece of cake ? Isn't that part of his goddamn job ? -CV

but they certainly implied involvement.

And that's exactly what they're going for. We didn't say he was 'in charge of or had control'. Of course we didn't say he didn't help...

I love how they can throw fits about Clinton's "hairsplitting," but look the other way when it suits their neanderthal worldview.

These people have no shame whatsoever.

who did.

Jay

here we go again , we will just blame this on the press again , it worked so well when we said that about them pushing the war , we were just joking with iraq about the war , but you people in the press just kept pushing it , what a load of shit these people spit out of there mouths when they are cornered

Bush*/Cheney say there is a link.

Rice/Rumsfeld say there isn't.

Or, is this a crack in the administration. R&R trying to distance themselves from Bush and Cheney? ( "We're not the ones who lied.)

Will the media pick up on this?

Stay tuned for tomorrow's episode of "As the Ship of State Sinks"

The motto for Republicans must be "We Never Take Responsibility". Rummy has been saying that he's not responsible for the post-war part...even though there never was a war...and there was no WH planning for whatever this phase we are involved in that is 'not a war but involves a lot of dying every day'.

you IMPLIED IT!!!

over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over

back in the public trough and quit insulting our intelligence.

But you used propaganda techniques to imply it , and thanks to the compliant, ass-kissing, media whores you were allowed to get away with it and your plan worked.

concept to their advantage for the Iraq War. If they were really serving this country, they would tell us the truth instead of exploiting citizens who need to know. They continue to parallel the two thoughts, 9-11 and Iraq without really connecting them....

That entire gang at the White House are opportunistic thugs.

They must feel vulnerable, at long last.

That's one of the reasons we all knew all along they were bullshitting. We were paying attention. Most people weren't. They just heard the words September 11 and Saddam Hussein in the same sentence over and over for about a year. And they did what they were supposed to. Made the connection. I have been an advertising copywriter for 20 years, and done well at it. (OK, fine, go ahead, ban me). I know weasel words and I know marketing when it's thrown at me. They were very careful. They never did, except for maybe the odd slipup, come right out and say it. They didn't have to. They had something else. Saturation advertising.

You nailed it!

I think Tom Tomorrow had a cartoon that showed Ari saying: "We'll do nothing to disabuse you of that notion."

In fact I'm not sure she'll get away with it. Sure, we know they never really said it. But millions of millions of people out there are going to hear them deny it and go WTF? Because in their minds they DID hear them say it.

edit for typo

no WMD, either, by the fucking way...

did you claim they had weapons, condi?

have you ever said anything, ever?

had the clip of her saying that no one ever thought of planes being used as weapons.

Someone needs to broaden the space between her two front teeth, maybe that would help extend Ms Rice's memory just a little bit.

now i know why whenever condi smiles i get the sudden urge to kick a field goal.

paraphrasing, "her statement came despite being a lie."

That is some excellent reporting. :toast:

At least nobody had oral sex as a result of these lies.

They're cracking, they are truly cracking!!!

All the idiots who have been saying this and beleiving it and buying into it are going to experience HARDCORE COGNITIVE DYSFUNCTION!! The disconnect will be overwhelming and the admin. can only lose with this tact!!! Does not compute! Their base is gonna FREAK!!

And this Congress and the American people must recognize another threat. Evidence from intelligence sources, secret communications and statements by people now in custody reveal that Saddam Hussein aids and protects terrorists, including members of Al Qaida. Secretly, and without fingerprints, he could provide one of his hidden weapons to terrorists, or help them develop their own.

http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/01/28/sotu.transcript.8/index.html

Conde, you are a lying sack o'Bushista crap! :grr:

on edit:

The inference is so strong as to forcing a perceptual link for those who were, and still are, in the grips of being held hostage to fear by these thugs!

Thank you for posting it, Angel_O_Peace!

