[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

Might be last day at library

Secret Service Director Grilled By Both Sides as She Refuses to Give Real Answers, with Dave Rubin

Best Immigration Video in a long time.

Is Joe Biden DEAD? Politicians DEMAND Proof Of Life By 5PM Rumors Swirl He Is Incapacitated Or Worse

San Franciscos Saks Department Store to Become Appointment Only, Confirms Round of Layoffs

Kamala Harris offers 'word salad' in a two minute non-answer

Great Replacement comes to Ireland: 280 migrants planned for a small town of 165

Israeli settlers beat foreign volunteers in occupied West Bank

Manchin Considers Rejoining Democrats, Running For President:

MEDICAL STUDY CHALLENGES BAD CHOLESEROL LABEL

There are unconfirmed rumours that Chinese President Xi Jinping had a stroke

850 Studies on COVID-19 Vaccine Serious Side Effects HIDDEN by US National Health As early as January 2022, researchers at the National Institutes of Health (NIH) were aware of at least 850 peer-reviewed case reports and/or research articles on COVID-19 vaccine reactions, according to emails obtain

Dollar Tree Reports 700 Percent Price Hike On Thousands Of Different Products

WE VOLUNTEERED AT A GAZA HOSPITAL: WHAT WE SAW WAS UNSPEAKABLE

NATOs foreign mercenaries carried out the false-flag Bucha massacre

The Clintons Endorse Kamala Harris For President

Mobile Data Reveals Someone Who Regularly Visited Thomas Crooks’ Home and Work Also

Activision Announces Release Of 'Call Of Duty: Moderately Sloped Roof'

French MP tells Israeli athletes they are ‘not welcome at the Olympics’ in Paris

The Real Doc Holliday Will Give You Chills

Wow: Golf Announcer Casually Blurts Out That He Thinks Tiger Woods Is on Drugs

Trump Hit 'So Hard' That His 'Shoes Fell Off' as Secret Service Rushed to Save Him - 'I'm Supposed to Be Dead'

Biden, 81, Pulls Out of Presidential Race

The Secret Service Failure Is WORSE Than We Thought

Sky News host brutally takes down Joe Biden after he lies in interview

Secret Service Allegedly Diverted to Jill Biden Instead of Trump Just Before Shooting: Report

Would-Be Trump Assassin Linked to BlackRock in Strangest Twist Yet

TRANQ THE NEW FENTANYL INSIDE AMERICAS CITY OF ZOMBIES

What We Know—and Don’t Know—So Far About the Trump Rally Gunman

‘The FBI Set Everything Up… They Wrote the Script – and WHITMER WAS IN ON IT!’


National News
See other National News Articles

Title: Cheney Sticks to His Delusions
Source: Washington Post
URL Source: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dy ... /04/06/BL2007040601116_pf.html
Published: Apr 6, 2007
Author: Dan Froomkin
Post Date: 2007-04-06 15:32:46 by ...
Keywords: None
Views: 4164
Comments: 83

Cheney Sticks to His Delusions

By Dan Froomkin
Special to Friday,>http://washingtonpost.com
Friday,
April 6, 2007; 1:20 PM

Faced with overwhelming evidence to the contrary, even President Bush has backed off his earlier inflammatory assertions about links between al-Qaeda and Saddam Hussein.

But Vice President Cheney yesterday, in an interview with right-wing talk radio host Rush Limbaugh, continued to stick to his delusional guns.

Cheney told Limbaugh that Abu Musab al-Zarqawi was leading al-Qaeda operations in Iraq before the U.S. invasion in March 2003.

"[A]fter we went into Afghanistan and shut him down there, he went to Baghdad, took up residence there before we ever launched into Iraq; organized the al-Qaeda operations inside Iraq before we even arrived on the scene, and then, of course, led the charge for Iraq until we killed him last June. He's the guy who arranged the bombing of the Samarra Mosque that precipitated the sectarian violence between Shia and Sunni. This is al-Qaeda operating in Iraq," Cheney said. "And as I say, they were present before we invaded Iraq." (Think Progress has the audio clip.)

But Cheney's narrative is wrong from beginning to end. For instance, Zarqawi was not an al-Qaeda member until after the war. Rather, intelligence sources now agree, he was the leader of an unaffiliated terrorist group who occasionally associated with al-Qaeda adherents. And although he worked hard to inflame sectarian violence after the invasion, he certainly didn't start it.

