Cheney now admits Iraq had NOTHING to do with 911!

Obama: "I've always said that the pace of withdrawal would be dictated by the safety and security of our troops and the need to maintain stability. That assessment has not changed...And when I go to Iraq and have a chance to talk to some of the commanders on the ground, I'm sure I'll have more information and will continue to refine my policies." July 2008


"And, Senator Obama, your campaign manager, David Plouffe, said, 'When he is' -- this is talking about you - 'When he is elected president, we will be out of Iraq in 16 months at the most. There should be no confusion about that.' So you'd give the same rock-hard pledge, that no matter what the military commanders said, you would give the order to bring them home?" Obama: "Because the commander-in-chief sets the mission, Charlie. That's not the role of the generals. ... Now, I will always listen to our commanders on the ground with respect to tactics, once I've given them a new mission, that we are going to proceed deliberately, in an orderly fashion, out of Iraq, and we are going to have our combat troops out. We will not have permanent bases there. Once I have provided that mission, if they come to me and want to adjust tactics, then I will certainly take their recommendations into consideration. But, ultimately, the buck stops with me as the commander-in-chief." Barack Obama 4/16/08

"'I am not a defender of the status quo with respect to welfare,' Obama said on the floor of the Illinois state Senate on May 31, 1997. 'Having said that, I probably would not have supported the federal legislation, because I think it had some problems.'"

We will help responsible families facing the threat of foreclosure lower their monthly payments & refinance their mortgages. It's a plan that won't help speculators or that neighbor down the street who bought a house he could never hope to afford, but it will help millions of struggling Americans, who will now be able to take advantage of the lower interest rates that this plan has already helped to bring about. In fact, the average family who refinances can save nearly $2,000 per year on their mortgage. State of the Union 2009 Barack Obama

In September 2007, Barack Obama Said "I Don't Think That We Can Take Nuclear Power Off The Table". "I don't think that we can take nuclear power off the table.

"I start off with the premise that nuclear energy is not optimal. I am not a nuclear energy proponent." Barack Obama 12/30/07

Want me to continue? putting a listing of quotes up that George W. Bush made over the life of his term in office to prove something is not a standard you wish to measure the current president by as well. It's about as relevant as saying Obama's approval rating make him a better president.
 
Bush and DICK won their second term by using the fear factor. It worked once. Now FOX news is trying its best to have the public believe that the aircraft that went down from its take off in Brazil was terrorist related. The GOP is deperate to use the fear factor again. It is sad. It seems fear is their best chance of winning back some seats in Congress. Terrorism is not cooperating so the economy will be the next scare tactic. The campaign has already begun.
 
Bush and DICK won their second term by using the fear factor. It worked once. Now FOX news is trying its best to have the public believe that the aircraft that went down from its take off in Brazil was terrorist related. The GOP is deperate to use the fear factor again. It is sad. It seems fear is their best chance of winning back some seats in Congress. Terrorism is not cooperating so the economy will be the next scare tactic. The campaign has already begun.

Oh so now Bush didn't lose, its that they used scare tactics....
Could it be that Gore and Kerry were sub par candidates? Much like Mccain was last election?
The big question is whether or not Obama can be re-elected in 2012 when inflation rears its ugly head?
 
and so the fear factor begins!

Yep and Obama himself is projecting it.

DRUDGE REPORT: OBAMA SAYS 'WE'RE OUT OF MONEY' 2009®
In a sobering holiday interview with C-SPAN, President Obama boldly told Americans: "We are out of money."

C-SPAN host Steve Scully broke from a meek Washington press corps with probing questions for the new president.

SCULLY: You know the numbers, $1.7 trillion debt, a national deficit of $11 trillion. At what point do we run out of money?

OBAMA: Well, we are out of money now. We are operating in deep deficits, not caused by any decisions we've made on health care so far. This is a consequence of the crisis that we've seen and in fact our failure to make some good decisions on health care over the last several decades.

So we've got a short-term problem, which is we had to spend a lot of money to salvage our financial system, we had to deal with the auto companies, a huge recession which drains tax revenue at the same time it's putting more pressure on governments to provide unemployment insurance or make sure that food stamps are available for people who have been laid off.

So we have a short-term problem and we also have a long-term problem. The short-term problem is dwarfed by the long-term problem. And the long-term problem is Medicaid and Medicare. If we don't reduce long-term health care inflation substantially, we can't get control of the deficit.

