What is Digg?Sponsored by Microsoft
Microsoft responds to the headlines. view!
microsoft.com/everybodysbusiness - Read our developers’ points of view on the headlines making news.
56 Comments
- rebrane, on 10/12/2007, -8/+35It'll be news when Cheney _stops_ lying.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -6/+27backup your claims with some evidence to show that your claims are correct, otherwise you are just spewing bs
Bush himself has admitted there was no link
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RX44z0lRJ4E - Idealistic, on 10/12/2007, -10/+27http://yes.com/is_captaineuphoria_dumb
- sharpfork, on 10/12/2007, -10/+26If you follow Dick's logic, anyone in the US and Bush have a relationship similar to Saddam and Abu Musab al-Zarqawi. I'm talking every single person in the whole country.
The only reason Dick says this stuff is to mislead the America people.
He is a smart fella but completely full of crap. - rtini, on 10/12/2007, -1/+16"Saddam Hussein attempted, unsuccessfully, to locate and capture al-Zarqawi and…the regime did not have a relationship with, harbor, or turn a blind eye toward Zarqawi." [p. 109] of http://intelligence.senate.gov/phaseiiaccuracy.pdf
...so you're saying the 9/11 commission was wrong, and that President Bush is wrong when he says there is no connection between Al Qaeda and Iraq? - skoles, on 10/12/2007, -8/+22Why do you hate Americas freedoms?
Would you like to stay in a death camp? Oh did I say "death camp?" I ment Happy Camps! - Nick22, on 10/12/2007, -8/+21so many articles make the front page from aaz because he submits like a billion a day and spends his whole life on digg, also a bunch of friends digging his storys probably has somthing to do with it too. But iv decided i dont really care if the same people are getting on the front page all the time, as long as the content is good
/offtopic
PS: stfu about republicans and democrats, n00bs. - Four20, on 10/12/2007, -7/+18"Saddam Hussein attempted, unsuccessfully, to locate and capture al-Zarqawi and…the regime did not have a relationship with, harbor, or turn a blind eye toward Zarqawi. . .now sorry, I gotta go shoot someone in the face."
- UGM2099, on 10/12/2007, -7/+18The connections he makes get more and more tenuous as time goes on. It's sad that he is hanging on to it rather than admitting he was wrong.
- rtini, on 10/12/2007, -5/+16It actually is news, if you RTFA:
"Just last month, the Senate Intelligence Committee — chaired by Bush-ally Sen. Pat Roberts (R-KS) — concluded that there was absolutely no relationship between Saddam Hussein and the late al-Qaeda operative Abu Musab al-Zarqawi. Nevertheless, in an interview with a South Bend, Indiana television station yesterday, Vice President Cheney falsely asserted that Zarqawi was proof of a connection between Iraq and al Qaeda."
The vice President lying on public television is news, isn't it? - Fairchild, on 10/12/2007, -4/+14Believe a lie enough and it becomes the truth.
- Wamzlee, on 10/12/2007, -6/+15Isn't the insurgency in its last throws? Or did I just step in Cheney *****?
- chivas3, on 10/12/2007, -6/+14[whine]gee, why do you liberals keep bringing up that this administration has lied. Not like conservatives would do that very thing if some "liberal" got a blowjob in the oval office. Just because our conservative lies directly led to the senseless deaths of thousands of people, it doesn't mean we want to hear about it all the time. If we could just get back to holding our leaders accountable for their lies about sexual activities...[whine]
- 5blocksfree, on 10/12/2007, -2/+10@chivas3...
Let's see..on one hand we have a blowjob, and on the other we have...a war...a steady erosion of the Constitution...and an administration that changes its story more often than dubya changes his undies. You do the math.
