Nation-Building >> What connection to Al-Quaeda? | return to front page

"America has two great dominant strands of political thought - conservatism, which, at its very best, draws lines that should not be crossed; and progressivism, which, at its very best, breaks down barriers that should never have been erected." -- Bill Clinton, Dedication of the Clinton Presidential Library, November 2004

Add to Google Reader or Homepage Subscribe in Bloglines Subscribe in NewsGator Online Add to netvibes

website stats

Previous Posts
Netflix, Inc.
ThinkGeek T-Shirts will make you cool!
illy coffee - 2 cans, 2 mugs for just $26.

Saturday, July 12, 2003


What connection to Al-Quaeda?

posted by annatopia at Saturday, July 12, 2003 permalink View blog reactions
As I said in the comments section of Aziz's earlier post, the dam has burst. This AP article contains the following gem:

Now, two former Bush administration intelligence officials say the evidence linking Saddam to the group responsible for the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks was never more than sketchy at best. "There was no significant pattern of cooperation between Iraq and the al-Qaida terrorist operation," former State Department intelligence official Greg Thielmann said this week.

But wait, there's more:

Another former Bush administration intelligence official, who spoke on condition of anonymity, agreed there was no clear link between Saddam and al-Qaida. "The relationships that were plotted were episodic, not continuous," the former official said. A United Nations terrorism committee says it has no evidence - other than Secretary of State Colin Powell's assertions in his Feb. 5 U.N. speech - of any ties between al-Qaida and Iraq. And U.S. officials say American forces searching in Iraq have found no significant evidence tying Saddam's regime with Osama bin Laden's terrorist network.

And that's not all. Go read the whole thing.

In addition, Bush is now claiming the uranium controvery is a closed subject. I beg to differ, Mr President, and I'm calling bullshit. In the MSNBC article which reported Bush's terse "case closed" remarks, we find this nugget:

National security adviser Condoleezza Rice and other officials asserted this week that the president’s statement was justified at the time because the CIA cleared the address in its entirety, including the uranium claim. They said the CIA never told the White House that the claim was suspicious. But U.S. officials told NBC News’ Andrea Mitchell that Tenet himself advised Rice’s top deputy, Steven Hadley, to remove a reference to the uranium report from a speech Bush delivered Oct. 7 in Cincinnati, establishing that the nation’s top intelligence officials suspected that the allegation was false more than three months before they approved Bush’s repeating it in his nationally televised address on Jan. 28. The Washington Post reported Friday that the CIA also told British officials about its doubts and passed word along to several U.S. agencies before the State of the Union address.

So, CIA officials warned Condi's team about the bogus uranium claim. In addition, members of Bush's own intelligence team are saying the Al-Quaeda claims were bogus as well. So, the two biggest reasons that the public supported the war ("They're gonna nuke us!" and "They're harboring Al-Quaeda!") have turned out to be complete and utter bullshit.

Mr President, the buck stops with you. What did you know and when did you know it?

It also looks like the American public is beginning to realise that they were snookered. If the press doesn't keep pounding this issue, then it's up to Americans like you and me. Write and call your local papers and demand that they continue to follow up on the biggest scandal since Watergate.

update LOL! Go freep the beard (props to skippy)! Today's questions is "Who do you blame for the mistake in the president's State of the Union address on Iraq?" Guess where America thinks the buck stops??


Post a Comment


View blog top tags
The Assault on Reason

Obama 2008 - I want my country back

I want my country back - Obama 2008

About Nation-Building

Nation-Building was founded by Aziz Poonawalla in August 2002 under the name Dean Nation. Dean Nation was the very first weblog devoted to a presidential candidate, Howard Dean, and became the vanguard of the Dean netroot phenomenon, raising over $40,000 for the Dean campaign, pioneering the use of Meetup, and enjoying the attention of the campaign itself, with Joe Trippi a regular reader (and sometime commentor). Howard Dean himself even left a comment once. Dean Nation was a group weblog effort and counts among its alumni many of the progressive blogsphere's leading talent including Jerome Armstrong, Matthew Yglesias, and Ezra Klein. After the election in 2004, the blog refocused onto the theme of "purple politics", formally changing its name to Nation-Building in June 2006. The primary focus of the blog is on articulating purple-state policy at home and pragmatic liberal interventionism abroad.