Kerry Press Release: Mr. Cheney, Answer the Question!

[Skinner]

For Immediate Release
September 13, 2004

MR. CHENEY, ANSWER THE QUESTION!

“Dick Cheney and George Bush have tried to mislead the American people about a direct link between Iraq and September 11th. They are playing the politics of fear to cover up their failed policies on the economy and Iraq. Yesterday, Secretary Powell said he sees no direct link between Saddam Hussein and what happened on September 11th. Dick Cheney needs to answer the question: Who’s telling the truth – you or Colin Powell?,” said Kerry campaign spokesman, Chad Clanton.

FACTS:

SECRETARY COLIN POWELL SEES NO DIRECT LINK BETWEEN IRAQ AND SEPTEMBER 11TH: Yesterday, Powell said he had “seen nothing hat makes a direct connection between Saddam Hussein and that awful regime and what happened on 9/11.” (Washington Post, 9/13/04)

VICE PRESIDENT CHENEY SEES DIRECT LINK BETWEEN IRAQ AND SEPTEMBER 11TH. (Cheney) went on to explain reasons for the war in Iraq, including Saddam Hussein's defiance of United Nations resolutions. “The bottom line is we're there for the safety and security of the nation and our friends and allies around the world,” he said. “We didn't do anything to provoke the attack of 9/11. We were attacked by the terrorists and we responded forcefully and aggressively.” (AP, 9/10/04)

MORE CHENEY: “There's been enormous confusion over the Iraq and al-Qaeda connection, Gloria. First of all, on the question of--of whether or not there was any kind of a relationship, there was a relationship. It's been testified to. The evidence is overwhelming. It goes back to the early '90s. It involves whole series of contacts, high level contacts between Osama bin Laden and Iraqi intelligence officials. It involves senior officials, a brigadier general and the Iraqi intelligence service going to the Sudan before--before bin Laden ever went to Afghanistan to train them in bomb-making, helping teach them how to forge documents. Mr. Zarqawi, who is in Baghdad today, is an al-Qaeda associate who took refuge in Baghdad, found sanctuary and safe harbor there before we ever launched into Iraq. There's clearly been a relationship.” (CNBC “Capital Report,” 6/18/04)

-30-

www.johnkerry.com
Paid for by Kerry-Edwards 2004, Inc.

[rndmprsn]

1. Answer up!

great tactic...

[Cocoa]

2. I like the courtroom feel of this

Cheney the uncooperative witness, makes you wonder what his debate will be like with Edwards...

[Seabiscuit]

19. Edwards will wipe the floor with Cheney's ass

in their debates.

[Sugarbleus]

20. Edwards should be good, but DON'T FORGET J.BAKER!

James Baker is still on Bushco's side, as well as Ted Olsen. Those two are brutal ie: "Presidential Selection" Lawyers, vintage 2000..

I'm hoping our boys are eating their spinach...yikes!

[Seabiscuit]

24. Baker and Olsen are small-fry compared to Edwards

Neither has the trial experience and success Edwards has had. Edwards was known in North Carolina as the foremost trial lawyer of his time. You don't earn that kind of recognition from your local Bar without being DAMNED good and effective.

I know, because I'm an attorney with many, many years of trial experience, and very successful, but my success pales in comparison to Edwards', as does Baker's and Olsen's. From my experience I also recognize how corrupt and incompetent these hired-gun shills are. They don't impress me at all, except as scoundrels, and an embarassment to the ABA.

Finally, Edwards isn't debating Baker or Olsen. He's debating Cheney, who is not an attorney, but a rigidly un-thinking neo-con ideologue who has a proven tendency to bad-temper outbursts, and stupidly compulsive lying, not to mention a track record which easily makes him the most evil Vice President in American political history.

As I said, the suave, unshakeable, well-spoken, intellectually acute and astute Edwards will make mincemeat of Cheney in any debate. He knows better than anyone in politics today how to put together a coherent and convincing argument. Which is what all good attorneys stive to do.

[Sugarbleus]

25. Thanks Sea. As an Attorney, your word on this makes me feel

sooooooo much better! That Baker has been all over the globe for the Bush Crime Family, as their mouthpiece...he freaks me out. Geez, when ya look into the guys eyes at times, they are pitch black. :scary:

On that, I understand "Baker Inc" is advising Cheney and Bush. That was my concern. We know these people will stoop to anything, go any distance to get their way.

Thanks again for the Edwards confidence boost. :)

[Seabiscuit]

27. What convinced me about Baker, et. al.

was what flaming a-holes and incompetent partison fuck-ups they were during the trial court and appellate court proceedings during the Florida election fiasco of 2000. These cretins didn't win a single point.