O8)

Condi is talking about the connection between Hussein and those that committed the atrocities of 9/11. The quote from the speech that Angel posted is excellent HOWEVER, in a court of law all that was ever said is that Hussein was HARBORING terrorists incluidng Al-Qaeda. Absolutely no mention that he was funding the ones who committed 9/11.

Unfortunately it's a word game and damn if these folks aren't the masters at it. When that statement was made (or as Bush would say - 'It's only 26 words') Evidence from intelligence sources, secret communications and statements by people now in custody reveal that Saddam Hussein aids and protects terrorists, including members of Al Qaida the fact was Hussein and terrorists including Al Qaeda were on friendly terms but as Condi said - no mention of 9/11.

But with the Bush/Media Word Game, they knew they didn't have to mention 9/11. They just had to make 2 separate statements that were somewhat related and let the media connect the dots for them. The hardcore shrills like Coulter and Limbaugh pick this up which then moves on to the Fox Shrills like Hannity & O'Reilly. They take was said Evidence from intelligence sources, secret communications and statements by people now in custody reveal that Saddam Hussein aids and protects terrorists, including members of Al Qaida and they push the envelope. These shrills take a simple logic statement and expanded it to the
A=B=C

Bush implied that Hussein(A) is a terrorist because he has aids and protects terrorists, including members of Al Qaida(B).

Now we've seen enough articles out there that have said that Al Qaida(B) were the terrorists behind 9/11(C).

However it's highly doubtful that we'll find any official quotes out of the Bush Regime that have ever Hussein (A) behind 9/11(C).

Still with me, btw that basic logic stuff was from a great class I took in college.

So we have 3 variables:

• Hussein(A)
  
• terrorists, including members of Al Qaida(B)
  
• 9/11(C)
  

The media usually with the hardcore shrills like Limbaugh and Coulter simply assume if Hussein(A) protects terrorists, including members of Al Qaida(B) and terrorists, including members of Al Qaida(B) caused 9/11(C) then through basic logic of:
A=B=C
Hussein must have caused 9/11.

Bush never had to say that exact sentence, he just need those shrills to pick it up and start harping on it. Then Fox and their shrills start annoucning it and finally mainstream wannabes like CNN and MSNBC will start talking about it.

But more importantly is the public hears this message and assumes that our media is telling them the truth. Then next thing you know you're neighbor is plastering flags all over their front lawn and SUV because god forbid you must be "Unpatriot" if you don't support this war in Iraq because the media is saying that
Hussein(A)=terrorists, including members of Al Qaida(B)=caused 9/11(C)

Condi is just telling us the facts. Thanks to the Media they got the whole nation getting all warm, fuzzy and patriotic and happy to support Bush and his war because they felt that it was "justified" since somewhere someone actually took 2 seperate statements and merged them into one.

(BTW, Franken talks about the chain of command when it comes to how these lies grow and fester starting from the hardcores like Limbaugh/Coulter and eventually ends up in mainstream news. I added the Basic Logic stuff)

I agree, LynneSin. Syllogism works to the user's advantage to provide what seems to be a logical connection to those who don't understand the mechanics of it and how it can be disproven.

For those of you who want a down and dirty crash course to better understand how the truth can be twisted as to seem viable through the vehicle of syllogism, read here:

http://www.karmastrology.com/astsylgs.shtml

...and sure do wish Al Franken would be heard more, would write more. Would be great to have a President who was also a political satirist of Franken's ilk. He's an exceptionally smart man.

Meanwhile, Tansy_Gold, in post #27, provided a great article re: Rice from Sept, 2002.

That whole A=B=C was just a Philophy requirement (Basic Logic) I took when I was in college and to be honest, is the basis for our legal system. I mean, if we took the Bush Regime to court accusing him them of saying Hussein was behind 9/11 we really have no solid evidence of anyone in the administration saying it.

But reading that CBS article was a thrill because it really supports that whole concept that the media is who aids in merging 2 completely seperate ideas together. And to be honest, I'm thinking it's really us that are connecting the dots!!!