As it happens, just in case anyone needed more evidence of the spuriousness of Cheney's views, yesterday also marked the release of yet another report confirming that that al-Qaeda and Saddam Hussein's government were not working together before the invasion.

The report also further documents how Cheney willfully ignored reliable intelligence in favor of broadcasting invented assertions emerging from a rogue Defense Department office -- a habit he apparently has yet to break.The Latest Report

R. Jeffrey Smith writes in The Washington Post: "Captured Iraqi documents and intelligence interrogations of Saddam Hussein and two former aides 'all confirmed' that Hussein's regime was not directly cooperating with al-Qaeda before the U.S. invasion of Iraq, according to a declassified Defense Department report released yesterday.

"The declassified version of the report, by acting Inspector General Thomas F. Gimble, also contains new details about the intelligence community's prewar consensus that the Iraqi government and al-Qaeda figures had only limited contacts, and about its judgments that reports of deeper links were based on dubious or unconfirmed information."

According to the report, "a key Pentagon office -- run by then-Undersecretary of Defense Douglas J. Feith -- had inappropriately written intelligence assessments before the March 2003 invasion alleging connections between al-Qaeda and Iraq that the U.S. intelligence consensus disputed.

"The report, in a passage previously marked secret, said Feith's office had asserted in a briefing given to Cheney's chief of staff in September 2002 that the relationship between Iraq and al-Qaeda was 'mature' and 'symbiotic,' marked by shared interests and evidenced by cooperation across 10 categories, including training, financing and logistics."

Those conclusions, running so contrary to traditional intelligence findings, were "leaked to the conservative Weekly Standard magazine before the war" and then "were publicly praised by Cheney as the best source of information on the topic."

Tony Capaccio writes for Bloomberg that the report draws "a direct connection between the Sept. 16 White House briefing and Cheney's public comments thereafter.

"Four days later, Cheney referred at fundraiser to a 'well-established pattern of cooperation between Iraq and terrorists.'

"And on Dec. 2, Cheney warned in a speech that Hussein's regime 'has had high-level contact with al-Qaeda going back a decade and has provided training to al-Qaeda terrorists.' His language mirrored that on briefing chart entitled 'Summary of Known Iraq-al-Qaeda Contacts -- 1990-2002.'"

Here is the full text of the report; as well as the slides used by Feith's office in its presentation to senior White House officials.

On one slide entitled "Fundamental Problems with How Intelligence Community is Assessing Information," Feith's office suggests that the CIA and others were underestimating how hard Iraq and Al Qaeda would be trying to hide their relationship -- so that, in their words, "absence of evidence is not evidence of absence."

That, of course, is highly reminiscent of the administration's key pre-war assertion that the lack of evidence of Iraqi WMDs proved how diligently Saddam was hiding them. In both cases, the administration stood traditional intelligence-gathering methodology on its head by insisting that lack of evidence was more indicative than evidence -- in other words that conviction trumped facts.The Limbaugh Connection

It's not a coincidence that Cheney was talking to Limbaugh yesterday. The show has been one of Cheney's favorite venues.

As I wrote in my January 29 column, The Unraveling of Dick Cheney, Cheney is increasingly out of touch with reality. He seems to think that by asserting things that are simply untrue, he can make others believe they are so.

In Limbaughland, he's right.

In Limbaughland, not only were Saddam and Al Qaeda linked but -- more significantly -- liberals hate America. In Limbaughland, Cheney can say a lot simply by failing to disagree with his host's assertions.

Consider a few of yesterday's exchanges.

Limbaugh was complaining to Cheney about how the Democrats seem to be primarily motivated by a desire "to make sure we come home defeated."

Limbaugh: "Can you share with us whether or not you understand their devotion, or their seeming allegiance to the concept of U.S. defeat?"

Cheney: "I can't."

I wrote yesterday about Bush's recess appointment of three controversial officials including Sam Fox, whose nomination to be ambassador to Belgium was opposed by Democrats on account of his 2004 donation to the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth.

Limbaugh called Fox "a great American" and praised the White House for making an end-run around Democratic opposition.

Limbaugh: "This is the kind of move that garners a lot of support from the people in the country. This shows the administration willing to engage these people and not allow them to get away with this kind of -- well, my term -- you don't have to accept it -- Stalinist behavior from these people on that committee."

