Bush says to look into Iranian role in terror attacks

chinaview.cn ^ | 7-19-04

[treeclimber]

WASHINGTON, July 19 (Xinhuanet) -- US President George W. Bush said on Monday that the United States will continue to investigate if Iran was involved in the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks.

"As to direct connections with September the 11th, we are digging into the facts to determine if there was one," Bush said at the photo opportunity with visiting Chilean President Ricardo Lagos in the Oval Office of the White House.

"Acting (CIA) Director (John) McLaughlin said there was no direct connection between Iran and the attacks of September the 11th. We will continue to look and see if the Iranians were involved," Bush said.

McLaughlin said on Sunday that the CIA had known for some time that some of the Sept. 11 hijackers were able to pass through Iran,but he said there was no evidence the government in Tehran supported this and nothing suggests an official connection betweenIran and the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks.

The New York Times also reported on Sunday that the final report of a commission investigating the Sept. 11 attacks would offer new evidence of cooperative ties between Iran and Osama bin Laden's Al-Qaeda terrorist network.

The new evidence will include information drawn from intelligence reports suggesting that Iran provided several of the hijackers on Sept. 11 with safe passage in the year before the attacks, the report said, citing US government officials.

Nonetheless, the US officials emphasized that the commission had no evidence to suggest that Iranian officials knew of the Sept.11 plot.

Iran has denied US accusations and said news reports tying Iranto the al-Qaeda were part of a US cover-up to deflect attention away from its failings in Iraq.

[treeclimber]

the axis of evil

[maestro]

Bush says to look into Iranian role in terror attacks .......Iranian roll vs Saudi Arabian roll,......role,.....roles....

Canada!

[My2Cents]

Why does the CIA need to be "told" to look into an Iranian connection? And while they're at it, how about looking into Syrian possession of Saddam's WMDs.

The books I've read over the past three years about the Arab/Muslim mindset in the Middle East say that everything is connected in the Middle East. You start following a path of inquiry, and come to a five-pronged fork in the road. Which path to take? In the Middle East, you can take any path you like, because any one of these will connect you to the "big picture."

To the question, "Was Iraq, or was Iran, involved in 9-11?" the answer is likely, "Yes."

And if Yossef Bodansky was correct in the information contained in his book THE HIGH COST OF PEACE, there was indeed an "axis of evil," and it not only involved collusion between Saddam and Iran, but also Syria and Arafat. They were all working in cooperation.

[Peach]

Exactly right, My2Cents. Bingo. They are ALL involved.

I haven't been around much today and will try to get caught up over the next day or so and slam a few threads.

[Indie]

Not only does Bush know they're all involved, but why the apparent hesitation?

[My2Cents]

But the Iranian connection should be a no-brainer. Many have been making the Iranian connection argument for the past two+ years (Michael Ledeen, for one).

Iran's Pasdaran Special Forces have had their finger in everything: HezbAllah; Arafat's Fatah; infiltration into northeastern and southern Iraq; Lebanon (they pretty much have run the show in the Bekaa Valley, from kidnappings in the early 1980s, to controlling the hostages). The problem with the left is that they really don't care who's opposing us in the Middle East. The left thinks we're the bad guys.

[DannyTN]

"Iran has denied US accusations and said news reports tying Iranto the al-Qaeda were part of a US cover-up to deflect attention away from its failings in Iraq."

No but it might be part of a US campaign to soften the blow when either Israel or the US blow the crap out of Iran's nuclear facilities.

[My2Cents]

The left has perhaps intimidated the Administration into taking a very cautious approach to Iran, Syria, the whole lot of them....The information we had on Saddam's WMDs was probably about as good as intelligence gets, and yet the media and the anti-war left has been shouting for a year and a half that the intelligence was "flawed." Personally, I would bet that the CIA's intel. on WMDs was pretty accurate, but that Saddam moved, hid, and destroyed this arsenal during the fog of war, and we cannot pick up the trail of where they went (even though there are persistent rumors and suspicions that much of the WMDs are in Syria and Lebanon). The CIA's reputation has been damaged, and Bush isn't about to rush into another war until the intelligence is pretty close to air-tight (which it may never be).

In the interest of winning the next election, the Democrats and their enablers in the news media have made it nearly politically impossible to protect this nation. Bush will do what he needs to do against Iran, but the task of protecting this country has been made more difficult with 16 months of naysaying.

[Indie]

In the interest of winning the next election, the Democrats and their enablers in the news media have made it nearly politically impossible to protect this nation.

Bingo! And that large group of presstitutes and their leftist minions will no doubt suffer personal consequences should something untoward happen.

They'd better all pray very hard our President stays safe, because they will be held accountable for that as well.