I had to read it a couple of times to assure myself that there was no solid statement in there saying Hussein was behind 9/11. But yet after the first few readings I was actually thinking that whole post I made was full of baloney.

But it wasn't!!!

Condoleezza Rice's statements, aired Wednesday in a broadcast interview, are the strongest yet alleging contacts between al Qaeda and the Iraqi government. Previously, evidence of the two working together was tenuous, or came from unreliable sources.

You read an article like that which was published on September 26th 2002, just over 2 weeks after we had our 1st aniversary of the 9/11 attacks...well, you can't help but want to connect the 2. Those are harsh words that Condi said

the strongest yet alleging contacts between al Qaeda and the Iraqi government

You know, I would say that I have strong ties with several folks here at DU and I'll use Kheph as an example because I think of him as this incredible friend. Now imagine tomorrow I decide to go out and gun down my neighbors (I hate guns btw - refuse to own one) does that mean we should blame Khephra for my actions? I mean, Kheph and I have strong ties with each other are we assuming he was the one that told me to commit this horrible crime?

They used our emotions: Bush and the Media never had to connect the dots. They knew that we get so freaking emotional (and rightly so) over 9/11 that we would just believe what we think we've read and Bush has himself a war!

Thanks Lynne!!

The Saudis harborer/harbor and trained AlQueda. So did Pakistan.
Hussein didnt protect Al Queda like SA did.
The lies are piling up so high that its confusing people.

The heat must be on. Rumsfeld and now Rice…unfortunately, they are correct, but the fine line between their non-sequitur and a direct implication was fussy at best. There’s no question the implication was there, but as we all know, politicians are schooled in how to get away with this….on both sides of the fence. And we have just too many idiots in this country, which is why it is so effective.


Bottom line: I hope this obvious spin has some legs

members of al Qaeda"

From Bush's last SOTU.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/01/20030128-19.html

No, I guess he never really said Saddam was behind 9/11, but that's just another wonderful "technicality" from Mr. Straight Talk. Whenever you listen to a Bushie or their leader (Cheney) you need to ask to see the fine print.

Why does she even bother to say this. EVERYONE knows the administration dissembled about this for months.

Hell, the troops in Iraq have pictures of the twin towers burning tacked to the walls of their tents and were vowing "revenge".

This is just so weird. This adminstration is not just totally inept and criminal. It's not just evil and deluded and amoral.

It's clinically fucking psychotic.

I don't get it - is your average American that damned stupid?

They are like sheep

The admin. most definitley did fuck up...They made an EMOTIONAL investment and now they trying to draw a LOGICAL conclusion from it...Ain't gonna happen, it leads to a psychological meltdown...That's where they're heading w/ their base...Unfortunately, now that I've settled down off of my "glee" over this news, I realize it's actually VERY DANGEROUS. Many of the fundamentalist radicals that have been buying this fantasy are now going to have no option but to awaken from their trance. You do know about the warnings about waking sleepwalkers don't you? They are often violent...This is a very similar situation...

Do you think Clarks announcement has anything to do with this? Does he have the goods on them or something?

Don

and their polls aren't the tripe they feed to the pulbic, but rather the real deal. They must be worse than we imagined, because they are telling the truth, which is ALWAYS the absolute last option...They're in trouble and this is their fall back position; the truth. Unfortunately for them, they overplayed their hand and misread the situation. They made and EMOTIONAL investment in the war and they are looking for a return based on a LOGICAL conclusion, i.e. "we never really made an Iraq-9/11 connection". They're fucked if they think they can make this work. It doesn't compute in the feeble brains of the people who they need the most...Everyone else will see it for the bullshit it is...

from September 2002 -----

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/09/26/national/main523326.shtml


President Bush's national security adviser said al Qaeda operatives have found refuge in Baghdad, and accused Iraqi President Saddam Hussein's regime of helping Osama bin Laden's followers develop chemical weapons.

Condoleezza Rice's statements, aired Wednesday in a broadcast interview, are the strongest yet alleging contacts between al Qaeda and the Iraqi government. Previously, evidence of the two working together was tenuous, or came from unreliable sources.

