We believe there to be Al-Qaeda in this US. Does that mean we have a relationship with them?
There must have been at least 20 “meetings” between US officials and the hijackers (when they got their passports stamped). This is at least a good a connection than the meeting in Sudan where Iraqi officials told Bin Laden “thanks but no thanks”.
Newspeak streamlines doublethink. Doublethink and newspeak render double speak obsolete.
I’ve just realised what that this whole thing makes complete sense
Chenry Gang: There are strong links between Sadam and Al-Qida.
9/11 committee: We find no credible evidenceof links
Conclusion: 9/11 committee think that Bush et al have absolutely no cedibility.
Example of Bush outright lying about what he’s previously argued on this matter:
http://slate.msn.com/id/2102608/
Kevin Drum also points out:
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2004_06/004168.php
What ME country DIDN’T have “relationships” with Al Qaeda as close or closer? Even the U.S. had relationships with various members at some points. This “relationship” thing reeks of desperation to try and divert attention from former bullshit.
Ale, if the report you quoting is true, doesn’t that mean that the U.S. was basically willing to let British citizens be killed just because it didn’t want to alter its timetable for war or do anything that would jeopardize their claim that there were Al Qaeda in Iraq? Should that be, like, pretty disgusting to British citizens everywhere?
I guess so, if I´d be a British citizen I´d be howling.
The spelling, it burnssss. You’ve repeated these mistakes a few times. Saddam, two d’s. And al Qaeda or al Qaeda, take your pick. There’s a definite ‘a’ sound in there.
SimonX: your post made my brain hurt. Thanks.
You know, Bush is leading Kerry in the polls as I write this. I’m trying to imagine four years of Bush - and Cheney and Ashcroft and Rumsfeld - completely free, because they won’t have to face another election.
Trying, but not succeeding. These guys are really, really scary.
Come on, we already despise him and think he’s the worst American president of all time anyway. What more do you want from us? 
Putin taking one for the team? wtf?
http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/europe/06/18/russia.warning/index.html
The best bit of that article is:
:wally
More bullshit from Chaney (he’s really a fucking scumbag)
http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/06/18/cheney.iraq.al.qaeda/index.html
Un-fucking-believable
Why the fuck doesn’t someone make a commercial with Rummy shaking Saddam’s hand under the caption “Al Qaeda wasn’t the only one with a relationship to SH”
<cue spooky music>
[sub]Paid for by people who don’t want WW3[/sub]
KERRY ARE YOU LISTENING???
**Asked if he knows information that the 9/11 commission does not know, Cheney replied, “Probably.” **
Are you reading FBI??
Full interview, but be warned, your blood may boil.
An obfuscation lesson by Dick Cheney
CHENEY: CLEAR LINKS BETWEEN SADDAM, AL-QAEDA; CALLS NY TIMES ARTICLE ‘OUTRAGEOUS’
Thu Jun 17 2004 19:00:33 ET
“…responding to a report from the 9-11 Commission saying it had found no evidence of ‘collaboration’ between Iraq and Al Qaeda” “Vice President Dick Cheney… called the New York Times coverage of the story ‘outrageous’.”
Vice Pres. CHENEY: I disagree with the way their findings have been portrayed.
<snip>
There’s clearly been a relationship.
There’s a separate question. The separate question is: Was Iraq involved with al-Qaida in the attack on 9/11?
<snip>
What The New York Times did today was outrageous. … The press wants to run out and say there’s a fundamental split here now between what the president said and what the commission said. Jim Thompson is a member of the commission who’s since been on the air. I saw him with my own eyes. And there’s no conflict. What they were addressing was whether or not they were involved in 9/11. And there they found no evidence to support that proposition. They did not address the broader question of a relationship between Iraq and al-Qaida in other areas, in other ways.
Vice Pres. CHENEY: But that is a separate question from what the press has gotten all in a dither about, The New York Times especially, on this other question [of whether or not there was a general relationship between UbL and Hussein]. What they’ve done is, I think, distorted what the commission actually reported, certainly according to Governor Thompson, who’s a member of the commission.
BORGER: But you say you disagree with the commission…
Vice Pres. CHENEY: On this question of whether or not there was a general relationship.
BORGER: Yes.
Vice Pres. CHENEY: Yeah.
BORGER: And they say that there was not one forged and you were saying yes, that there was. Do you know things that the commission does not know?
Vice Pres. CHENEY: Probably.
BORGER: And do you think the commission needs to know them?
Vice Pres. CHENEY: I don’t have any–I don’t know what they know. I do know they didn’t talk with any original sources on this subject that say that in their report.
BORGER: They did talk with people who had interrogated sources.
Vice Pres. CHENEY: Right.
BORGER: So they do have good sources.
Vice Pres. CHENEY: Gloria, the notion that there is no relationship between Iraq and al-Qaida just simply is not true.
[Since there actually is a diagreement between “what the president said and what the commission said,” and if it is outrageous that the NYT would say that ‘there’s a fundamental split here now between what the president said and what the commission said,’ this means that the VPotUSA is just outraged that the NYT would say it?]
BORGER: Well, let’s get to Mohammad Atta for a minute, because you mentioned him as well. You have said in the past that it was, quote, “pretty well confirmed.”
Vice Pres. CHENEY: No, I never said that.
BORGER: OK.
Vice Pres. CHENEY: Never said that.
BORGER: I think that is…
Vice Pres. CHENEY: Absolutely not. What I said was the Czech intelligence service reported after 9/11 that Atta had been in Prague on April 9th of 2001, where he allegedly met with an Iraqi intelligence official. We have never been able to confirm that nor have we been able to knock it down.
**The Vice President Appears on NBC’s Meet the Press **
December 9, 2001
RUSSERT: Do you still believe there is no evidence that Iraq was involved in September 11?
CHENEY: Well, what we now have that’s developed since you and I last talked, Tim, of course, was that report that’s been pretty well confirmed, that he did go to Prague and he did meet with a senior official of the Iraqi intelligence service in Czechoslovakia last April, several months before the attack.
Christ, I feel like I’m turning into some quasi version of Reeder, 'cept Cheney is my Bush.
So if Cheney has access to information that the 9/11 commission didn’t have, why didn’t he freakin’ give it to them when he “testified” (not under oath, so there was no testicle swearing) with Bush?