Lieberman Suggests Terrorists Were In Iraq Before U.S. Invasion

[RedEarth]

This one almost slipped through the cracks. Buried at the end of a long article in today's Hartford Courant, Joe Lieberman is quoted suggesting that one reason for the decision to wage war on Iraq was that terrorists were there before the U.S. invasion:

Even the news about the National Intelligence Estimate, which found that the Iraq war had spread terrorism, did not deter Lieberman.

"Are there terrorists in Iraq? Of course there are. That's a reason we went in," he said. But he would not comment on the report itself, saying, "We don't know what it says. We have to see it."

The terrorists were in Iraq before "we went in"? Anybody have any idea who Lieberman's referring to? Our best guess is that he's talking about al Zarqawi, whose presence in Iraq has been held up at times by various Bush administration officials as proof of "ties" between Saddam Hussein and Al Qaeda. But the recently-released Senate Intelligence Committee report concluded that there were no ties between the two men, that Saddam didn't "harbor" him, and that Saddam viewed Al Qaeda as an enemy.

http://electioncentral.tpmcafe.com/blog/electioncentral/2006/sep/27/ct_sen_lieberman_says_terrorists_were_in_iraq_before_u_s_invasion

[Warpy]

1. I've defended Holy Joe's voting record on this board

but no more. Yes, he voted with the Democrats much of the time and had a 60% positive rating at Progressive Punch (Hillary Clinton is 80%).

However, no more. He's now spouting wingnut memes. Why the hell doesn't he just change parties and get it over with? The GOP isn't supporting their own candidate, Schlesinger. They're supporting Lieberman. There is nothing stopping him or them but the illusion he'll split the Dem vote, something I doubt.

[The_Casual_Observer]

2. Joe is taking advantage of the confused and jumbled information

that is out on the internets to make yet another bogus claim. Anymore, it's a free for all when it comes to rewriting a history that suits your objectives.

[mainegreen]

3. Its true. Here's proof:

Rumsfeld in Iraq meeting Saddam.

[razors edge]

4. not to mention the cia.

[indepat]

5. Terrorists were in the USA and virtually every country before the invasion

Joe, you as*hole, you are grasping at straws and that pig ain't gonna fly.

[The Stranger]

6. For Joe Leiberman, IRAQIS are terrorists. Of course, Iraqis were in Iraq.

[Leopolds Ghost]

7. Zarqawi was "holed up" in a portion of Iraq LIBERATED from Saddam

He was surrounded by US Troops and Kurdish Allies.

Don't people understand that?

Shrum told Kerry not to go after this issue back in 2004, btw,
on the grounds that people couldn't pronounce Zarqawi, or some
such nonsense... the same reasoning people used back in the
1990s about bin Laden.

[dansolo]

8. And protected by a US led no-fly zone