Tuesday, August 23, 2005
CBS Anchor: "There were virtually no terrorists in Iraq before the invasion.
Just watching the CBS News morning show and watched the token nonhot chick anchor say this to a Presidential aide:
Here's my question: The President is still trying to connect Iraq to the War on Terror when we know that there were virtually no terrorists in Iraq before the invasion.
God almighty, I wish some newsguy would ask me that on live television.
Unfortunately, the White House spokesperson totally failed to take the tactical offensive here - the latest in a long litany of rhetorical failures from the White House. The White House doesn't lie nearly so often as it enables liars by refusing to correct the false record of the media. When journos say something stupid on live TV, the White House should hit back hard, and shame these journos into doing their homework.
Who benefits? We all do. Including good journalists, the competent of which will have a chance to rise to the top as producers get tired of the current crop of half-wits having their superficial knowledge of national security issues routinely shown up on national TV.
What we need are more "Hitchens-like moments" like these, more consistently delivered. No journo or anyone else should be permitted to minimize the close and intimate connection of Saddam Hussein's regime and terrorism without getting immediately and decisively crushed under an avalanche of undisputed facts:
Prior to the invasion, Ansar al Islam was operating openly, in Brigade strength, in Northern Iraq - perhaps the only country in the world at that time in which Al Qaeda could actually put a large conventional formation in the field since the fall of Afghanistan. This fact *alone* may put as many as 2,000 terrorists in Iraq's borders prior to the invasion, and decisively falsifies the argument.
Prior to the invasion, Saddam Hussein was sheltering Abu Nidal, the man who took over the Achille Lauro and murdered Leon Kinghoffer. More than that, he was on Saddam's payroll, working out of a government office. This fact *alone* falsifies the claim that there were no terrorists operating as envoys of the Saddam regime.
Abu Abbas was likewise a guest of Saddam's regime prior to the invasion.
Zarqawi was a known Al Qaeda op, and was being harbored and succored by Saddam Hussein prior to the invasion.
Saddam - and this fact is grossly underplayed in the media thus far - is directly implicated in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, since Yassin was living at his uncle's home in Baghdad, with the full knowledge of the Iraqi government.
Saddam was bankrolling homicide bombers responsible for hundreds of deaths in Israel and Palestine, including the deaths of several Americans. We have the canceled checks.
And you still want to claim that there were virtually no terrorists in Iraq before the invasion?
Splash, out
Jason
Here's my question: The President is still trying to connect Iraq to the War on Terror when we know that there were virtually no terrorists in Iraq before the invasion.
God almighty, I wish some newsguy would ask me that on live television.
Unfortunately, the White House spokesperson totally failed to take the tactical offensive here - the latest in a long litany of rhetorical failures from the White House. The White House doesn't lie nearly so often as it enables liars by refusing to correct the false record of the media. When journos say something stupid on live TV, the White House should hit back hard, and shame these journos into doing their homework.
Who benefits? We all do. Including good journalists, the competent of which will have a chance to rise to the top as producers get tired of the current crop of half-wits having their superficial knowledge of national security issues routinely shown up on national TV.
What we need are more "Hitchens-like moments" like these, more consistently delivered. No journo or anyone else should be permitted to minimize the close and intimate connection of Saddam Hussein's regime and terrorism without getting immediately and decisively crushed under an avalanche of undisputed facts:
Prior to the invasion, Ansar al Islam was operating openly, in Brigade strength, in Northern Iraq - perhaps the only country in the world at that time in which Al Qaeda could actually put a large conventional formation in the field since the fall of Afghanistan. This fact *alone* may put as many as 2,000 terrorists in Iraq's borders prior to the invasion, and decisively falsifies the argument.
Prior to the invasion, Saddam Hussein was sheltering Abu Nidal, the man who took over the Achille Lauro and murdered Leon Kinghoffer. More than that, he was on Saddam's payroll, working out of a government office. This fact *alone* falsifies the claim that there were no terrorists operating as envoys of the Saddam regime.
Abu Abbas was likewise a guest of Saddam's regime prior to the invasion.
Zarqawi was a known Al Qaeda op, and was being harbored and succored by Saddam Hussein prior to the invasion.
Saddam - and this fact is grossly underplayed in the media thus far - is directly implicated in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, since Yassin was living at his uncle's home in Baghdad, with the full knowledge of the Iraqi government.
Saddam was bankrolling homicide bombers responsible for hundreds of deaths in Israel and Palestine, including the deaths of several Americans. We have the canceled checks.
And you still want to claim that there were virtually no terrorists in Iraq before the invasion?
Splash, out
Jason
Comments:
Post a Comment
