Sunday, December 04, 2005

Meet the DePressed....


On Meet De Press this Sunday morning, Tim Russert had on Thomas Kean and Lee Hamilton, the Chair and Vice Chair of the 9/11 Commission. The following really irks me:


MR. RUSSERT: I want to go back to your original report. You found that there was no connection between al-Qaeda and Saddam Hussein that was "operational." And you found that there was no evidence that the--Iraq cooperated with al-Qaeda in developing or carrying out attacks against the U.S. Is that accurate?

MR. KEAN: That's correct.


MR. RUSSERT: So there's no suggestion that Iraq was, in any way, shape or form, involved with September 11?

MR. KEAN: No, and we can find no evidence whatsoever, and we came out with that statement clearly.


Why does that bother me? Because, for the life of me, I can never understand why Dems and libs continually push this belief that President Bush ever said "Saddam's Iraq had a hand in orchestrating 9/11". What I find so insidious in Tim Russert's question which I italicized in bold, is that it puts the subliminal message into viewers' minds that we went to war with Iraq because we were told by President Bush that Saddam was involved with September 11th. It's always been clear to me since before the war that this wasn't one of the arguments put forth.

When a highly respected journalist and great interviewer like Tim Russert continually does this sort of crap, is it any wonder that so many people are misled, not by President Bush, but by MSM? They continually misreport and mischaracterize exactly what the Administration says, ever since the run-up to war.


Here's what Annenberg's FactCheck.org has to say in regards to an anti-war coalition ad that was running in September:


"Saddam Hussein had al-Qaeda ties."

The ad quotes Bush as saying, "There's no question Saddam Hussein had al-Qaeda ties." Bush said that September 17, 2003, after months of fruitless searching for evidence of WMD's in Iraq.

However, the full quote shows Bush also made clear that he was not claiming that Saddam had any connection to the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. In fact, he was knocking down a suggestion made four days earlier by Vice President Cheney, who said on NBC's Meet The Press that it is "not surprising that people make that connection" when asked why so many Americans believed Saddam was involved in the attacks.

Bush, Sept. 17, 2003: We've had no evidence that Saddam Hussein was involved with the September 11th . What the Vice President said was, is that he has been involved with al Qaeda. And al Sarawak, al Qaeda operative, was in Baghdad. He's the guy that ordered the killing of a U.S. diplomat. He's a man who is still running loose, involved with the poisons network, involved with Ansar al-Islam. There's no question that Saddam Hussein had al Qaeda ties.

Since the word "ties" can cover any connection, however weak, Bush was in fact stating the truth. The bipartisan 9/11 Commission later cited reports of several "friendly contacts" between Saddam and Osama bin Laden over the years, and cited one report that in 1999 Iraqi officials offered bin Laden a "safe haven," which bin Laden refused, preferring to remain in Afghanistan. But nothing substantial came of the contacts. The commission said: "The reports describe friendly contacts and indicate some common themes in both sides' hatred of the United States. But to date we have seen no evidence that these or the earlier contacts ever developed into a collaborative operational relationship."

Does MSM-bashing ever get old? No...not really. So long as it is out there, we should continue to hammer it home, the liberal bias that passes itself off as straight, nonpartisan news reporting.

Check out this book, by Stephanie Gutmann. Heard the a
uthor interviewed last week on Dennis Prager. This photo should speak volumes about the nature of journalistic accuracy and reporting.

Labels: , , , , , , , , ,

7 Comments:

Blogger The_Bos'un said...

As usual, you did a great job, Wordsmith. Keep the heat on. Have a good week.

BTW, are you going to have a purple finger on the 12th - 15th to show solidarity for the Iraqi people. They start voting on the 12th.

I am going do dye my finger for those days. Got the idea and information on the purple finger day from Bill Bennett,
http://newsmax.com/archives/ic/2005/12/1/162358.shtml

R/ Bosun

Monday, December 05, 2005 12:22:00 AM  
Blogger The WordSmith from Nantucket said...

Thanks for the tip. I'll look into that. That sounds like a great idea, and worth doing. Any recommendation on the ink, before I get my lazy fingers to look at your link and look it up myself?

One Soldier's Perspective, by the way, has a video with some great images of the last election. I think I'll link it with another post, right now.

Monday, December 05, 2005 12:33:00 AM  
Blogger The_Bos'un said...

When you have time, drop me a line by email and let me know your off line address. I would like to put you in my outlook address book. You do have an outstanding blog here, along with your two others. Have a good week and thanks for that inspirational link, http://www.soldiersperspective.us/?p=754

Respectfully, Bos'un

Monday, December 05, 2005 1:05:00 AM  
Blogger The_Bos'un said...

And remember Michael Yon!!

Monday, December 05, 2005 1:06:00 AM  
Blogger Mark said...

The mainstream media doesn't want to report that fact. It doesn't propogate their agenda.

By the way, I'm really happy to see you are getting the attention on your blog that you deserve. You truly are a wordsmith.

Monday, December 05, 2005 5:57:00 AM  
Blogger The WordSmith from Nantucket said...

Thanks for the compliments guys, but I don't feel it's well-deserved.

And as for attention, Mark, lol. My blog just lurks quietly in the blogosphere. The most traffic it's probably generated is around 100 in one day. I think the average is something more like 20-30.

Unfortunately, I didn't have a stat counter up when Hugh Hewitt linked my 9/11 post. I would have been curious to see how many people might have read that.

Monday, December 05, 2005 8:10:00 AM  
Blogger Mary said...

I agree with all of the above, WS.

You do a great job.

As far as Russert goes, he has gone off the deep end lately. He is losing credibility in my eyes.

More and more, he just echoes the Left's talking points.

Bush has never said Saddam Hussein was behind the 9/11 attacks. In the fall of 2001, we knew that it was bin Laden. End of story.

The suggestion that the Administration has misled Americans on that is entirely misleading in itself.

Monday, December 05, 2005 11:21:00 PM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home


Day By Day© by Chris Muir.

© Copyright, Sparks from the Anvil, All Rights Reserved