| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Erebus
* Dog in the Sand *
USA
1834 Posts |
 Posted - 06/21/2004 : 09:20:45
|
Dave, I think these articles address your first question. In regard to the second question, my simple answer is that they would cooperate, from the common enemy argument especially given Bedouin history, at least as I crudely understand it.
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2004/6/18/92642.shtml
Friday, June 18, 2004 9:21 a.m. EDT
9/11 Chair Hamilton Slams Media Distortions
Vice Chairman of the 9/11 Commission Lee Hamilton blasted the mainstream press yesterday for distorting the Commission's findings on links between Iraq and al-Qaida, saying those findings actually support Bush administration contentions.
"The sharp differences that the press has drawn [between the White House and the Commission] are not that apparent to me," Hamilton told the Associated Press, a day after insisting that his probe uncovered "all kinds" of connections between Osama bin Laden's terror network and Iraq. Hamilton's comments followed a deluge of mainstream reports falsely claiming that the 9/11 Commission had discredited the Bush administration's claim of longstanding links between Baghdad and bin Laden.
But the Indiana Democrat said the press accounts were flat-out wrong.
"There are all kinds of ties," he told PBS's "The News Hour" late Wednesday, in comments that establishment journalists have refused to report.
"There are all kinds of connections. And it may very well have been that Osama bin Laden or some of his lieutenants met at some time with Saddam Hussein's lieutenants."
Hamilton said that while his probe had failed to uncover any direct operational link between Baghdad and Osama bin Laden's terror network in attacks on the U.S., there's no question that "they had contacts."
http://www.seanet.com/~jimxc/Politics/June2004_3.html#jrm2306
Newsmax is a partisan news organization, but they are right on this question, and the New York Times, the Washington Post, CBS, and all the rest of the "mainstream" news organizations are wrong. Is it not obvious that they, too, are partisan?
This failure of the very expensive journalists at such news organizations to get the basic facts right on this part of the Commission report reminds me of a similar failure on David Kay's interim report on the search for Saddam's WMDs. And Kay reacted in the same way as Hamilton did; he came out the next day and said the accounts were wrong. But even now you still see news stories that echo the first, incorrect descriptions of Kay's findings — and do not mention Kay's disagreement. Hamilton's objection to these distorted news accounts will, I predict, be buried, too.
This continuing massive failure of our "mainstream" news organizations to get the basic facts right is one of the most serious problems we have in the war on terror. In the long term, their declining share of the audience may bring them back to a less ideological, more factual, approach to the news. In the short term, I plan to do my small part by correcting them when they err.
- 8:17 AM, 18 June 2004
|
 |
|
|
Mroocore
- FB Fan -
USA
177 Posts |
Posted - 06/21/2004 : 09:22:35
|
quote:
Originally posted by darwin
quote:
Originally posted by Mroocore
quote:
Originally posted by darwin
quote:
Originally posted by Mroocore
somewhere FDR is glad that he did not have to prove a link between The Empire of Japan and Nazi Germany to the American people.
The Three-Power Pact that Germany, Italy, and Japan all signed would have made that case pretty easy.
my point exactly.
in both cases, 9/11 and Pearl Harbor, everybody knew who was responsible.
with or without an 'Iraq Link' and the Three-Power Pact we still know who is/was responsible, regarding Saddam if nothing else Iraq conspired.
No, it is not your point!! Don't act like what we're saying in any way is the same.
In the case of WWII, we knew who the Axis were. They signed an agreement; they weren't secret about their association.
In this case, we absolutely do not know that Iraq is responsible or conspired in the 9/11. In fact, the bipartisan committee has reported that they found NO evidence of Iraq and bin Laden cooperating. To quote chimpy the president, "This administration never said that the 9/11 attacks were orchestrated between Saddam and al-Qaida".
it was my point and it was simple.
it is my fault that i did not explain it this way earlier.
in 1941 after Pearl Harbor America(from all that i know and that includes speaking w/ veterans of WWII and people who lived through it) was supportive of all FDR's military decisions throughout WWII.
in 2001 after 9/11 America was mainly supportive of dubya's decisions and that continued for quite sometime.
untill the colonizers screwed all of it.
the Three Power-Power Pact elimanated any need to prove a link.
dubya has no form of pact in TWAT, although that does not mean that the many terrorist organizations that exist do not conspire.
i believe that they do.
i have tried to divorce my feelings towards the current adminastration in regards to TWAT.
imo, that is all i have 'cause i now believe nothing, it is a very interesting juxtaposition.
that was all.
nothing more or less.
i was not trying to compare TWAT, which by the way is an excellent acronym that i had not heard of until this thread thanks This_Guy, to WWII in anyway.
i was trying to compare America's past and present reactions towards the former and current president's decisions during these two time periods.
 PENGU LIES |
|
|
|
Erebus
* Dog in the Sand *
USA
1834 Posts |
Posted - 06/21/2004 : 09:59:47
|
June 21, 2004
http://www.buzzmachine.com/
The runaway 9/11 Commission
[snip]
And then the Commision itself had to backtrack and conceded that, well there were ties indeed. Bob Kerrey (see breakfast club post below) says that there were links, "no question." His No. 2, Lee Hamilton, says the Commission does not disagree with Cheney when he says there are connections and he even backs away from saying there was "no credible evidence" of a 9/11 link to saying that it was "not proven one way or the other," Safire reports.
But by then, the headline damage was done. It looks to the world like another hammer with which to beat up American and its President over the Iraq war. But it's a rotten red herring. [snip]
Turns out that the Commission members "do not get involved in staff reports," Kerrey said yesterday. So this report did not come from the "Commission." It is shocking that the commission would allow this to happen. It is another indication of the Commission's incompetence and the politicization of 9/11 it has allowed and fostered.
|
|
|
|
Carolynanna
>> Denizen of the Citizens Band <<
Canada
6556 Posts |
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
Sept 11 panel says no Iraq link