I think there's plenty of reason to whine - the issues here transcend party affiliation - they affect EVERYONE in very significant ways. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -3/+11I think the PRESIDENT is the BOMB. SHOOT, sometimes, I think about GEORGE W. BUSH and wonder if he would like the ISLAMABAD deli on 14th st here in WASHINGTON, DC. I think the felafel is to DIE for. Or even to KILL for. It's so good it makes me wanna declare a felafel JIHAD on all the other INFIDEL felafel stands in the capital -- from those near THE WHITE HOUSE to those near CAPITOL HILL. they give me heartburn, though. it's like they ASSASSINATE my belly. it really KILLS me.
- crapple, on 10/12/2007, -4/+11since when has the Bush admin let little things like facts get in their way?
- Thuktun, on 10/12/2007, -3/+10Most of that article is transcript. It certainly doesn't look like an opinion piece. You can watch the video. How is that opinion versus news?
- GeneralFault, on 10/12/2007, -2/+8Thank you for that link. I am about half way through the document, but I had to reply to this while the thread was still relevant. I am surprised that the words "FEW indications" are the two words that stuck most for you you. The report is rife with comments such as
"A series of failures, particularly in analytic tradecraft, led to the mischaracterization of the intelligence."
"The Committee concludes that the Intelligence Community's decision to classify this information is without justification."
"the intelligence in those PDBs was not markedly different from that in the NIE, but said they were "even more misleading" and "more alarmist, and less nuanced than the NIE.""
And those are just a couple of many damning quotes in the first 10 pages that can fit in one sentence. It is a very interesting and blood boiling read. - Democritus2, on 10/12/2007, -3/+9You know what is really sad?
There is a stronger case tying the terrorists with US leaders then Iraq. Maybe we should have invaded ourselves. Oh wait, that is happening already. - cyn0sure, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7@minox
Wait, you mean democracy doesn't really work and is easily gamed? - BigBaRay, on 10/12/2007, -8/+13""stfu about republicans and democrats, n00bs""
Stupidest ***** think I ever heard in the comments of a story in the "Political News" section. Lol (Pawnage or whatever you kids say). - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6Here, you can use my scrubber. Remember to get in between the treads...this stuff stinks, and it tends to linger.
- raid517, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5Quit making long winded and unnecessarily complex excuses for him. He lied and misled the American people for his own selfish ends.
That's it. End of story. - nfulton, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Cheney is "Truth Challenged". No matter how many times he hears the truth, he insists on telling this lie over and over and over again.
By his standard we should have _nuked_ Pakistan. They had far more contact with and support for Al Qaida than Iraq ever did.
Can wait until Cheney is impeached . . . - nfulton, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4You are going to have an interesting few days. Have you ever met the Secret Service. They have _no_ sense of humor whatsoever.
- themayorpwns, on 10/12/2007, -3/+5I can't wait to get these douchebags out of office. I only hope we get better leaders next time around...
- raid517, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4@ Simus1
You fool, that is a bunch of long since discredited black CIA propaganda - and they have admitted it a long time ago too. Even President Bush himself has now said on multiple occasions that there was no link between Al-Qaeda and Saddam Hussein.
What I find amazing is the sheer power of propaganda - that as soon as you plant an idea in someone's head it is possible to make it stick there permanently - even when the vast majority of those who made the claims originally are desperately doing their utmost to distance themselves from them.
Cheney needs to continue to perpetrate the lie (even when all the other members of the administration have distanced themselves from it) since it is obvious that he serves a different master, in the guise of Haliburton and his big oil associates and special interest groups. If the US were ever to pull out of Iraq it would effectively mean he and all his chums would loose all their 'no compete' contracts and that they would have to hand the oil fields (which they have pretty much stitched up between themselves) back to the Iraq people.
All Cheney's got is the Al Qaeda line, it's his only card - and his only hope of being allowed to stay in that country and to carve their natural resources for his own selfish ends. He can't exactly claim that it's about 'freedom for the Iraqi people' any more, since most Iraqi people do want freedom - althoughit is freedom from their American invaders. - spankaccount, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2It's important to note that thinkprogress is funded by the DNC.
- converge, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3--Costanza
- dortdruben, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2You don't have to read them.
