Well, I’d like to thank MyWay’s HOPE YEN for being the first reporter, that I have seen, to exploite the 9/11 panel findings.
Mr. Yen quickly starts the article off with:
WASHINGTON (AP) – Bluntly contradicting the Bush administration, the commission investigating the Sept. 11 attacks reported Wednesday there was “no credible evidence” that Saddam Hussein helped al-Qaida target the United States.
President Bush and Donald Rumsfeld came out MUCH earlier saying there was no evidence, why is this news worthy now Hope Yen? (see http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/3118262.stm, http://www.dailytexanonline.com/news/2003/09/18/WorldNation/Saddam.Not.Involved.In.911.Bush.Says-468829.shtml, http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,97527,00.html// Rumsfeld says Saddam not involved (See http://online.wsj.com/article/0,,BT_CO_20030916_006829,00.html). So I ask you sir, how are their findings “Bluntly contradicting the Bush administration, the commission investigating the Sept. 11 attacks reported Wednesday there was “no credible evidence” that Saddam Hussein helped al-Qaida target the United States.” news worthy? Oh thats right, you make it sound like the Bush administration said that Saddam was tied w/ 9/11.
While Saddam dispatched a senior Iraqi intelligence official to Sudan to meet with bin Laden in 1994, the commission said it had not turned up evidence of a “collaborative relationship.”
WHAT MORE EVIDENCE DO YOU NEED? Look at it this way, would we send Donald Rumsfeld to talk w/ Osama about creating terrorist training camps? NO, that would be crazy. But guess what? If we wanted to build a terrorist relationship w/ Osama only then would we send Rumsfeld to talk about the possiblity of setting up camps in the United States.
On Monday, Vice President Dick Cheney said in a speech that the Iraqi dictator “had long established ties with al-Qaida.”
Yeah, didn’t Saddam send his senior Iraqi intelligence official to meet with Osama?
“Bin Laden is said to have requested space to establish training camps, as well as assistance in procuring weapons, but Iraq apparently never responded,” the report said. “There have been reports that contacts between Iraq and al-Qaida also occurred” after bin Laden moved his operations to Afghanistan in 1996, “but they do not appear to have resulted in a collaborative relationship,” it said.
Couldn’t it be that the U.N. was all over Iraq at that point, why give the U.N. and the United States more reason to attack you. Had the U.N. not been all over Iraq, Saddam prolly would have given him space. (lets not be soo stupid here)
“Two senior bin Laden associates have adamantly denied that any ties existed between al-Qaida and Iraq,” the report said.
Golly, they must be telling the truth. I mean why would they lie to us? So if they said it, it’s gotta be true!
Hope Yen, the first part of this message was really the only part directed towards you (I understand that the rest of the article was just quotes taken from the panel.) However, your first statement was “Bluntly contradicting the Bush administration, the commission investigating the Sept. 11 attacks reported Wednesday there was “no credible evidence” that Saddam Hussein helped al-Qaida target the United States.” I find your statement of “Bluntly contradicting the Bush administration” to be rhetoric.
No comments:
Post a Comment