Cheney: "The world is better off today with Saddam Hussein out of power"

[bigtree]

Cheney is launching the first attack on Rockefeller's assertion that we'd be better off with Saddam Hussein in power. He has to know about the CIA findings in the intelligence report released this week that showed Saddam was no friend of al-Qaeda.

article: {snip}

"According to the report, postwar findings indicate that Saddam "was distrustful of al-Qaida and viewed Islamic extremists as a threat to his regime." It quotes an FBI report from June 2004 in which former Deputy Prime Minister Tariq Aziz said in an interview that "Saddam only expressed negative sentiments about bin Laden."

Saddam himself is quoted in an FBI summary as acknowledging that the Iraqi government had met with bin Laden but denying that he had colluded with the al-Qaida leader. Claiming that Iraq opposed only U.S. policies, Saddam said that "if he wanted to cooperate with the enemies of the U.S., he would have allied with North Korea or China," the report quotes the FBI document.

The Democrats said that on Oct. 7, 2002, the day Bush gave a speech speaking of that link, the CIA had sent a declassified letter to the committee saying it would be an "extreme step" for Saddam to assist Islamist terrorists in attacking the United States.

Levin and Rockefeller said Tenet in July acknowledged to the committee that subsequently issuing a statement that there was no inconsistency between the president's speech and the CIA viewpoint had been a mistake. "

http://www1.whdh.com/news/articles/national/BO27689/


not the first time Cheney's lied in the face of evidence against him. Democrats are listening. We'll see what they do this week about hanging Bush with what they have, and opening the rest of the report.

[Stargleamer]

1. Stargleamer: "The world is better off without Cheney in Power"

n/t

[onehandle]

4. Jinx! You owe me a Coke. nt

[onehandle]

2. onehandle: "The world would better off today with Bush out of power"

And you too, Dick.

After November, you'll both be dickless.

[Monkeyman]

3. That Coward has no idea what the truth is

[Cameron27]

8. Oh he knows damn well what the truth is

He just has no shame in spinning lies.

[Straight Shooter]

5. Cheney is referring to the imaginary world where Iraq had WMD.

Also, in that same imaginary world, Saddam aided al Qaeda and was conspiring with Osama to send drones to America.

In that same imaginary world, bush is a brave man and Cheney volunteered for Vietnam five times.

[CarlVK]

6. The world would be better off with CHENEY out of power

A'ight?

[leftofthedial]

7. bullshit

stability in a neutered Iraq was better for the world than chaos and religious-ethnic war in the heart of the Middle East.

[Rosemary2205]

9. So why in hell didn't Rummy kill him when he had the chance?

[Rageneau]

10. I wish Saddam was still in power and Bush wasn't.

Better still, I wish Saddam was president of the USA instead of Bush.

Not because I have a high opinion of Saddam, but because the USA needs better leadership than the Moron-in-Chief that we've got now, and even Saddam would be an improvement.

[Rosemary2205]

11. Bite your tongue

Saddam is a murdering scumbag. The world is better off without either of those assholes and their families. (Bush and Saddam)

[MODemocrat]

20. Bush and Saddam are indeed similar

What in the hell does this civil war in Iraq do for our country?----Nothiiiiiiiing!

[geek tragedy]

41. You'd prefer that John Kerry be in a prison cell

getting tortured?

You'd prefer that Michael Moore and Cindy Sheehan would have been lined up and shot?

Nice.

[bigtree]

12. another account from NYT

CIA said to find no Hussein link to terror chief
By Mark Mazzetti The New York Times

Published: September 9, 2006

As recently as Aug. 21, President Bush said at a news conference that Mr. Hussein "had relations with Zarqawi." But a C.I.A. report completed in October 2005 concluded instead that Mr. Hussein's government "did not have a relationship, harbor or even turn a blind eye toward Zarqawi and his associates," according to the new Senate findings.

The C.I.A. report also contradicted claims made in February 2003 by Secretary of State Colin L. Powell, who mentioned Mr. Zarqawi no fewer than 20 times during a speech to the United Nations Security Council that made the administration's case for going to war. In that speech, Mr. Powell said that Iraq "today harbors a deadly terrorist network" headed by Mr. Zarqawi, and dismissed as "not credible" assertions by the Iraqi government that it had no knowledge of Mr. Zarqawi's whereabouts.

