Quote:
Originally Posted by host
read every Cheney reference to Atta, ace. Cheney, in the course of his answers to questions about Atta meeting in Prague with an Iraqi representative of Saddam Hussein's government, Cheney declares that this is meeting is "PRETTY WELL CONFIRMED". He later tells Gloria Borger, when she tries to discuss it with him....that he "NEVER SAID THAT"......
|
I don't have every Cheney reference to Atta, I am reading what you posted. You think Cheney saying something like "pretty well confirmed" based on an answer to a question about the link from the Czechs is direct proof of a lie?
Quote:
Considered with Cheney's other statements, how can it be unreasonable to believe that Cheney seems to have lied, over and over, since 2002 about links between Saddam, 9/11 hijacker Atta, and Saddam and Zarqawi and his "treatment" in Baghdad, his "poison camp", and his training of "terrorists" in Iraq. Cheney cites those "examples" as justifying invasion and occupation of Iraq, and the toppling of the Iraqi government. Cheney's accusations linking Atta and Zarqawi to Saddam.......are not justifications. They were doubted by the US intelligence community when Cheney cited them in public comments, early on, and they all are long disproven, since at least mid- 2004. Yet he used the Zarqawi justification, again this month. Saddam had no relationship with Zarqawi, no ability to control him. Zarqawi operated before the US invasion in the Kurdish controlled region in Northern Iraq, in an area that US intelligence and military forces had access to without any interference from Saddam's Iraqi government or military.
|
When we go through this item by item and the sum equals a lie, I will admit you are correct. So far I don't see it. Are you ready for the next, or do you want to discuss this first one further?
And, just for kicks, I read Kucinich's fourth exhibit. Seems there - Cheney is saying that Sadaam is attempting to develop nuclear weapons. Come on guys, give me something.