Cheney: "Well, you're dead on, Rush."

The two also chuckled about the White House move.

Limbaugh: "You go on vacation, this is what happens to you."

Cheney: "If you're a Democrat." They both laughed.

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 16.

#8. To: ..., ALL (#0)

But Cheney's narrative is wrong from beginning to end. For instance, Zarqawi was not an al-Qaeda member until after the war. Rather, intelligence sources now agree, he was the leader of an unaffiliated terrorist group who occasionally associated with al-Qaeda adherents.

Why did a dozen self-admitted members of al-Qaeda who were caught bringing explosives, chemicals and vehicles into Jordan to committ an act of mass casualty terror say they met with and were funded by al-Zarqawi prior to the invasion of Iraq? They were convicted, by the way. The fact is that al-Zarqawi was in Afghanistan at the same time as bin Laden ... before the invasion of Iraq. And the fact is al-Qaeda has always been an association of terrorist groups.

BeAChooser  posted on  2007-04-06   18:06:26 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#9. To: BeAChooser (#8)

Why did a dozen self-admitted members of al-Qaeda who were caught bringing explosives, chemicals and vehicles into Jordan to committ an act of mass casualty terror say they met with and were funded by al-Zarqawi prior to the invasion of Iraq?

NewsMax didn't give you many details did it.

When people selectively present details, as you are doing above, and as NewsMax no doubt did to you, it usually means that the story doesn't really support the propaganda that is being pushed.

And if the story is true, why don't Bush or Cheney use it to refute this very damming report from the Defense Department? Cheney was just on Rush yesterday and he could have spewed it then.

Actually, watching you operate, I assume there is a shred of truth to the story, but that there is no doubt a huge factor that makes the story useless for your propaganda -- and that is why you are being so selective about what you tell us.

...  posted on  2007-04-06   21:54:40 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#11. To: ..., ALL (#9)

Why did a dozen self-admitted members of al-Qaeda who were caught bringing explosives, chemicals and vehicles into Jordan to committ an act of mass casualty terror say they met with and were funded by al-Zarqawi prior to the invasion of Iraq?

NewsMax didn't give you many details did it.

You are working overtime to discredit yourself. You know full well that I previously posted to you links from half a dozen mainstream sources ... MSNBC, CNN, CSPAN, ABC, THE WASHINGTON POST, ETC ... all describing the Jordan chemical bomb plot and al-Zarqawi's involvement.

Like I said, ..., the Newsmax bit is getting old.

You need some new material if you want to stay in the comedy business.

BeAChooser  posted on  2007-04-07   17:07:38 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#12. To: BeAChooser (#11)

You know full well that I previously posted to you links from half a dozen mainstream sources ... MSNBC, CNN, CSPAN, ABC, THE WASHINGTON POST, ETC ...

Bullshit.

If you had done this you would have had the links in your post. I've seen you operate.

And as I said above, NewsMax didn't give you any details on this story, and you don't give any details on this story because when the details are known, the story doesn't support your propaganda.

They fact that you tried to change the subject when I first confronted you with this proves my point.

...  posted on  2007-04-07   17:25:36 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#16. To: ..., scrapper2, ALL (#12)

"You know full well that I previously posted to you links from half a dozen mainstream sources ... MSNBC, CNN, CSPAN, ABC, THE WASHINGTON POST, ETC ..."

Bullshit.

If you had done this you would have had the links in your post. I've seen you operate.

You really are bent on discrediting yourself, aren't you:

**************************

http://freedom4um.com/cgi-bin/readart.cgi?ArtNum=48869&Disp=160#C160

#160. To: ..., ALL (#135)

"We have documents showing that the Iraqi regime was playing catch and release with al-Qaeda terrorists. al-Zarqawi even felt confident enough to meet IN BAGHDAD the terrorists who Jordan eventually caught with the materials they planned to use to kill tens of thousands."