So, one option is just to do nothing. We say, well, it's too expensive for us to make some short-term investments in health care. We can't afford it. We've got this big deficit. Let's just keep the health care system that we've got now.

Along that trajectory, we will see health care cost as an overall share of our federal spending grow and grow and grow and grow until essentially it consumes everything...


Both sides use fear, sometimes its justified sometimes its not. The decision of whether fear is justified or not is left up to the voters and how elections are decided.

The fear of inflation is real and anyone with half a brain cell will tell you that, even Obama's administration.
 
Both parties use fear to motivate their base. The difference is that Repoublicans fear things that are real (terrorists) while Democrats fear things that are not (global warming) and that even if they are real the likelihod is that almost nothing can be done about it.
 
Bush and DICK won their second term by using the fear factor. It worked once. Now FOX news is trying its best to have the public believe that the aircraft that went down from its take off in Brazil was terrorist related. The GOP is deperate to use the fear factor again. It is sad. It seems fear is their best chance of winning back some seats in Congress. Terrorism is not cooperating so the economy will be the next scare tactic. The campaign has already begun.
yeah, like we didnt hear "worst economy since the great depression" for 2 FUCING YEARS

Jim, you are a partisan asshole
 
A lot on the left regularly mistake the truth for spinning.

Since when are rightwingers the authority on truth??? Bwaaaahaaahaa!!:lol:
most are over liberal fucking morons like you and the thread starter

"After September 11th having been hit once how could we take a chance that Saddam might strike again? And that's the threat that has been removed and I think we are all safer with that threat removed."

So the above does NOT imply a connection between Iraq and 9/11? You're daft.
 
"I do not believe and have never seen any evidence to confirm that [Mr. Hussein] was involved in 9/11," Mr. Cheney told an audience gathered for lunch at the National Press Club in Washington. "We had that reporting for a while, [but] eventually it turned out not to be true."
Newsvine - Cheney admits Iraq had no link to 9/11

Ya cause he only said that repeatedly before the invasion of Iraq. As did the President and the Military and the Intelligence.

Iraq was invaded for misdeeds Iraq did, not because of 9/11. That is one of the biggest lies ever told, that we invaded Iraq claiming they had anything to do with 9/11.

Misdeeds? What misdeeds? For violating and abusing human rights? Dozens of other countries did that. For defying the US? Almost every other country does that. For killing innocent people with wmds? That happened in 1988 and only 15,000 people were killed. Nearly 1 million people have died in Darfur, RGS. Where is your clarion call to invade Sudan?
 
Since when are rightwingers the authority on truth??? Bwaaaahaaahaa!!:lol:
most are over liberal fucking morons like you and the thread starter

"After September 11th having been hit once how could we take a chance that Saddam might strike again? And that's the threat that has been removed and I think we are all safer with that threat removed."

So the above does NOT imply a connection between Iraq and 9/11? You're daft.
no it doesnt, asshole
you lack reading comprehension, take a class
 
most are over liberal fucking morons like you and the thread starter

"After September 11th having been hit once how could we take a chance that Saddam might strike again? And that's the threat that has been removed and I think we are all safer with that threat removed."

So the above does NOT imply a connection between Iraq and 9/11? You're daft.
no it doesnt, asshole
you lack reading comprehension, take a class

did wolf misquote it or am I missing something?
 
"Misdeeds? What misdeeds? For violating and abusing human rights? Dozens of other countries did that. For defying the US? Almost every other country does that. For killing innocent people with wmds? That happened in 1988 and only 15,000 people were killed. Nearly 1 million people have died in Darfur, RGS. Where is your clarion call to invade Sudan?

No vast fields of oil there. That seems enough reason for most in the GOP.

Obama has done more to increase optimism is the country and the economy than Bush did in all of his 8 years. Obama is trying to pull the economy out of the mess that Bush left. Remember that the bailouts began with the Bush administration. But it seems Bush was more concerned about the white collars on wall street and the banking sector.

The only fear that the GOP should be dealing with is the fear that they will be extinct if they don't widen their base. Limbaugh and Newt want the party to travel further to the right. That will be their demise. Moderates are watching closely.
 
"After September 11th having been hit once how could we take a chance that Saddam might strike again? And that's the threat that has been removed and I think we are all safer with that threat removed."