Bush's father's and Reagan's appointees to the U.S. Supreme Court reversed the correct Florida Supreme Court decision to allow the recounts to continue, and *appointed* Bush to the W.H. on a 5-4 decision, led by Antonin Scalia. I still refer to that majority as the "gang of five" because not one of them had the inegrity or courage to sign their decisions. As a result the final decision was a "per curium" decision - NOT precedent, and NOT binding precedent, and NOT a formal "opinion" in legal-speak. IOW, the Gang of Five totally chickened out and hid behind their anonymity, as a political favor to the Reagan and Bush families who appointed them.

Happy to give you some relief from your anguish.

[WI_DEM]

3. I like their press releases

now if they could just get the media to cover what they say.

[cthrumatrix]

4. don't expect an answer...just like shrubs cocaine use

[TWiley]

5. Unfortunately, Colin will probably roll over and

take it in the .... uh .... BVD's for the "Gipper" We cannot expect him to stand up for Kerry when his toast is buttered by the evil shrub.

Colin will merely say ..... "Oh, I have just heard compelling new evidence that dick knew and I did not." "It is classified so I cannot give you the details" Presto! Bush wins again.

Smells like Rove to me .... the set-up was too obvious.

In this case though, I do hope to be completely wrong.

[Myrina]

6. kick !!!

:kick:

[wiggs]

7. WATCH OUT!

Cheney has hinted before (to the 9/11 Commission) that he has more evidence of these connections than has been made available to anyone else.

Why has Cheney repeated these seemingly false claims of connections between Saddam and 9/11? Is he clueless? Was he inspired by Baghdad Bob's performance last year, thinking that if he tells a lie often enough, many people will believe it (over 40% of Americans still believe there's a connection)?

Or...does he have something in his back pocket? October surprise?

Remember what Powell said on MTP. He didn't say there wasn't a relationship. He said HE HASN'T SEEN the evidence of one.

If I were Kerry I'd be careful about being the straight man for Cheney in demanding an answer to this question.

[Catfight]

8. This would be illegal evidence then, all evidence was suppose to

be handed over to the 9/11 commission, if this is so, then he is interfering with an investigation, which AGAIN would be treasonous in a time of war.

[truthspeaker]

12. He's bluffing.

We should call his bluff. These crooks lie all the time. If they truly have such evidence they would have shared it by now.

[WilliamPitt]

14. I heard the same advice about saying there are no WMDs

It was bad advice.

[ibegurpard]

26. Ah, yes.

Let's sit back and say or do nothing because we shake in our boots about what the evil masterminds in the White House have in response to EVERYTHING we say.

[robbedvoter]

9. Good question! Spread it around! lack of answer should be news.

[DrFunkenstein]

10. They Should Shoot Down All The Claims In Cheney's Last Statement

Almost everything in that passage has been either shot down, or looks really, really bad for the adminstration (like letting Zarqawi go 3 TIMES to make the case against Saddam look stronger).

C'mon staff, a little follow up. But you are definitely on the right track!

[madfloridian]

11. I like that statement, but then there is this resolution the Dems signed.

http://www.antiwar.com/blog/index.php?id=P1296

There are a couple of posts here about it. It is not good they signed that. It appears to link 9/11 and Iraq. Hopefully this press release will help the situation.

Here is an article about it. It worries a lot of us that this was signed.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A10421-2004Sep9?language=printer

SNIP..."Mention of the war in Iraq clouded a House resolution marking the third anniversary of the Sept. 11 attacks, and 16 lawmakers voted Thursday against the otherwise non-controversial measure."

[IndianaGreen]

17. "on behalf of freedom in the war on terrorism"

Published on Monday, September 13, 2004 by the Toronto Star
Kerry Stuck in Political Quagmire
Democrat's Iraq Message Boosts Bush
Becomes Easy Target for Political Satire

by Tim Harper

Yet, when Kerry marked the 1,000th U.S. death in Iraq last Tuesday — a milestone seemingly tailor-made to give his campaign some traction — he appeared to have bought into the Bush-Cheney mantra that war in Iraq was war on terror. He honoured the dead who gave their lives "on behalf of freedom in the war on terrorism.''

This came, after Democrats spent months criticizing Bush for linking Iraq and the war on terror, even though there is no evidence that Saddam Hussein had anything to do with the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.

A spokesperson, David Wade, later explained Kerry was referring to parts of Iraq that now had become "breeding grounds for terrorists.''