No, NewsMax told you you

Newsmax is not the source for any of this. If you'd paid the slightest attention to any thread where these things were discussed, you know that.

http://www.nti.org/d_newswire/issues/2005_6_30.html

http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2004-04-18-jordan-terror_x.htm

http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/04/26/jordan.terror/

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/04/26/world/main613825.shtml

http://www.townhall.com/opinion/columns/terencejeffrey/2004/05/05/11586.html

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,184927,00.html

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4838076/%20

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,135670,00.html

http://middle-east.news.designerz.com/zarqawi-chemical-bomb-plot-trial-postponed-after-lawyers-fail-to-show.html

http://www.nti.org/d%5Fnewswire/issues/2005/4/21/b3156726%2D58b2%2D447b%2Dae27%2D7669bf04a708.html

http://www.nationalreview.com/robbins/robbins200405030839.asp

It's clear enough who is in the dark here.

BeAChooser posted on 2007-04-04 16:19:41 ET

*************

#194. To: scrapper2, ..., ALL (#187)

The sources you point out to ... as showing him to be a fool does the very opposite - the sources show you to be the fool, the shill-dupe of reichwing prop.

So scrapper ... you are saying that NTI's Global Security Newswire, the Associated Press, Jordanian Times, Agence France-Presse, CSPAN, The Washington Times, the San Diego Union-Tribune, The Boston Globe, CNN, USATODAY, CBS News, MSNBC, FOX News, ABC News, The National Review, townhall, the Pittzburgh Post-Gazette, The Irish News, Powerline, FrontPageMag, Larry Elder, LittleGreenFootballs, Reuters and The Washington Post all are working together?

Because they ALL carried the story about the Jordan chemical bomb plot.

Contrary to ...'s claim that my only source was Newsmax.

Yes, scrapper ... I do think I know who is making fools of themselves here.

BeAChooser posted on 2007-04-04 19:35:41 ET

****************

BeAChooser  posted on  2007-04-07   18:23:30 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


Replies to Comment # 16.

#17. To: BeAChooser (#16)

Ahhhh. My noting that the incident took place in 2004, well after the start of the war, has built a fire under your butt.

I see you are madly trying to change the subject here.

But back to the point kook, the incident took place in 2004, the alleged perps were torured and then responded with precisely what Bush needed to deflect the gathering bad press. The press did not buy it and the recently released Defense Department report contradicts your kook theories.

I guess if I were you, I would try to change the subject as well.

...  posted on  2007-04-07 18:32:29 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#18. To: BeAChooser (#16)

Kook, your are a bald faced liar.

You said you had posted the articles here. I knew you had not and I called you a bullshitter over it.

Not one of the URLs above is from this site.

As I said, you were guarding the details on this story as you knew it didn't really support the crap you were spewing. You told me that you had already posted the details here when you knew damn good and well you had not.

Now you are trying to fob off the links above as 4um links.

...  posted on  2007-04-07 18:36:21 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#19. To: BeAChooser (#16)

So scrapper ... you are saying that NTI's Global Security Newswire, the Associated Press, Jordanian Times, Agence France-Presse, CSPAN, The Washington Times, the San Diego Union-Tribune, The Boston Globe, CNN, USATODAY, CBS News, MSNBC, FOX News, ABC News, The National Review, townhall, the Pittzburgh Post-Gazette, The Irish News, Powerline, FrontPageMag, Larry Elder, LittleGreenFootballs, Reuters and The Washington Post all are working together?

By the way, the links don't say what you claim they say.

This incident took place in 2004, well after the start of the war. No one disputes that Bush set up Al Qaeda in Iraq after the start of the war.

The question is was Al Qaeda operating in Iraq prior to the war. The shit you posted above is from 2004 and isn't relevant. Seems the Defense Department report still stands.

By the way, this whole thing took place in Jordan not Iraq.

...  posted on  2007-04-07 18:39:54 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#21. To: BeAChooser (#16)

Do you have any evidence that contradicts the Defense Department when they say that there were no real Saddam / Al Qaeda links?

I mean real evidence. Not bullshit stories that require 700 word posts explaining why the obvious faults in the story are not really there.

If you are going to take this route, why don't you just post a story about Bin Laden in Afghanistan and note that Bin Laden once read a National Geographic story about life in Baghdad. That would establish the Saddam / Al Qaeda link by the standards you are using above.

Don't insult our intelligence. We know when the war started and we know it started prior to April of 2004 - the date of the bullshit story you cite above.

In closing, if any of the SHIT you are trying to fob off above is true, why doesn't Bush use it to save himself? Why doesn't he go on national TV and make fools of the Democrats with it?

...  posted on  2007-04-07 18:45:42 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


End Trace Mode for Comment # 16.

TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest


[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register]