Posted on 06/19/2004 11:32:53 AM PDT by unspun
White House - AP
|
|
|
Fri Jun 18, 9:46 AM ET
|
|
By DEB RIECHMANN, Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON - Disputing the findings of the commission investigating the Sept. 11 terror attacks, President Bush (news - web sites) continues to insist there was a link between Saddam Hussein (news - web sites) and al-Qaida.
|
||||||||||||||||||
"This administration never said that the 9-11 attacks were orchestrated between Saddam and al-Qaida," Bush said Thursday after meeting with his Cabinet at the White House.
"We did say there were numerous contacts between Saddam Hussein and al-Qaida. For example, Iraqi intelligence officers met with (Osama) bin Laden, the head of al-Qaida, in the Sudan. There's numerous contacts between the two," he said.
Saddam's alleged link with terrorists was a central justification the Bush administration had for toppling the former Iraqi regime. Bush also argued that Saddam had weapons of mass destruction, which have not been found, and that Saddam ruled his country with an iron fist and tortured his opponents, claims that no one has disputed.
"The reason I keep insisting that there was a relationship between Iraq (news - web sites) and Saddam and al-Qaida is because there was a relationship between Iraq and al-Qaida," Bush said.
The Sept. 11 panel reported this week that while there were contacts between al-Qaida and Iraq they did not appear to have produced "a collaborative relationship."
Vice President Dick Cheney (news - web sites) vehemently disagreed with that conclusion, saying on CNBC's "Capital Report" that "the notion that there is no relationship between Iraq and al-Qaida just simply is not true."
Senior members of the commission seemed eager to minimize any disagreement with the White House.
"What we have found is, Were there contacts between al-Qaida and Iraq? Yes. Some of them were shadowy but they were there," said Tom Kean, the Republican former governor of New Jersey, who is chairman.
Like Bush, he said there was no evidence that Iraq aided in the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.
Former Rep. Lee Hamilton of Indiana, the Democratic vice chairman of the panel, said media reports of a conflict between the administration and the commission were "not that apparent to me."
Although bin Laden asked for help from Iraq in the mid-1990s, Saddam's government never responded, according to a report by the commission staff based on interviews with government intelligence and law enforcement officials.
"There have been reports that contacts between Iraq and al-Qaida also occurred after bin Laden had returned to Afghanistan (news - web sites), but they do not appear to have resulted in a collaborative relationship," the commission's report said. "Two senior bin Laden associates have adamantly denied that any ties existed between al-Qaida and Iraq."
Bush said Saddam had ties to other terrorist networks as well.
"He (Saddam) was a threat because he was a sworn enemy to the United States of America, just like al-Qaida," Bush said. "He was a threat because he had terrorist connections — not only al-Qaida connections, but other connections to terrorist organizations."
The president said Saddam had links, for example, to the Abu Nidal Palestinian terror organization and sheltered Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, considered the most dangerous foreign fighter in Iraq and one of the world's top terrorists.
"He was a threat because he provided safe haven for a terrorist like al-Zarqawi, who is still killing innocents inside Iraq," Bush said.
|
|
Attention on al-Zarqawi has increased in recent months as he became a more vocal terror figure, due in part to three recordings released on the Internet, including the video showing the beheading of American businessman Nicholas Berg.
In the Thursday night CNBC interview, Cheney said of al-Zarqawi: "Here's a man who's Jordanian by birth. He's described as an al-Qaida associate. He ran training camps in Afghanistan back before we went to war in Afghanistan. After we went in and hit his training camp, he fled to Baghdad. Found safe harbor and sanctuary in Baghdad in May of 2002. ... There clearly was a relationship there that stretched back over that period of time to at least May of '02, a year before we launched into Iraq."
This is your chance to FReep the media, today!
See the email including addresses, below.
Gee, what a surprise, considering many of the members on the panel (sarcasm)
President Bush (news - web sites) continues to insist there was a link between Saddam Hussein (news - web sites) and al-Qaida.
How dare he claim this ....we the all powerful media say it isn't true.....can we get back to our coverage of Abu Gharib.....shocking new details ....the underwear were Helen Thomas's......those evil Republicans stole them.
/sarcasm
From: "Arlen Williams"
To: mangocurtis@northwestern.edu
bill.gaspard@latimes.com, martstone@aol.com, snd@snd.org, mail@journalism.org, credibility@ap.org, kathyg@rtndf.org, rlavelle@roundtablemedia.com,mfowlkes@roundtablemedia.com, ,consultjody@aol.com,chrispeck1950@yahoo.com ,kens@spokesman.com ,lgrist@rockford.gannet.com ,doug@spokesman.com ,pkuhr@ku.edu, ,miller@freepress.com ,lseals@timesdispatch.com ,apme@ap.org ,info@ap.org,durken@ap.org,asne@asne.org,sbosley@asne.org
,awilcox@asne.org ,cwilliams@asne.org ,IRC@naa.org ,ono@uniontrib.com
Cc: phart@fair.org,jnaureckas@fair.org ,srendall@fair.org,dthomas@fair.org ,censored@sonoma.edu,feeback@free-market.net,response@fairpress.org,institute@igc.org,dcinstitute@igc.org
,norman@accuracy.org
,cynthia@accuracy.org, editor@mediamonitors.net, bobsomerby@hotmail.com, editor@cursor.org, doug@mediachannel.org, anand@mediachannel.org, tim@mediachannel.org, danny@mediachannel.org
Sent: Sat, 19 Jun 2004 13:38:26 -0500
Subject: What accountability, AP?