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/0913-01.htm

[seabeyond]

13. been a couple hours, did cheney answer?

lol lol

[Guaranteed]

16. Yeah, he said

"Russia got his!"

[TeeYiYi]

15. kick

TYY:kick:

[IndianaGreen]

18. House Republicans and Democrats Unite in Linking Iraq with 9/11

We should be beating Bush by 20-points, instead we are handicapped by an incoherent message on Iraq, among other things. The campaign appears the result of committee work, and lacks the cohesion that is necessary to provide a simple and consistent message.

Here is another example of what I am talking about:

Published on Monday, September 13, 2004 by CommonDreams.org
House Republicans and Democrats Unite in Linking Iraq with 9/11
by Stephen Zunes

On the eve of the third anniversary of 9/11, the U.S. House of Representatives – by an overwhelming bipartisan majority of 406-16 – passed a resolution linking Iraq to the Al Qaeda attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. This comes despite conclusions reached by the bipartisan 9/11 Commission and the consensus of independent strategic analysis familiar with the region that no such links ever existed.

The resolution contains appropriate and predictable language paying tribute to the rescue workers and victims’ families. It also notes actions taken by the U.S. government in response to the attacks, such as the creation of the Department of Homeland Security, improvements in intelligence procedures, enhanced coordination between government agencies, and hardening cockpit doors on commercial aircraft. Actions by American allies were noted as well, such as their arrest of key Al-Qaeda operatives in Europe and elsewhere.

However, the resolution also contains language designed, despite the lack of any credible evidence, to associate the former Iraqi government of Saddam Hussein with the 9/11 attacks.

Al Qaeda = Taliban = Iraq

For example, the resolution states that “since the United States was attacked, it has led an international military coalition in the destruction of two terrorist regimes in Afghanistan and Iraq.”

http://www.commondreams.org/views04/0913-14.htm

[Disturbed]

21. "We didn't do anything to provoke the attack of 9/11."

The just attacked us because they hate us for our freedoms.

BULLSHIT!!

They attacked the US because of the policies that the US perpetrates in the ME and that we support the very regimes that oppress the majority of the population there. They will attack again.

If the US is so freakin' high on spreading freedom why hasn't Kuwait, Saudi Arabia and all the other so-called US ME Allies become 'democracies"? Why does the US still support so many brutal dictatorships?

Cheney ahs not further info. He is sociopathic, warmongering, greedy, bloody leech.

[bigtree]

22. Cheney v. Powell (old article)

The vice president and the secretary of State appear to have conflicting opinions of the Iraq-al Qaeda connection.
by Stephen F. Hayes
01/13/2004

"I HAVE NOT SEEN smoking-gun, concrete evidence about the connection. But I think the possibility of such connections did exist, and it was prudent to consider them at the time that we did."

That was Secretary of State Colin Powell last Thursday. It was a curious comment, given that the administration had made an Iraq-al Qaeda connection an important, if ancillary, part of its case for war in Iraq. In fact, Powell himself had laid out some of the "concrete evidence" of the Iraq-al Qaeda connection himself in a presentation at the United Nations Security Council on February 5, 2003.

One week after this presentation, on February 12, 2003, Powell testified before the House International Relations Committee. He was asked by Rep. Howard Berman of California why containment of Saddam was no longer a viable option. Powell explained that potential threat of terrorists with WMD was not acceptable in a "post-9/11 environment."

What's more, Powell declared, the links are not speculative. "This is not hypothetical. The ricin that is bouncing around Europe now originated in Iraq. Now, not part of Iraq directly under Saddam Hussein's control, but his intelligence people know all about it. There's cooperation taking place in the manner I described last week. And I have no reason to step back from anything I said last week--this nexus between weapons of mass destruction, states that are developing them, and cooperation with non-state actors such as Osama bin Laden or some other nut case who might come along in due course. It's a risk that we strongly believe, the president strongly believes, and I think most members of the international community strongly believe we should not take any longer."

Moments later, Rep. Donald Payne, a Democrat from New Jersey, challenged Powell on the link between Iraq and al Qaeda.>>>>.

More: http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/003/597odrzf.asp

[Beetwasher]

23. If Bush Put Out A Similar Press Release You Can Be Damn Sure

Everyone in the press would be asking the questions that were posed.

Why is it when Kerry does it, it's ignored? (rhetorical question, no need to answer, I already know why).

No one will ask Cheney these questions, no pundits will bring them up, no one will report this. It's fucked up beyond belief.

[Lactar]

28. This is to easy

Guys,
All he has to say is "There was a relationship with Al-Q, but not with 9-11"

Hopefully he wont figure it out in time.