The panel concluded that Mr. Hussein regarded Al Qaeda as a threat rather than a potential ally, and that the Iraqi intelligence service "actively attempted to locate and capture al-Zarqawi without success."

http://www.iht.com/articles/2006/09/09/africa/web.0909intel.php


The U.S. was protecting Zarqawi from Hussein, isolating him and the 'terror camp' in the north with their enforcement of the no-fly zone.

[cal04]

13. he sure helped it happen

Julian Borger reports on the shadow rightwing intelligence network set up in Washington to second-guess the CIA and deliver a justification for toppling Saddam Hussein by force

(snip)

The president's most trusted adviser, Mr Cheney, was at the shadow network's sharp end. He made several trips to the CIA in Langley, Virginia, to demand a more "forward-leaning" interpretation of the threat posed by Saddam. When he was not there to make his influence felt, his chief of staff, Lewis "Scooter" Libby, was. Such hands-on involvement in the processing of intelligence data was unprecedented for a vice-president in recent times, and it put pressure on CIA officials to come up with the appropriate results.

Another frequent visitor was Newt Gingrich, the former Republican party leader who resurfaced after September 11 as a Pentagon "consultant" and a member of its unpaid defence advisory board, with influence far beyond his official title.

An intelligence official confirmed Mr Gingrich made "a couple of visits" but said there was nothing unusual about that

http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,,999669,00.html

[Imagevision]

14. "better off today with Saddam Hussein out of power" had me fooled!

[Name removed]

15. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[BrotherBuzz]

19. Mission accomplished, no?

Seems President Hussein capitulated and he was contained without invading. Big bang for the buck. :shrug:

[blonndee]

27. Why are you spamming the board with this cut and paste? n/t

[uppityperson]

28. you mean like this one?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x2099660#2099737
I am doing my usual thing, when I meet this poster here on DU, as I have before most likely, or similar.

[BrotherBuzz]

30. NO, like this one

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=2099401&mesg_id=2099573

:rofl:

[uppityperson]

35. indeed.

someone is snorting "I gotcha I gotcha" while prancing around?

[BrotherBuzz]

36. Methinks that someone tied their Willie in a knot

so he wouldn't pee on himself (caveat: it couild be a woman, as in Ann Coulter, so the Willie comment still applies)

:rofl:

[blonndee]

31. Geez. A bit less transparency might get them further.

But don't tell them, kay? ;-)

[tenshi816]

16. Every time someone in BushCo says that,

I always think "how"? How, exactly, are we better off? Saddam's removal has made not one bit of difference in people's lives, except for those in military families and the Iraqis themselves (who have simply moved from one circle of hell to another - from Saddam to American occupation).

[whistle]

17. Not according to this film Dick Cheney

9/11: Press For Truth

google has it up

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-10167206415364...

[MODemocrat]

18. Cheney is "better off" the World is NOT

I'd probably say the same thing if my bank $account was flowing over because of the blood for oil war.
It hasn't made a whit of difference to the rest of the world. People are dying every day by the
thousands, and our home front is going to hell in a hand basket.

If you want war continuously; you'll vote republican. They don't know anything else.

Cheney is just a blow gut, nothing more.:evilfrown: :evilfrown: :evilfrown:

[Deja Q]

21. In the long run, quite possibly. What about the short term?

And why are we nationbuilding another country while working on what appears to be the decimation of our own? (is it really over global warming concerns? I doubt it.)

[Poiuyt]

22. I just wish someone would ask how the world is better off with Saddam

out of power instead of accepting it as a scientific fact. Bush and Cheney say that with such authority that everyone in the press is afraid to challenge them on that statement.

[Name removed]

23. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[uppityperson]

24. do you believe this, flashman?

do you believe the world is better off today? Tell us more, please, rather than continuing to copy/fast this quote into many topics. What do you think? Does this explain why?