She made her accusations as the Bush administration continued to make its case to a skeptical world that Saddam should be removed from power, by force if necessary. They followed accusations from Democratic Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle that Mr. Bush was playing politics with the debate over war in Iraq.

"There clearly are contacts between al Qaeda and Iraq that can be documented; there clearly is testimony that some of the contacts have been important contacts and that there's a relationship here," Rice said. <end snip>

"accuses Saddam Hussein's regime" but not Saddam personally.

"contacts between al Qaeda and the Iraqi government," but Saddam isn't the whole Iraqi government.

"Some of the contacts have been important contacts and that there's a relationship there," but she didn't quite exactly and precisely state. . . . oh, :puke:

<another snip>
"No one is trying to make an argument at this point that Saddam Hussein somehow had operational control of what happened on Sept. 11, so we don't want to push this too far, but this is a story that is unfolding, and it is getting clearer, and we're learning more," Rice said.

She suggested that details of the contacts would be released later.
<end that snip>

<one more>
Administration officials, speaking on the condition of anonymity, said Rice's disclosure was significant because it marked the first time that the White House claimed that al Qaeda operated in areas of Iraq controlled by Saddam. It was an effort to counter suggestions that al Qaeda operatives were solely in the Kurdish area of northern Iraq, which he doesn't control. The disclosure is part of an effort to strengthen the case against Saddam, the officials said
<end>

"Areas of Iraq controlled by Saddam," but not necessarily that Saddam had anything to do with it." time for another :puke:


This is just one article that came up on a google search. I have no idea how many more there are. Zillions, I suppose.

come back to them and she just isn't that bright.

This will be their undoing..all the lies are well documented and will out them for the vicious parasites that they are.

and that was Al Quida sympathizers which meant Saddam and he helped those terrible terrorists out!

Condaleeza Rice is Backsteppin! and she is not a very good dancer!

:bounce:

and on Thursdays we create the fly trap for next Tuesday.

or words to that effect..remember condi ?..you meant a nuclear attack on NYC..by islamic terrorists with nukes supplied by the puppet saddam..(excuse this)..YOU FUCKING LYING BITCH..

:D

All the way sweetheart!!!

VERBATIM:

"Whereas members of al-Qaida, an organization bearing responsibility for attacks on the United States, its citizens, and interests, including the attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, are known to be in Iraq;"

http://www.webdesignsbycarson.com/warres.html

They said

"Whereas members of al-Qaida, an organization bearing responsibility for attacks on the United States, its citizens, and interests, including the attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, are known to be in Iraq;"

What Condi is saying is that the Bush Regime never said "Hussein was behind 9/11"

If we took this to a court of law Bush would be found "not guilty" on that issue.

The media, on the other hand, connected the dots and went to town on the story. The Bush Regime was not about to correct this since the whole country was buying this load of crap and supporting his war.

Originally posted by LynneSin:
If we took this to a court of law Bush would be found "not guilty" on that issue. The media, on the other hand, connected the dots...The Bush Regime was not about to correct this since the whole country was buying this load of crap and supporting his war.

The Bush Regime's (criminal) intent was to create the illusion that there was a link between 9/11 and Saddam in order to justify invading Iraq. The proof of that lies in the fact that they did nothing to "correct" the media though they knew the story wasn't true. Bush IS guilty--of conspiracy and fraud at least; of treason at most.


rocknation

Now that Iraq has been taken out, it's time to shift to target number two. Eg. see the post about Syria.

You're playing a game with words: "... the Bush administration had never accused Saddam Hussein of directing the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks ..." Actually, Dubya has come close to claiming even that.

But, Condi, now that you and Rummy have made your lying claims today, please do us one little favor: the next time your boss (Dubya? Cheney?) does make the claim, or even insinuates it, please correct him in public.