Dear members of the journalistic profession and Associated Press:
The persistence of the twisting and misreporting of the recent findings of the 9.11 Commission, so as to misconstrue them to find no linkage between Al Queda and the Iraqi Ba'ath Socialist Regime of Saddam Hussein is inexcusable. It should be a career threatening blunder for a journalist.
Examine this article, by Deb Riechmann, of the Associated Press, for instance:
"Bush Takes Issue with 9/11 Panel Findings"
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&u=ap/sept_11_bush
(BTW, note the photo of the 'recollecting/worrying' President and
With exactly what in the commission's findings, did President Bush take issue, Ms. Riechmann? Is that title yours, or was it written by one of your editors, trying to spin your story?
Then, look at just a tiny sample of the journalistic birth defects such AP misreporting spawns:
http://www.wokr13.tv/news/national/story.aspx?content_id=073E8E43-63A8-4DFF-99AB-74E6CC904FB9
http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/World/Iraq/2004/06/17/503411-ap.html
http://www.sentinelandenterprise.com/Stories/0,1413,106~31919~2218910,00.html
http://www.sbsun.com/Stories/0,1413,208%257E24658%257E2216672,00.html
http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/04170/333930.stm
http://www.outlookindia.com/pti_news.asp?id=228832
But, just a blunder? Really? Do not journalists have an appreciable standard of intelligence? Clearly, this appears to be a blunder of the propagandistic kind (and of Goebbelsian magnitude) stemming from political motives.
Therefore, what are you going to do, to hold journalists committing this offense accountable?
Who will be an ombudsman of truth, ethical reporting, and journalistic professionalism? What is truth's recourse?
If you have any input for me regarding this, especially to suggest what way and what place the truth may be brought to bear, please reply.
Arlen Williams
West Chicago, IL
www.unspun.info
This is really annoying.
BOTH CHAIRMEN OF THE PANEL SAYS THE PRESS IS TWISTING THIS ONE PARAGRAPH. THE COMMISSION LOOKED *****ONLY****AT WHETHER IRAQ MAY HAVE BEEN INVOLVED IN 9/11.
THEY DID NOT LOOK AT ALL AT THE ISSUE OF THE OVERALL RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN IRAQ AND AL QUEDA!!
Man this is really getting on my nerves!
It is only the press that sees a contradiction. Cheney doesn't. Bush doesn't. Both chairs of the friggin' committee itself say they have no quibbles with anything the WH has said!!!!!!
A pox on the press!
No kidding. Why the underreporting of Abu Gharib all of a sudden (sarcasm).
Senior members of the commission seemed eager to minimize any disagreement with the White House.So how exactly is Bush "taking issue with the Commission's findings"?"What we have found is, Were there contacts between al-Qaida and Iraq? Yes. Some of them were shadowy but they were there," said Tom Kean, the Republican former governor of New Jersey, who is chairman.
Like Bush, he said there was no evidence that Iraq aided in the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.
Former Rep. Lee Hamilton of Indiana, the Democratic vice chairman of the panel, said media reports of a conflict between the administration and the commission were "not that apparent to me."
To say that Kena and Hamilton were "minimizing" disagreement is simply a lie. They were denying its existence.
of course, the truth wouldn't help John Kerry, while a lie might.
Above are the email addresses... FReep away...!
Ok, just putting together Bin Laden's AQ caused 9/11 and Putin's statement he warned Bush about SH's plans to attack the US seems to put anything the media spins to rest.
Might be worthy to do some Freeping at Poynter.org
Because if he is, then he is a legitimate target in the WOT.
And then what the hell is the left talking about when they talk about the "situation in Iraq" and the WOT as if they are separate entities?.
And if Kerry says Saddam is not a terrorist, he can kiss his horse faced ass goodbye.
And I'd bet that even this report is loopy since it is slanted towards the White House defending itself and only the negatives about the '911 report findings'.
Squirrel,
I have seen alot of captions on FR, and I have to say that yours is probably the best of them all.
Not only is it an accurate reflection of how Bush must feel (he would surely get a kick out of it), it is exactly how I feel.
Thank you.
BTW, my prediction is President Bush will win AT LEAST 40 states.
**"We did say there were numerous contacts between Saddam Hussein and al-Qaida. For example, Iraqi intelligence officers met with (Osama) bin Laden, the head of al-Qaida, in the Sudan. There's numerous contacts between the two," he said.**
Will the lamestream ABCNNBCBS ever get it right?
Let me tell you about Reuters.
I was interviewed by a young Reuters woman, who wanted me to draw comparisons between the Vietnam War (which I fought in) and the Iraq War.
I told her the only parallel that I could see is the press during both wars neglected to print the good things we were doing and the acts of heroism on the part of American soldiers. I then went on to tell her that her job, as a journalist, should be to tell both sides of a story - not just the bad.
She ended the interview by asking how she might get in contact with Ron Kovic. I said she might by contacting the Kerry Campaign. I knew then that I would not be quoted in her story. And I wasn't.
One more thing. she asked if I thought GWB had a chance of winning re-election. I told her, while drawing comparisons to LBJ, that as long as President Bush did not *back down* that he would. She was incredulous. Too bad for her, because she and all the other naysayers will find out November 2.
Bush will win at least 40 states.
Not as long as advertisers continue to bankroll their actions. I've given up of trying to convince news organizations to act responsibly and am now watching the crap just to note who's advertising. I then make darned sure to let as many of them know that I can no longer do business with them. I usually get some lame a$$ response stating they purchase sets of spots which are randomly placed. What a bunch of horse hooey. I do, though, still think that by pressuring sponsors we can bring about change in the media.
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.