- derfel, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1"Never ascribe to malice, that which can be explained by incompetence." - Napoleon Bonaparte
So is he incompetent or deliberately attempt to mislead the public? Either way he shouldn't stay in office.
"Q: Are you saying that you believe fighting in Iraq has prevented terrorist attacks on American soil? And if so, why, since there has not been a direct connection between al Qaeda and *Iraq* [emphasis added] established?
CHENEY: Well, the fact of the matter is there are connections. Mr. Zarqawi, "
"there are connections" to the question "And if so, why, since there has not been a direct connection between al Qaeda and Iraq established" doesn't imply Cheney lied (again)? - archiesteel, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3Nice. :-)
- minox, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3@cyno
Yes, that is what I am saying. - origclubsoda, on 10/12/2007, -13/+13How is it utter crap? Its was a bipartisan report that REVEALED most of the intelligence shortcomings. If this report i is crap than so is any criticism of US intelligence agencies because that criticism is based on the findings of this report.
- waxfanatic, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Saddam's Iraq and al Qeada did have quite a few planned encounters. Each one detailed in the paperwork we confiscated from the various ministries within Iraq after the regime fell. What is not known is the nature of the relationship they had. If any. Cheney stating that al Qeada and Saddam interacted is not a lie. Insisting that anyone outside of al Qeada and Saddam's inner circle actually knows the true nature of the relationship between them is a bold faced lie. One the "Cheney lied" crowd seems happy to tell over and over.
MS - mixelplfft, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1and even more sad is the news won't touch it because those responsible own the news in one way or another. where are all the reporters with balls who will fight the man and stand up for what is right? the US sheeple need to wake-up.
the letters i have to type in to prove i'm not a machine are as follows: DERdn
a sign? possibly. snap! you're now awake. - fgsfds, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Minox, you understand that you're taking an anti-american position when you say that, right?
- Deathfrogg, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Simus1
So you cite two moonie-owned(GOP) newspapers as your source? Seems to me that the Senate Committee in question would have just a tad more credibility. Face it, your hero is a raving lunatic and a damned liar. Its obvious the man should never have ever been allowed anywhere near public office, much less the helm of the biggest war corporation in the world. The man is seriously deranged.
Wake up. - converge, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2Expect the MIB's at your door.
- nfulton, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2Yeah, there is, sad to say:
Read about George Bush and Bin Laden Here
http://www.inthesetimes.com/issue/25/25/feature3.shtml - pwarf, on 10/12/2007, -5/+2Cheney's response and the quote from the Senate Intelligence Committee report address different things and are actually not contradictory. A distinction must be made between *Iraq*-Al Qaeda links and *Hussein (Iraqi government)* - al Qaeda links.
Stipulating, for the sake of argument, that the Senate Intelligence Committee report is accurate about Zarqawi, then Zarqawi is an example of the former type of link, but is not an example of the latter.
Reread the question Cheney was answering and his response:
"Q: Are you saying that you believe fighting in Iraq has prevented terrorist attacks on American soil? And if so, why, since there has not been a direct connection between al Qaeda and *Iraq* [emphasis added] established?
CHENEY: Well, the fact of the matter is there are connections. Mr. Zarqawi, who was the lead terrorist in Iraq for three years, fled there after we went into Afghanistan. He was there before we ever went into Iraq. The sectarian violence that we see now, in part, has been stimulated by the fact of al Qaeda attacks intended to try to create conflict between Shia and Sunni."
Does this contradict anything in the Senate Intelligence Committee quote, included below?
"Saddam Hussein attempted, unsuccessfully, to locate and capture al-Zarqawi and … the regime did not have a relationship with, harbor, or turn a blind eye toward Zarqawi. [p. 109]"
A careful reading shows that the two statements do not contradict each other. In fact, the quote that purportedly contradicts the vice president's statement actually corroborates all the *factual* claims in the vice president's quote.
Was the vice president's answer misleading? If so, did he intend to mislead the public?
