OT: LIZ AND FORMER VP CHENEY PUSH 'UNDISPUTED' CLAIM THAT IS ACTUALLY WRONG
The Huffington Post | By Paige Lavender | 07/11/2014
Former Vice President #$%$ Cheney and his daughter, erstwhile Wyoming Senate candidate Liz Cheney, wrote their version of "the truth about Iraq" in an op-ed published by the Weekly Standard.
Among the "truth" the two conservatives dish out in the op-ed is an "undisputed" claim that's actually been disputed several times.
"Those who say the invasion of Iraq in 2003 was a mistake are essentially saying we would be better off if Saddam Hussein were still in power. That’s a difficult position to sustain," the Cheneys write. "It is undisputed, and has been confirmed repeatedly in Iraqi government documents captured after the invasion, that Saddam had deep, longstanding, far-reaching relationships with terrorist organizations, including al Qaeda and its affiliates."
In 2002, the New York Times claimed the Bush administration was "sowing a dangerous confusion" by saying al Qaeda had a relationship with Hussein's regime. In 2004, the 9/11 commission reported it found no "collaborative relationship" between Iraq and al Qaeda. And a 2008 military report released by the Pentagon also showed no connection between the two.
Hussein ( not the Hussein we have in the White House but the other Hussein who dictated to Iraq not America) was paying $25,000 to the families of murder bombers (who were terrorists, wouldn't everyone agree) provided the murder bomber went through with his murder bombing ( euphemistically called suicide bombing) . That sounds pretty supportive of terrorism to me. When we look at the Muslims of the Middle East we can find many terrorist and terrorist supporting groups, such as, for instance the Muslim Brotherhood, who our Hussein apparently likes, since persons with close ties to it have been and are In high positions in agencies of our national security and the department of state.
Well, elkie, I don't know which is true or if either position is truly indisputable but if you take the rest of the weekly standard piece and the WSJ editorial from mid June, it doesn't paint a very good picture of where things are likely heading in Iraq - which of course is the matter at hand.
Ya witnessing the abject desperation and paranoia of a failing campaign to fundamentally transform
America. The usual prog lap , like puff po, I reckon will go down with da ship, but for how long before they turn tail and turn coat?