thinkprogress.org — President Bush was in the midst of explaining how the attacks of 9/11 inspired his "freedom agenda" and the attacks on Iraq until a reporter, Ken Herman of Cox News, interrupted to ask what Iraq had to do with 9/11. "Nothing," Bush defiantly answered.
Aug 21, 2006 View in Crawl 4
acroyear2Aug 21, 2006
And the other reason the Administration was not upfront with the world is because it would not have garnered as much trust from the Iraqis if they knew they were a strategic manuever for our own personal goals. It is a difficult situation but I don't believe wars need to be run like this.
Closed AccountAug 22, 2006
@acroyearHere's an even *better* analogy:12 years ago, we caught a bully beating up a twelve year old. We beat him into submission, but let him off with a warning. The cops put him on probation. Since then, he's been hanging out with other bullys, acting like he had a gun, and openly violating his probation. The cops, for thier part, put him on double-secret probation a dozen times, always swearing that this time they *really* mean it. After 8 years of this, we all (with your friends leading us) decided he had to go, and if the cops weren't going to do something, we would.But we didn't. We put up with his bulls**t for 3 more years, and then one morning, one of his friends drove a motherf*cking plane into our motherf*cking house. Not him, but someone we'd seen him with. We got busy chasing down the guy that did it, but we also knew we could no longer afford to let him stand across the street, sneering and making us guess whether he had a gun. We begged the cops for 11 months to follow through on their warnings, but they hemmed and hawed and wouldn't leave the donut shop. BTW, this gave him plenty of time to stash the gun, if he had one, at a friends house. Meanwhile, some of us got confused. "He didn't have anything to do with it! Why are we going after him?" Though we thought it was obvious, we tried to help people connect the dots ... to see the big picture. We'd tried to ignore the thugs, but one of them went on a murder spree, so now we couldn't take chances with the rest of them. And we were going to start with mister punk-ass, maybe-I-do-and-maybe-I-don't-have-a-gun.Finally, a little more than half of us decided we had to take action and we proceeded to call his bluff. Sadly, many of the bystanders sat down on the curb and started actually mocking us ... I couldn't believe it. Were they blind, forgetful or just afraid of what this guys friends might do in retaliation?!? Some of them were even shouting about how they'd seen us play together once or twice when we were kids. Like, WTF did that have to do with anything?
youareretardedAug 22, 2006
Am I the only one that was more concerned with the fact that Bush said he wasn't going to pull out so long as he is president?The fact that Bush and this administration lack any foresight (there are many quotes on how quick they said this war would be and how little push back there should be, just to name one example) and only see one path to take and one solution to a problem that is more complicated than "good vs evil", is what I find really disturbing.I don't think the story here is the fact that Bush says Iraq has nothing to do with the attacks of 9/11 (which he has stated in the past and he definitely linked Iraq with terrorism but there is a difference) but rather his strong determination to keep fighting. If I was Iran and N Korea and Bush had publicly called me part of the "axis of evil", I too would be scared I'd be next on the list to be invaded/attacked and I too would be preparing for war.Terrorism is not a country, it's an ideology, you don't fight ideologies with weapons, so why is our game plan for fighting terrorism to combat it like it's a traditional military enemy? The only reason I can think of is because Bush wants a traditional war because a traditional war has a clear victor and an ending (usually) and by pulling in enemies like Iran and N Korea into this "war" he will finally get his "traditional" enemy. Hezbollah really seems to understand this and I believe it's why it's winning over people and converting them to their ideology.Am I crazy? Does that make sense?
lostriderAug 22, 2006
backpeddling is wonderful. err wait no revisionist history thats it.
miketrinAug 22, 2006
the right wing nuts have. ffing wackos
notarobotAug 22, 2006
Notice how practically every story that exposes right wing/bush admin lies gets reported as inaccurate? This one is pretty funny because the title of the article paraphrases what Bush says on video in the article. What is inaccurate here? Do you rats that refuse to leave the sinking ship of the Iraq War LIE think that liberals made a fake CG video of the prez?These frustrated little fox news sheep have been abusing the "report as inaccurate" function. They must think that they can manipulate Digg like they manipulate reality in their own minds. Sorry, sheep, you are a shrinking minority. You can't change what everyone else sees.
moonmelodyAug 23, 2006
Just a question..Does anybody here know that Australia is in the war too?Atleast your president potentially retarded as he is made up some reason why this had anything to do with America or your soldiers.Australians have no reason except that now the big country might love us a little more. But seriously i am yet to meet a single American who even knows we are in the war.It makes you see the lengths poor little Australia will go to for attention.
baksheeshAug 24, 2006
I know that you guys are there. But.. I spent two years on Camp Victory and Blackjack in Baghdad. Hung out with a lot of your guys. Cheer's.
anitabeeAug 27, 2006
At the top of this page, I see the following: "Warning: The Content in this Article May be Inaccurate. Readers have reported that this story contains information that may not be accurate."The content is, in fact, quite accurate, as is verified on the White House's own website. To verify, Go to:www dot whitehouse dot gov and look to the left for a link to Current News. Click on that and scroll to:August 21, 2006Press Conference by the PresidentClose to the end of the press conference, you'll see this:>>THE PRESIDENT: You know, I've heard this theory about everything was just fine until we arrived, and kind of "we're going to stir up the hornet's nest" theory. It just doesn't hold water, as far as I'm concerned. The terrorists attacked us and killed 3,000 of our citizens before we started the freedom agenda in the Middle East.Q What did Iraq have to do with [9/11]?THE PRESIDENT: What did Iraq have to do with what?Q The attack on the World Trade Center?THE PRESIDENT: Nothing, except for it's part of -- and nobody has ever suggested in this administration that Saddam Hussein ordered the attack. Iraq was a -- the lesson of September the 11th is, take threats before they fully materialize...
will9Aug 27, 2006
Bush and Co are very clever liars.Not many people have noticed that Bush actually implied that Saddam WAS involved in the 9/11 attacks in the very same breath as denying it. Immediately after correctly answering the actual question, Bush started pretending that he was answering a different question, saying "nobody has ever suggested in this administration that Saddam Hussein ordered the attack."Bush was not asked whether Saddam "ordered" the attacks. He was asked whether Saddam was involved in the attacks. By denying that Saddam "ordered the attack", Bush implies he might well have had some other significant role.An uninformed Bush supporter (as most of them are, see <a class="user" href="http://www.harrisinteractive.com/harris_poll/index.asp?PID=684)">http://www.harrisinteractive.com/harris_poll/index.asp?PID=684)</a> might hear Bush's answer believe that Bush said, "Sure, Saddam might not have ordered the attack, but he masterminded it or orchestrated it or financed it or directly supported it".What a bunch of weasels in the White House!
rightsideAug 30, 2006
It is amazing that a fake story would produce so much commentary! The vitriolic hatred of this president had brought about more lies than he has ever been claimed to have told. And the sad part id the MSM is leading the charge and the sheep are following.
fuchilaAug 31, 2006
Bush should be punnished.
Closed AccountSep 18, 2006
Agreed, al-Qaida was two-bit until we stomped around the world and turned it into something it was not. We have the bombs and the guns and needed an enemy to justify the ridiculous spending on defense.