So the above does NOT imply a connection between Iraq and 9/11? You're daft.
no it doesnt, asshole
you lack reading comprehension, take a class

did wolf misquote it or am I missing something?
it's out of context
 
Boston.com / News / Nation / Cheney link of Iraq, 9/11 challenged

Cheney strongly insinuated the connection along with the assertion that Saddam had tried to secure aluminum tubes for weapons purposes. It was his way of lying without really lying. Put the lie out there until fear takes over.

Uncle Fester needs to go away and shut up. He has proven anything he says is questionable, at best.

Did you ever actually read the article your posting? No where in it did Cheney ever claim that Saddam was involved in 9/11.

Its undisputeable that Saddam had links with Al Qaeda and other terrorist organizations. He funded terrorists. After 9/11 we declared war on terrorists and any nation that supports terrorism. That's about as close as a connection between Iraq and 9/11 as anyone has ever claimed.

Again, this straw man you guys on the left had set up was faulty when you started it before the war, its still just as faulty. Youd think after 7 years you guys could come up with something that's atleast alittle honest.


It's not a strawman at all.

The Bush Administration did not lay to rest the carefully nurtured "rumor" that Saddam was involved somehow in 9/11 until September 2003 when Mr. Bush publicly stated there was no connection. That was well after the preparations were laid for the invasion, and after the actual invasion of Iraq in March and despite the fact that inSept. 2002 Tenant testified that was not even an Al Queda/Saddam link.



As for claims....Cheney comes off as either dishonest or confused, in the same talk he says:

Vice President Dick Cheney said that while "overwhelming" evidence shows a past relationship between Saddam Hussein and al-Qaida, the Bush administration never accused Saddam of helping with the Sept. 11 attacks.

"We have never been able to prove that there was a connection there on 9/11," he said in the CNBC interview that aired on NBC's "Today" show Friday.

and then

Cheney, however, insisted the case was not closed into whether there was an Iraq connection to the Sept. 11 attacks. “We don’t know.”

The vice president noted a disputed report about an alleged meeting between an Iraqi intelligence official and lead hijacker Mohamed Atta in the Czech Republic in April 2001. “We’ve never been able to confirm or to knock it down,” Cheney said.

Well...which is it Mr. Cheney?
 
Boston.com / News / Nation / Cheney link of Iraq, 9/11 challenged

Cheney strongly insinuated the connection along with the assertion that Saddam had tried to secure aluminum tubes for weapons purposes. It was his way of lying without really lying. Put the lie out there until fear takes over.

Uncle Fester needs to go away and shut up. He has proven anything he says is questionable, at best.

Did you ever actually read the article your posting? No where in it did Cheney ever claim that Saddam was involved in 9/11.

Its undisputeable that Saddam had links with Al Qaeda and other terrorist organizations. He funded terrorists. After 9/11 we declared war on terrorists and any nation that supports terrorism. That's about as close as a connection between Iraq and 9/11 as anyone has ever claimed.

Again, this straw man you guys on the left had set up was faulty when you started it before the war, its still just as faulty. Youd think after 7 years you guys could come up with something that's atleast alittle honest.


It's not a strawman at all.

The Bush Administration did not lay to rest the carefully nurtured "rumor" that Saddam was involved somehow in 9/11 until September 2003 when Mr. Bush publicly stated there was no connection. That was well after the preparations were laid for the invasion, and after the actual invasion of Iraq in March and despite the fact that inSept. 2002 Tenant testified that was not even an Al Queda/Saddam link.



As for claims....Cheney comes off as either dishonest or confused, in the same talk he says:

Vice President Dick Cheney said that while "overwhelming" evidence shows a past relationship between Saddam Hussein and al-Qaida, the Bush administration never accused Saddam of helping with the Sept. 11 attacks.

"We have never been able to prove that there was a connection there on 9/11," he said in the CNBC interview that aired on NBC's "Today" show Friday.

and then

Cheney, however, insisted the case was not closed into whether there was an Iraq connection to the Sept. 11 attacks. “We don’t know.”

The vice president noted a disputed report about an alleged meeting between an Iraqi intelligence official and lead hijacker Mohamed Atta in the Czech Republic in April 2001. “We’ve never been able to confirm or to knock it down,” Cheney said.