I think Cheney should have made it clear that while Zarqawi found refuge in Iraq after fleeing Afghanistan, he didn't receive help from Hussein or the Iraqi government; as obvious from this post and the replies, many people read his statement as implying that Zarqawi got help from the Iraqi government (though this may partially be due to the suggestive wording of the post and the ThinkProgress column). I think Cheney tried to make his argument fit into the soundbites required by the TV news format, and he oversimplified to the point where he was technically still correct but was misleading. I think that while Cheney didn't try to be misleading, he ignored the likelihood that he would be misunderstood so he could make his point more concisely. I personally don't attribute this to malice. When complex things are explained quickly this usually happens; almost any book popularizing science or history will be full of technically true but misleading statements resulting from condensing and oversimplifying. However, if you want to assume malice, I wouldn't mind a digg headline, "Vice president's statements wrongly imply Zarqawi-Hussein connection. Nefarious intentions assumed."
In summary, Cheney was technically correct. Many people falsely inferred a claim of cooperation between Saddam and Zarqawi. Cheney's statements were way too easy to misinterpret and he should have done better. I think this was carelessness, but someone could just as easily claim it's a Rovian plot to mislead the public while technically not lying. - BigBaRay, on 10/12/2007, -8/+5Not that it really matters to me, I could care less who's stories arrive as long as I get flamed a few times and get to launch off some flames of my own, but doesn't it kinda seems weak that stories on Digg get promoted to the front page with such few diggs???
I mean if Digg is the hottest thing out there and worth so much then we is it so easy to collect a few friends from WoW and become a diggmaster??? I must be missing something in the mechanics of the way Digg works are is it actually about 150 people that have dugg this story???? Seems like a small number. - Simus1, on 10/12/2007, -6/+1The Connection:
http://www.amazon.com/Connection-Collaboration-Hussein-Endangered-America/dp/B00073HH92/sr=8-1/qid=1161390050/ref=pd_bbs_1/104-2797122-5816761?ie=UTF8&s=books
The Clinton View of Iraq-al Qaeda ties:
http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/003/527uwabl.asp
Re the evidentiary assumptions of the Senate Report:
http://www.weeklystandard.com/content/public/articles/000/000/012/670bsucx.asp
One link through Sudan:
Part 1: http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/005/880qqeoh.asp
Part 2: http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/005/884ygeya.asp
The links according to Iraqi Premier Allawi:
http://powerlineblog.com/archives/010555.php#010555
http://www.washtimes.com/national/20031201-123723-4738r.htm - bigturns, on 10/12/2007, -13/+3@Four20
ROFL! - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -16/+6Digg is rigged no doubt about it.
I mean, just look at the frontpage, 70% of all news is posted by a select group of 8 people. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -16/+5Hate to be a stickler for accuracy, but...
http://intelligence.senate.gov/phaseiiaccuracy.pdf
The data reveal FEW indications of an established relationship between al-Qa'ida and Saddam Hussein's regime before September 11, 2001. (155)
"FEW indications" does not equal "absolutely no relationship" - CharlieInCO, on 10/12/2007, -14/+3... buried as inaccurate and I was going to make the same point. It's another bit of leftist, erm, inaccuracy, aloong with "*no* weapons of mass distruction" and "Bush lied" but the Clinton administration didn't, even though they said exactly the same thing about Saddam.
But then, this isn't about accuracy, it's about who wins the horserace, isn't it? - twinklyJesus, on 10/12/2007, -20/+8This is opinion, not news. Thinkprogress.org = moveon.org...a political propaganda site.
Marked wrong topic. - minox, on 10/12/2007, -15/+2Captain, thank you for raising this issue. No one acknowledges how about 30 people actually control what reaches the front page. The way it currently runs is defeating the purpose of digg.
- wurzelgummage, on 10/12/2007, -20/+5I wish there was a way to stop stories posted by certain people from showing up.
-
Show 51 - 56 of 56 discussions
The Digg Toolbar for Firefox lets you Digg, submit content, and keep track of Digg even when you're not on the Digg site. Download the official 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is