"Sen. John Kerry (D-MA) issued a statement that said, "Bush exaggerates claims about Zarqawi."
Posted on 06/16/2004 6:54:49 AM PDT by Happy2BMe
White House Cautiously Confirms Iraq's Terror Ties
By Jeff Gannon
Talon News
June 16, 2004
WASHINGTON (Talon News) -- Beginning with a speech by Vice President Dick Cheney on Monday, the Bush administration is quietly building the case that Saddam Hussein had greater involvement in Middle East terrorism than previously thought. In a speech to the James Madison Institute, Cheney pointed out that the former dictator gave monetary support to the families of suicide bombers in Israel and provided safe haven for terrorists like Abu Nidal.
Without going into greater detail, Cheney flatly stated, "He had long standing ties with al Qaeda."
At Tuesday's Rose Garden press conference, President George W. Bush was asked to qualify the vice president's remarks.
"Zarqawi. Zarqawi is the best evidence of connection to al Qaeda affiliates and al Qaeda," Bush said. "He's the person who's still killing."
U.S. intelligence believes that Abu Musab al Zarqawi, known to be in Iraq since 2002, is behind many of the terrorist attacks against western interests in recent months. He is thought to be responsible for planning the Madrid train bombing and directly involved in the beheading of American contractor Nicholas Berg, among other acts.
It was widely reported that Zarqawi recently sent a letter to Usama bin Laden indicating that the prospects for a terrorist victory in Iraq are fading.
"The grip is starting to be tightened on the holy warriors' necks and, with the spread of soldiers and police, the future is becoming frightening," Zarqawi said.
At Tuesday's press briefing, White House Spokesman Scott McClellan told Talon News, "I think those ties are well known, and we have talked about them previously."
McClellan added, "Secretary Powell outlined the former regime's support for and ties to terrorists when he went before the United Nations. Director Tenet has testified in open session before Congress about what we know about those ties."
Despite claims to the contrary, the Clinton administration also believed Saddam Hussein had ties to al Qaeda. In his new book, "The Connection," Steven Hayes, a reporter for the Weekly Standard, discussed a sealed indictment of Usama bin Laden issued by the Clinton Justice Department in 1998. It specifically cited an agreement between the Hussein and al Qaeda that the terrorist organization would not agitate against the regime in exchange for weapons development assistance.
Hayes says that six Clinton administration national security officials cited a link to Iraq in justifying the 1998 U.S. strike against Sudan.
Sen. John Kerry (D-MA) issued a statement that said, "Bush exaggerates claims about Zarqawi."
Hmm. The 9/11 Ommission said NO on this one....
But but but, Tom Kean and his merry band of circus performers insists there is no tie between Iraq and Al qaeda!
The 911 Commission is made up of a bunch of buffoons! Anyone that pays any heeed to their conclusion is either a fool or an idiot!
Hear the Donkey Bray
(RealPlayer)
[Expletive deleted] !!!
During the 90's, the press wrote hundreds of articles about Osama bin Laden's growing relationship with Saddam Hussein.
In 1998, the Clinton administration said that Osama bin Laden had agreed not to attack Iraq in exchange for WMD training.
It has been interesting to watch the leftist press pretend they don't know that which they once knew and wrote about.
Less than two months before 9/11/01, the state-controlled Iraqi newspaper “Al-Nasiriya” carried a column headlined, “American, an Obsession called Osama Bin Ladin.” (July 21, 2001)
In the piece, Baath Party writer Naeem Abd Muhalhal predicted that bin Laden would attack the US “with the seriousness of the Bedouin of the desert about the way he will try to bomb the Pentagon after he destroys the White House.”
The same state-approved column also insisted that bin Laden “will strike America on the arm that is already hurting,” and that the US “will curse the memory of Frank Sinatra every time he hears his songs” – an apparent reference to the Sinatra classic, “New York, New York”.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1127451/posts
A shame GWB took the lefts bait and is leetting them redefine the war as a "War Against al Qaeda" rather than a "War Against Terror". Iraq's connections to terrorist groups have been as clear as Kerry's donnection to the Democratic Party for years.
The argument that al Zarqawi isn’t al Qaeda, but rather affiliated with Ansar al-Islam is specious, but apparently now relevant.
Either we have evidence that Atta received hijacker training in Iraq or we don't. If this is indeed true the President himself should be confidently stating it. Atta is the one hijacker most Americans can identify and this would be powerful evidence if presented correctly.
I saw excerpts from Russert's show Sunday with Powell. When Russert stated that there were no WMDs, Powell didn't correct him. Why is that the left has been allowed to equate no stockpiles of WMDs found with there are no WMDs or were never WMDs? Our side should be confidently stating that the issue is where are the WMDs, not whether they existed.
The handling of Iraq from a PR standpoint has been a debacle by the Bush administration. They need to strongly state their positions with confidence and defute these bogus perceptions that WMDs don't exist and there were no Iraq / Al Qaeda links.
Classless statement from Kerry.
I wonder if he really phrased it exactly as depicted.
Without going into greater detail, Cheney flatly stated, "He had long standing ties with al Qaeda."
At Tuesday's Rose Garden press conference, President George W. Bush was asked to qualify the vice president's remarks.
"Zarqawi. Zarqawi is the best evidence of connection to al Qaeda affiliates and al Qaeda," Bush said. "He's the person who's still killing."
Good new title for the commission: Ommission.
Both of Kerri's statements on Zarqawi and 9/11 are actual quotes (he now wishes he never said).
I'm confused as to what you are talking about. When asked yesterday to qualify Cheney's assertion of an Al Qaeda/Iraq tie, President Bush instead supported it and cited *Zarqawi* as evidence.
Yes, yes, yes.
Taxman Bravo Zulu!
Pretty much sums up the situation with Islam. Peace while one infidel is still breathing is "frightening." Any more questions?
the problem is that the left and the media (largely the same thing) have defined "evidence" to mean "proof" which is erroneous. There is plenty of evidence that Iran and al queda worked together and there is even evidence that Iraq was involved with 9/11 (Salman Pak, Haye's book, etc) but since it is a Republican in office the bar is "conclusive proof" as opposed to the mere precense of evidence as it was for Clinton.
GWB declared a worldwide “War on Terror”, not a war solely on the perpetrators of 9/11, and declared a policy of preemption, rather than requiring an imminent threat of attack to act. Leaving the propriety of the positions aside (I agree with him), that’s was the Bush position.
The left has, with some success, morphed the question into did Iraq have direct ties to al Qaeda, and is Zarqawi an al Qaeda operative. Both questions are largely irrelevant to the Bush policy. That Iraq had ties to international terrorist groups as defined by the US is irrefutable. Same with Zarqawi. He’s a known terrorist. He’s generally acknowledged as a leader of Ansar al-Islam (itself affiliated with al Qaeda), and a member of Hizb ut Tahrir, a fundamentalist group dedicated to overthrowing the monarchy in Jordan.
Zarqawi is a terrorist, pure and simple, and terrorists are fungible. There’s plenty of overlap and support between groups. The terrorist recruits in Iraq are plain vanilla mideast folk raised in an abusive hate America, hate Israel, hate Jews hate Christians environment. Extended arguments as to whether he had an al Qaeda membership card, the left’s tactic, is unproductive. Who cares if he didn’t, he’s still the enemy.
Bump ! :^D
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
