[Dave S]

Last Wednesday Russert insisted to radio host Don Imus, "No one will say there was a direct involvement of Saddam Hussein in Sept. 11. ... There's no direct link that can be substantiated." The full exchange between Russert and Vice President Cheney on the evidence tying Iraq to 9/11 went like this:

RUSSERT: The Washington Post asked the American people about Saddam Hussein, and this is what they said: 69 percent said he was involved in the September 11 attacks. Are you surprised by that?

CHENEY: No. I think it's not surprising that people make that connection.

RUSSERT: But is there a connection?

CHENEY: We don't know.

Whats the beef? What's the difference between what Russert said on Imus and what Cheney said on MTP?

[familyofman]

RUSSERT: But is there a connection?

CHENEY: We don't know.

I'm so glad that's all cleared up now. By-the-by, how does this equal a "lecture" by VPOTUS? Sound to me as if he was saying "We don't know" if there was a connection - how does this equal a statement of fact that there was a connection?

[opusprime]

Good point!

And didnt we train al-qeida in Afghanistan during the 1980's?

Didnt we train the 19 hijackers/illegal immigrants how to fly jets from 1999-2000?

Didnt 15 of the 19 hijackers come from Saudi Arabia?

Havent their been links identified to the Saudi royal family to al-qeida?

Doesnt the Bush family and the Carlyle group have strong ties to both the Saudi royals as well as the bin-Ladens?

Why the hell are in Iraq again Mr Cheney?

How many billions of our tax dollars are being siphoned to Halliburton Mr Cheney?

Who did you meet with in your Energy task force Mr Cheney?