Well...which is it Mr. Cheney?
since the both say basically the same thing, why would you think there was any contradiction?
 
Did you ever actually read the article your posting? No where in it did Cheney ever claim that Saddam was involved in 9/11.

Its undisputeable that Saddam had links with Al Qaeda and other terrorist organizations. He funded terrorists. After 9/11 we declared war on terrorists and any nation that supports terrorism. That's about as close as a connection between Iraq and 9/11 as anyone has ever claimed.

Again, this straw man you guys on the left had set up was faulty when you started it before the war, its still just as faulty. Youd think after 7 years you guys could come up with something that's atleast alittle honest.


It's not a strawman at all.

The Bush Administration did not lay to rest the carefully nurtured "rumor" that Saddam was involved somehow in 9/11 until September 2003 when Mr. Bush publicly stated there was no connection. That was well after the preparations were laid for the invasion, and after the actual invasion of Iraq in March and despite the fact that inSept. 2002 Tenant testified that was not even an Al Queda/Saddam link.



As for claims....Cheney comes off as either dishonest or confused, in the same talk he says:



and then

Cheney, however, insisted the case was not closed into whether there was an Iraq connection to the Sept. 11 attacks. “We don’t know.”

The vice president noted a disputed report about an alleged meeting between an Iraqi intelligence official and lead hijacker Mohamed Atta in the Czech Republic in April 2001. “We’ve never been able to confirm or to knock it down,” Cheney said.

Well...which is it Mr. Cheney?
since the both say basically the same thing, why would you think there was any contradiction?

Is there or is there not a connection? Despite Tenant's testimony to the contrary, despite overwelming evidence against a link - the Administration refused to come out and state no 9/11 link until well after the invasion.

Why? Because it fueled public fear and support needed for the invasion.
 
Oh please. "The fear factor".

I don't suppose anyone remembers the Clintons going around insisting that if Bill wasn't elected, old people would lose their social security and CHILDREN WOULD DIE!
 
It's not a strawman at all.

The Bush Administration did not lay to rest the carefully nurtured "rumor" that Saddam was involved somehow in 9/11 until September 2003 when Mr. Bush publicly stated there was no connection. That was well after the preparations were laid for the invasion, and after the actual invasion of Iraq in March and despite the fact that inSept. 2002 Tenant testified that was not even an Al Queda/Saddam link.



As for claims....Cheney comes off as either dishonest or confused, in the same talk he says:



and then



Well...which is it Mr. Cheney?
since the both say basically the same thing, why would you think there was any contradiction?

Is there or is there not a connection? Despite Tenant's testimony to the contrary, despite overwelming evidence against a link - the Administration refused to come out and state no 9/11 link until well after the invasion.
Why? Because it fueled public fear and support needed for the invasion.

That's why Bush said ahead of time there was no connection. He said it repeatedly. That part of your claim is incorrect.
I ask you, which is it? the admin never said there was no connection or they did? Is Bush not part of the Bush admin?
 
Last edited:
It's useless. The only people who have said that we invaded Iraq because of 911 have been the Dems. All along they've said it.

And of course it's a lie. It's just a lie that they believe, because they're too stupid to read or watch television to see what's really being said.
 
It's not a strawman at all.

The Bush Administration did not lay to rest the carefully nurtured "rumor" that Saddam was involved somehow in 9/11 until September 2003 when Mr. Bush publicly stated there was no connection. That was well after the preparations were laid for the invasion, and after the actual invasion of Iraq in March and despite the fact that inSept. 2002 Tenant testified that was not even an Al Queda/Saddam link.



As for claims....Cheney comes off as either dishonest or confused, in the same talk he says:



and then



Well...which is it Mr. Cheney?
since the both say basically the same thing, why would you think there was any contradiction?

Is there or is there not a connection? Despite Tenant's testimony to the contrary, despite overwelming evidence against a link - the Administration refused to come out and state no 9/11 link until well after the invasion.

Why? Because it fueled public fear and support needed for the invasion.
with all of the things Tenent was WRONG on, you want to take his word on it for THAT?
:lol:
btw, neither statement of Cheney's was wrong, they didnt have any proof to either prove Saddam was a part of it or that he wasnt
thats NOT saying he was or that he wasnt
so there is no contradiction in what Cheney said
 

Forum List

Back
Top