"We never said saddam flew those planes into the WTC"

something is going to happen this year...

no WMD!
no link between saddam & 9/11!
no saddam!
no osama!

what is going to happen now?
once the media starts, how is it going to stop?
their rigged election may be unrigged thanks to bev and co.!

I want the truth about 9/11!!!!!!!!!!!!

lets wake these goddamn sleepwalkers up!

into disrupting our real President Clinton and our govt over his "definition of what IS, IS" they certainly are getting bizzarre..

It's fantastic seeing them faltering now, after so much hostility, so much disrespect for humankind.

Are they crossing messages as Ironic Times points out?
"

White House Split on Terror War
Some want to exaggerate achievements,
others to overstate threat.

Administration Offers New
Explanation for Iraq War
U.S. soldiers protecting homeland by
posing as targets for terrorists who might
otherwise come here.

by rhetorically linking the two at every single opportunity.

This has to be the most disingenous bunch of slimeballs I've ever seen.

Global Message: September 26, 2002
The security of our country is the commitment of both political parties, and the responsibility of both elected branches of government. Elected officials are working for a strong Congressional resolution that sends a clear message: UN Security Council demands must be followed and the Iraqi dictator must be disarmed. These requirements will be met, or they will be enforced.

The danger is grave and growing. The Iraqi regime possesses biological and chemical weapons and is rebuilding facilities to make more. It could launch a biological or chemical attack 45 minutes after the order is given. The regime is seeking a nuclear bomb -- and, with fissile material, could build one within a year.

Iraq's regime has longstanding and continuing ties to terrorist groups -- there are al-Qaida terrorists inside Iraq. The regime also practices the rape of women and the torture of dissenters and their children as methods of intimidation.

The President has made it clear: we refuse to live in a future of fear. We are determined to build a future of security and peace for the world.

Great find! :thumbsup:

That's the first time I've seen the US use Blair's 45-minute claim! :kick:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/09/20020926-19.html

Bush stated that 45 minute potential bio weapons threat in two live speeches. However, on previous occasions, he attributed it to British sources. This mention of it in a September 26, 2002 Global Message at the White House website is the first time it was mentioned in the absolute (without attribution to another source, that being British intelligence) as plain fact.

Thanks for the link :hi:

"We have never claimed that Saddam Hussein ... had either direction or control of 9/11," Rice said when asked about the public perception of a link.

No shit, Condi. Because if you'd said that we'd be grilling you now to find out why the Cabal took us into Afghanistan first! And if Saddam had directed or controlled 9/11, taking us into Afghanistan might have been slightly irresponsible, or perhaps even illegal mightn't it? Maybe even put us at greater danger, huh?

Doh! They really are arrogant bastards--they treat the American people and the world like we were all children. (Is that what it means having the "adults" in charge?)

So, in your opinion, Condi, the public has "misperceived." Do you think the nation's leadership--and that includes you, baby--have any responsibility for correcting such misperceptions? Isn't not doing so a failure of leadership?

Oh, damn it! Why can't these reporters think on their feet and pop some hardball questions at these cardboard cut-out mutha f*ckers?

Reading these liars' cover-ass spin is like encountering an insurance agent over a claim. "I'm sorry, sir, if you'll read the fine print, you'll see we do not cover medical costs for accidents that occur between your home and your workplace on the fourth day of odd-numbered months in the Mayan calendar. Next!" The sickest of sick corporate mind-sets.

(Edited to add last paragraph and fix about a dozen grammar and spelling mistakes. Need more tea!)

Probably if we search everywhere on Google or Lexus-Nexus we'll probably not find any legit news article with anyone from the Bush Regime saying that.

Instead they allow their shrills to hound the message: Hannity, Coulter(+), Limbaugh and the other squealers are out there doing their own version of connecting the dots. Fox News picks up on this and makes it expands the story and eventually this will become everyday conversation.

