the Sugar Conspiracy

Thursday, September 18, 2003

What the hell?!?!

President Bush said Wednesday there was no evidence that Saddam Hussein was involved in the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001 — disputing an impression that critics say the administration tried to foster to justify the war against Iraq.

"There's no question that Saddam Hussein had al-Qaida ties," the president said. But he also said, "We've had no evidence that Saddam Hussein was involved with September the 11th."

While that's actually the first utterance of truth that's come out of the administration's mouth lately (although the Saddam/al-Qaida link remains completely baseless), it's still awfully strange. Where is this coming from all of a sudden? Cheney backlash? It's totally an about face from everything Bush and Co. have been saying for the past year. Or rather, alluding to. And maybe that's the key - Bush never actually said that Saddam was responsible for 9/11, but he sure as hell suggested it a lot. And I know it's a politician's job to play fast and loose with reality, but c'mon! You convinced the American people (or at least 70% of them) that Saddam was responsible for 9/11 as your justification to attack Iraq. You can't just erase all that with a simple admission of the truth.

Update: Tom Tomorrow has the link to Bush's mistake - he did accuse Saddam of being involved in 9/11 . . . and to Congress no less.

posted by chris at 12:56 AM
------------------

Blog - Info - Archive - Contact - Links
2005 © Designed by Chris. Take what you want.