From another forum, where I posted:
I googled this debate and what I've come up with is a number of speeches in which Bush and/or Cheney make references to Saddam and AQ and 9/11 having connections. If we all remember correctly, following Sept 11, we first heard the phrase 'War on Terror' which was, generally, interpreted to mean a War on Al Qaeda by most. When Bush says that fighting Saddam and fighting AQ are both part of the broader war on terror, he is deliberately allowing the public to connect those dots on their own.
It wasn't until September 17, 2003 that Bush publicly and specifically stated that there was no connection between Saddam and 9/11. This is important because it is after the fall of Saddam, when a reversal of public opinion regarding Saddam and 9/11 would be moot, and yet is far enough away from Sept 2001 for most people to be unable to remember specific comments made by Bush etc.
As someone who works in Marketing, I can tell you this is a very common tactic among public relations professionals. The desired effect is achieved, and personal responsibility is not provable.
I find it very erroneous on the part of Bush supporters to claim that Bush did not 'imply' a connection, or at least let the public connect their own dots without making an effort to correct the perception. Even a monkey could see that this is a very subtle and common form of propaganda.
A review of the things Bush definitely did say:
In an October 7, 2002 speech in Cincinnati, Bush announced that:
We know that Iraq and the al Qaeda terrorist network share a common enemy -- the United States of America. We know that Iraq and al Qaeda have had high-level contacts that go back a decade. Some al Qaeda leaders who fled Afghanistan went to Iraq. These include one very senior al Qaeda leader who received medical treatment in Baghdad this year, and who has been associated with planning for chemical and biological attacks. We've learned that Iraq has trained al Qaeda members in bomb-making and poisons and deadly gases. And we know that after September the 11th, Saddam Hussein's regime gleefully celebrated the terrorist attacks on America.
Iraq could decide on any given day to provide a biological or chemical weapon to a terrorist group or individual terrorists. Alliance with terrorists could allow the Iraqi regime to attack America without leaving any fingerprints.
Some have argued that confronting the threat from Iraq could detract from the war against terror. To the contrary; confronting the threat posed by Iraq is crucial to winning the war on terror.
link:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/rele...20021007-8.html
March 21 letter to the Speaker of the House and the President Pro Tempore of the Senate stating the reasons for the military invasion of Iraq :
I have reluctantly concluded, along with other coalition leaders, that only the use of armed force will accomplish these objectives and restore international peace and security in the area. I have also determined that the use of armed force against Iraq is consistent with the United States and other countries continuing to take the necessary actions against international terrorists and terrorist organizations, including those nations, organizations, or persons who planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001.
link:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/rele...20030321-5.html
To the UN, September 12, 2002:
Mr. Secretary-General, Mr. President, distinguished ladies and gentlemen: We meet one year and one day after a terrorist attack brought grief to my country, and to the citizens of many countries. Yesterday, we remembered the innocent lives taken that terrible morning. Today, we turn to the urgent duty of protecting other lives, without illusion and without fear...In the attacks on America a year ago, we saw the destructive intentions of our enemies. This threat hides within many nations, including my own. In cells and camps, terrorists are plotting further destruction and building new bases for their war against civilization. And our greatest fear is that terrorists will find a shortcut to their mad ambitions when an outlaw regime supplies them with the technologies to kill on a massive scale.
In one place -- in one regime -- we find all these dangers, in their most lethal and aggressive forms ... exactly the kind of aggressive threat the United Nations was born to confront.
Twelve years ago, Iraq ...
link:
http://www.bushcountry.org/bush_spe...eech-091302.htm
From the State of the Union address in January, 2003:
Evidence from intelligence sources, secret communications and statements by people now in custody reveal that Saddam Hussein aids and protects terrorists, including members of Al Qaida. Secretly, and without fingerprints, he could provide one of his hidden weapons to terrorists, or help them develop their own.
Before September the 11th, many in the world believed that Saddam Hussein could be contained.
link:
http://www.bushcountry.org/bush_spe...state-union.htm