What the Bush Regime FAILED to do is stop this story months ago when the shrills & squealers were out there insisting it was Iraq and calling those of us who said otherwise as "unpatriotic"

brained actions. they "strategerize" their lies so they can ass-cover later... they plan out exactly what must be said, by whom, and in what context, with cover plans for later use on late-night and early-morning TV.

exactly like the enormous corporations who rape our economy and then say "HUH? WHAA? noooo... we were just doin' business as usual, and then the whole BILLION DOLLAR COLLAPSE thing just SNUCK UP ON US!"

it's called premeditated crime. highly premeditated.

How is the large percentange of the population
who believed bush's connecting the 2 going to take it?

---- Jesus fucking christ!
Does this woman have no fucking shame?

http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/meast/03/11/Iraq.Qaeda.link/
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Does Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein provide assistance to Osama bin Laden's al Qaeda? It's a case the Bush administration has tried hard to make.

"These al Qaeda affiliates, based in Baghdad, now coordinate the movement of people, money and supplies into and throughout Iraq for his network, and they've been operating freely in the capital for more than eight months," said U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell in his presentation last month to the U.N. Security Council.

During testimony before the Senate Intelligence Committee in mid-February, CIA Director George Tenet added, "Iraq has, in the past, provided training in document forgery and bomb-making to al Qaeda. It has also provided training in poisons and gases to two al Qaeda associates."

Snip

http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/02/05/sprj.irq.alqaeda.links/
UNITED NATIONS (CNN) -- The regime of Iraqi President Saddam Hussein for years has consorted with the al Qaeda terrorist network, often using as a go-between a shadowy figure who set up a training camp in northeast Iraq, Secretary of State Colin Powell said Wednesday.

Speaking to the U.N. Security Council, Powell offered the most detailed explanation yet of possible links between Baghdad and associates of Osama bin Laden. At its center, he said, is Abu Mussab Zarqawi, a bin Laden associate who has traveled in Iraq.

Iraqi officials have steadfastly denied that they have any links to al Qaeda, insisting such charges are part of a U.S. disinformation effort to justify a military attack. Powell dismissed their denials, and said Iraq has a record of trying to deceive the world.

"Ambition and hatred are enough to bring Iraq and al Qaeda together," Powell said.


W A S H I N G T O N, Sept. 26 — The United States has long charged Saddam Hussein with supporting terrorism, but the Bush administration is now alleging something new — what one official called a "current, symbiotic relationship" between Iraq and al Qaeda.

SNIP



http://abcnews.go.com/sections/us/DailyNews/Iraqpolitics020926.html
President Bush appeared in the Rose Garden today with members of Congress who support him on Iraq and accused Iraqi President Saddam Hussein of essentially the same crime he charged the Taliban with: harboring al Qaeda terrorists.
"The regime has long-standing and continuing ties to terrorist organizations. And there are al Qaeda terrorists inside Iraq," he said.

Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld said "Iraq and al Qaeda have discussed safe haven opportunities in Iraq, reciprocal nonaggression discussions."

And, he added, al Qaeda is looking for specific assistance from Baghdad.

"We have what we consider to be credible evidence that al Qaeda leaders have sought contacts in Iraq who could help them acquire weapons of mass destruction capabilities," Rumsfeld said.


SNIP

http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2002-07-28-iraq-al-qaeda_x.htm
WASHINGTON — Bush administration lawyers have concluded that establishing a link between al-Qaeda terrorists and Iraq would provide the legal justification the White House needs to attack Saddam Hussein's regime, U.S. officials say.

An intensive effort by U.S. intelligence to establish a link between al-Qaeda and Iraq is being driven, in part, by a conclusion reached in recent weeks by White House and Pentagon legal and legislative advisers. They believe that connecting Iraq and the Sept. 11 attacks would allow the administration to avoid debates at the United Nations and in Congress over what some would call an unprovoked strike.

The administration has sought the connection since the first days after Sept. 11.

The idea of using that connection as legal grounds for military action has gelled only recently, however, as the administration has developed its military options and confronted the difficulty of gaining support from allies for attacking Iraq. Countries such as Russia and France, both permanent U.N. Security Council members, have been pushing to ease sanctions on Iraq and have raised concerns about an unprovoked attack.