[bigtree]

25. had none, had no access to any, Bush knew this, he was told repeatedly

he ignored the reports and inflated and lied about the threat.

[blonndee]

29. SPAMMING this cut and paste - 3rd time I've read this. n/t

[Name removed]

34. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

37. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[uppityperson]

39. Answer these questions, rather than ducking and accusing.

Do you believe the world is better off today due to invading Iraq/war with Iraq/ whatever you want to call the current military action in Iraq put forth by Mr.Bush? Tell us more, please, rather than continuing to copy/fast this quote into many topics. Why did Mr.bush say this? Did he believe it? Did it make the world safer?

If you want to have a civil discussion, you must answer questions also. Copy/pasting, accusing, etc aren't civil, aren't a discussion, qualify as disruptive. So? Ball is in your court.

[uppityperson]

40. helloooo, are you there? Are you going to answer?

waiting.

[bigtree]

42. your 'facts' have been repeatedly contradicted

they ignore the evidence against Bush, and are an attempt to deflect from the responsibility of the Bush regime. Opposition to a presentation such as you have provided, is a standard recitation of facts Bush ignores as he continues his con game. He's losing supporters every day that he and his apologist's lies are refuted by the facts they have been withholding for all of the years they've been prosecuting their bloody wars. They can't cover it all up forever.

It wouldn't surprise anyone if Bush and his warmongering minions would just admit they want to roll over the sovereign countries in the Middle East on whatever pretext they can manage. Why not be honest? Their hunger to dominate that region is no secret. In their scheme, one justification falls, another is put in it's place, as if every one of the reasons presented were justifications in of themselves. But, the rationales and excuses for Bush's preemptive, unilateral invasion faded and were discredited, even the last straw about defending democracy. What was that nonsense about 'alternatives to democracy' in Iraq that was floated by the State Dept.?

Bush disregarded the will of Congress in the IWR which mandated restraint and a return to the Security Council, ignored the will of the American people who he assured there would be no precipitous action, he lied to America and the international community as to his understanding of the threat, then he withdrew inspectors and invaded.

Btw, Bush was also the recipient of the intelligence document entitled "Bin-Laden determined to strike in the U.S." on Aug. 6, 2001.

[uppityperson]

43. bonjour flashman

that means "good day" in French anti-freedom language. Are you going to answer?

[sandnsea]

26. Well it's the wrong damned debate - again

And I don't know when we'll learn to stop fighting fights we already lost.

The debate is not whether anyone is better off with or without Saddam - it's whether there was a better way to remove him from power while simultaneously improving life for the Iraqi people.

[kentuck]

32. There is no proof...

that the world is better off without Saddam. Actually, quite the contrary. Why should we accept this bullshit form these people?

[Imagevision]

33. Ask the Iraqi people if, 'they feel safer now'??

[SKKY]

38. I firmly believe that, Bush not being in power will have a much more...

...positive effect than Saddam not being in power. I think the Iraqis are find out that the cure is in fact much
worse than the disease.

[bigtree]

44. from FiTimes: Lying in the face of lies

Cheney defies evidence to reassert al-Qaeda link with Saddam's Iraq

By Demetri Sevastopulo

Published: September 11 2006 03:00 | Last updated: September 11 2006 03:00

US Vice-President Dick Cheney repeated assertions yesterday on links between the former Iraqi regime of Saddam Hussein and al-Qaeda despite a recent Senate intelligence committee report that concluded otherwise.

In defending the decision to invade Iraq despite its lack of weapons of mass destruction, Mr Cheney said the fact that Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, the former head of al-Qaeda in Iraq who was killed in a US air strike this year, was in Baghdad before the war was evidence that Iraq had links to al-Qaeda.

But a Senate intelligence committee report on prewar Iraq intelligence released on Friday concluded that there was no evidence that Mr Hussein's Ba'athist regime had either harboured or turned a blind eye to Mr Zarqawi.

In an hour-long interview on NBC television, Mr Cheney argued that the invas-ion of Iraq had imp-roved the country. While recognising the increase in sectarian violence, he said Iraq was better off without Mr Hussein. "If we weren't there . . . the situation would be far worse than it is today," Mr Cheney said.