Bush says Saddam not involved in attack upon WTC !

[kentuck]

I'm reposting this because I was waiting to see if the cable networks and the corporate media would give it the coverage it deserved. The coverage was minimal. If there was a poll today, there would still be 65% of the people that would think Saddam Hussein was involved in 9/11. We cannot be happy until that number is close to zero. That is a truth that the media has a responsibility to give to the American people. I will post it here in hopes of keeping the story alive and perhaps someone will read it and pass it on to someone that had no idea that Bush said Saddam was not involved in 9/11. We cannot let the story die.

[RobertSeattle]

1. The other unspoken item here is that the President should be an informer

Any President, regardless of party, if he/she knows the American people are terribly mistaken or badly informed about something of national importance, should plainly explain to the American people what the truth is. This is not something "obvious" to an administration that has mastered the art of deception.

[gristy]

4. Yes, you are right about this.

if he knows the American people are terribly mistaken or badly informed about something of national importance, should plainly explain to the American people what the truth is.

But this cabal is not part of the human race. Not even part of politics as we used to know it. They stood to benefit from the confusion, so they weren't about to correct it. But now the chickens are coming home to roost.

[gristy]

2. I thought this was covered pretty well.

It was on CBS news. They even showed a meeting where he said this over the table to a reporter. I think it was on the front page of the paper today.

[kentuck]

9. It needs as much coverage as Kobe !

Not a one day flash and sweep under the rug.

[gristy]

11. It doesn't need to be "covered" by the press

Bush has lost a major "talking point" here. He just can't use it any more. That is where the great benefit is. The arsenal of lies his cabal has available to them has been reduced by one.

[kentuck]

13. So it is OK if 65% continue to believe Saddam responsible for 9/11 ?

And they will live in darkness forever?

[gristy]

14. No, of course not.

And hopefully the press will continue to repeat what * has finally admitted to. The next time Tim Russert is interviewing Cheney, he's not going to be able to infer the connection. Russert will be able to (and hopefully he will) call him on it, especially now that he can quote the President.

So it's not a news story on its own. But it is a big change what and how the cabal can spin.

[neuvocat]

3. Don't you think it is strange?

Hannity apparently is claiming that Hussein is responsible for the attacks despite what's coming from D.C.

[gristy]

5. Hannity hasn't gotten the memo yet.

n/t

[RobertSeattle]

8. We got a local wack job here doing the same thing

He's still convinced Saddam and 911 are strongly linked. Basically accused Bush of lying (!) about the LACK of link. These RW talk show hosts are confused what to deceive their listeners about!

[oasis]

12. I saw his "debate" today with Gerry Ferraro. He was damn near shouting.

She had to turn to Alan Colmes to get the facts out.

[Jennellist]

6. This is false

Bush never said Saddam was not involved in 9-11 attack. He said there is as yet no evidence linking Saddam to the attacks. There is a big difference.

[gristy]

7. Yes, I agree there is a difference

And there is even a bigger difference between saying that there is NO evidence linking Saddam to the attacks and phrasing your speech for months in such a way as to imply the linkage AND then to do nothing to correct the public's misperception that Iraq/Saddam was responsible.

[kentuck]

10. We could accept that.

:) But the people need to know, don't you agree? Or do you think there has been enough coverage of the story already?

[caledesi]

15. That's not what he implied over and over again....

http://www.csmonitor.com/2003/0314/p02s01-woiq.html


Just why did 70% of the American people believe that Iraq was involved in 9/11? Because they heard Bush link the two over and over and over again!

[gristy]

16. Yes, that's right.

I think kentuck is referring to *'s recent (yesterday?) statement that there is NO evidence linking Iraq to 9/11. He was forced to make this statement after Cheney really went overboard on Sunday's MTP with their standard deception that you refer to.

[kentuck]

17. Yes. Implied. But 70% of the people believed it....

And it's not like Rove and Bush were not aware of those polls. They intentionally went along with the implication without clarifying it... They lied with their silence.