SNIP

And here is a page of admittance from their head spokesman Rush pimlebutt.
http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/cold/photos_prove_connection_between_iraq_and_al_qaeda_terrorists.guest.html
About 20 minutes before show time, we posted satellite imagery of Salman Pak - home of the terrorist training center in Iraq we've been telling you about. I want to thank Gary Napier and his whole staff from Space Imaging, Inc. for these images from their IKONOS satellite. It's not in geo synchronous orbit, so they can move it to map, measure and monitor anywhere on earth.

The third of the three shots zeros in on what looks like a Boeing 727 fuselage to me. Everyone says it's a 707, but its wings would be farther forward if that were the case. So it's probably a 727, or at least a tri-jet. One of the stories I read this week and put into Rush's Saddam Stack of Stuff in researching all this, cited Aviation Week and Space Technology's article on this facility. This confirms the existence of that fuselage; it's right where the Iraqi defectors said it was.

only those of us who are closely watching know this. The general public has no notion. No notion at all this is going on now. It is not going to be repeated constantly like the pre-war propaganda was. They are going to mention it once, okay now move on.

THis is atrocious and Condi needs to be ashamed of herself. The way these people are manipulating the American people is one of the worst things I have ever seen in my life!

I'm developing a Letter to the Editor. I'll send it to my local papers and maybe someone will read it and connect the dots that lead to lies not to a connection between 9/11 and Iraq.

(or whatever the figure is these days) of American's who think that Saddam was responsible for 9/11 going to take this new information??

until all the US media whores are shouting it from the rooftops that the Great Flaming Shrub lied!! We have less than a year to get that to happen so that 1) he will be so discredited as to not be able to re-theft the presidency <<and hopefully, be politically ruined for life>>, and 2) to possibly have enough media whore coverage to bring on the cries for either impeachment and/or being held accountable for war crimes.

Now, if only the Valerie Wilson/CIA/Rove connections can come to light and be proven true!

... about stopping terrorists hijacking airliners not "in the traditional sense" or in telling the truth. She does seem very qualified in sophistry, always saying the right thing — probably practice to avoid getting jailed for perjury during the coming trials. So, what makes her qualified to be National Security Advisor? She was in Big Oil? Big deal.

is the only explanation for Rice and Rumsfeld to be coming clean. They are just putting stuff on the record for when Gen Clark or whoever calls them out on the BS.

Look for Rice to refer to this interview in a few weeks when the crap hits the fan.

good one, Octafish.

Propaganda really does work on stupid people. You can say "We don't want another 9-11 to happen, that's why we are going to war with Saddam."

That doesn't blame Saddam for 9-11, but if you say the above over and over and over and over, people being to think 9-11 when they hear Saddam.

Nice work dissembling asshole propagandists.

I've heard better lies from juveniles.

believed the earlier lie....

Wonnder how they'll react to the news that they were punked by this unelected bunch of crooks?

what a tangle web they weave when first they practiced to deceive...

put the soundbite reel together.

It should be a major embarrassment to them that so many millions of people think there IS a connection. Numbers like that just don't come out of thin air. 70% of Americans should feel outraged!

There are ways to tell the truth but still lie.

no Saddam didn't "direct" the attacks but hasn't the Bushies said all along that he was involved with the attacks?

Isn't that why a majority of Americans believe he had something to do with the attacks

to a House committee, Cheney said it on MTP sunday and the PNACers are still saying it! try as the may to deny their lies for war...there is document proof that all of them LIED!!!!

:kick:

to her own people. Can't you just see every time she looks in the mirror, she remembers "my grandfather was an honest, dignified man. He did his best for his family. And look what I've become".

I can't understand how she can convince herself that she's a spokeswoman for African Americans. If she thinks of herself as a trailblazer, a person other young women could emulate and hold up as a role model, she's sadly mistaken.

She's sold herself out, just like Colin Powell, to the party of the White Supremacists.