Al Qaeda

[Lemur]

Your post doesnt support the claim that he claimed there were ties between Iraq and 911.

I understand what you're saying. He never explicitly stated that Iraq was involved in the plot itself. It's a bit of a dodge, and I doubt you would tolerate this sort of semantic hoodwinking in a non-conservative, but in an extremely literal sense you are correct.

In a practical, political sense, however, you are choosing to miss the point. Al Qaeda is known in the U.S. for 9/11. Full stop. When you say Al Qaeda, people think of planes flying into buildings. Maybe they think of OBL and the shoe bomber. Not a whole lot more.

So when you link anyone to Al Qaeda, you're linking them to 9/11, unless you explicitly state otherwise. Oh, not in a strict legal sense, but from a P.R. perspective, heck yeah. When the Vice President spends years linking Al Qaeda to Iraq, well, the effect is as intended.

You can fall back to a "but he never explicitly linked them to the act itself" argument, but that's politically naive. If you link someone to the Nazis, you're linking them to belligerent militarism and genocide. If you're trying to say that someone was an unimportant Nazi, you need to make that clear.

Both the President and the Vice President have made a point of mentioning 9/11 in the same sentences and paragraphs as Iraq. That's how you wind up with 69% of the U.S. believing a theory based on zero evidence. Unless, Gawain, you'd like to contend that 69% of America either knows more on the subject than all of our intelligence services combined, or they just like making things up to amuse themselves.

[EDIT]

Sorry Proletariat, I was posting while you were, ships in the night, etc.

Nobody I know currently believes that Saddam was behind 9/11. But before we invaded, when the Admin. was in a full court press, yes, I knew quite a few people who believed that invading Iraq would avenge 9/11.

As for the reliability of polls, of course they can be fixed. They're just a tool. But as I wrote to G above, there was a deliberate linking of Al Qaeda to Iraq that was supported by the thinnest evidence, which assumed a disproportionate role in both Presidential and Vice Presidential speeches. I can't imagine the linkage was a coincidence. Politicians do things to create a public impression -- that's why they're politicians.

[Gawain of Orkeny]

So when you link anyone to Al Qaeda, you're linking them to 9/11, unless you explicitly state otherwise. Oh, not in a strict legal sense, but from a P.R. perspective, heck yeah. When the Vice President spends years linking Al Qaeda to Iraq, well, the effect is as intended.

Because the American people arent stupid. We dont think Saddam had anything to do with planning 911 but we do believe that he did indeed have ties to AQ and is therefore partialy responsible for 911 hence the poll results. It was never stated nor did any americans believe we invaded Iraq because of 911. Its you who are making false assumptions here. Read the congressional authorization of force in Iraq. Theres nothing about 911 in it.

[Proletariat]

In a practical, political sense, however, you are choosing to miss the point. Al Qaeda is known in the U.S. for 9/11. Full stop. When you say Al Qaeda, people think of planes flying into buildings. Maybe they think of OBL and the shoe bomber. Not a whole lot more.

What can you even do, Gawain?

"Sure, he didn't say what I'm claiming! But if you read between the lines he definately did not not say it!"



Please cite an example of this massive group of people who think we invaded Iraq solely because of 9/11.

(I thought they lied to us and it was WMDs. Apparently the BA didn't need to lie about WMDs, they already had 69% of the country bamboozled.)

[Lemur]

Please cite an example of this massive group of people who think we invaded Iraq solely because of 9/11.

Did I say "solely"? Did I say it was causal for the invasion? No, if you look at my post, I didn't.

Harris Poll is generally regarded as a non-partisan service, and they show a significant number of people still believe Saddam was behind 9/11.

More surprising perhaps are the large numbers (albeit not majorities) who believe the following claims not made by the president and which virtually no experts believe to be true:

* 47 percent believe that Saddam Hussein helped plan and support the hijackers who attacked the U.S. on September 11, 2001 (up six percentage points from November).
* 44 percent actually believe that several of the hijackers who attacked the U.S. on September 11 were Iraqis (up significantly from 37% in November).
* 36 percent believe that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction when the U.S. invaded (down slightly from 38% in November).

It does seem that some people are arriving at wildly untrue conclusions. Anyway, Proletariat, please feel free to point me to some evidence to the contrary.

[Gawain of Orkeny]

You just shot yourself in the foot Lemurmania

who believe the following claims NOT made by the president

Its not his fault people believe things he DIDNT claim .

[Lemur]

No, my foot is doing just fine. If you've the patience, I would ask you to re-read what I was saying about linkage.

[EDIT]

Never mind, we're getting too far off-topic anyway. Now it's becoming all about Bush, when it's supposed to be about Al Qaeda. I really had no intention of derailing things so badly, mea culpa.

[Gawain of Orkeny]

No, my foot is doing just fine. If you've the patience, I would ask you to re-read what I was saying about linkage.

Hell I could link Washington to the war on terror. Everything in the world is somehow linked to every other thing in the world. That people make up their own dosent prove your point.

[Proletariat]

No, my foot is doing just fine. If you've the patience, I would ask you to re-read what I was saying about linkage.

Refering this to linkage requires a cognitive dissonance that only preconceived notions can produce.

[Lemur]

Gawain, Proletariat, if we want to take this any further, it should be in a separate thread. We're derailing the Al Qaeda discussion.