The Latest Media Smear: Did Palin Link Saddam Hussein To 9/11?

Anne Kornblut, writing in the Washington Post, thinks so:

Gov. Sarah Palin linked the war in Iraq with the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, telling an Iraq-bound brigade of soldiers that included her son that they would “defend the innocent from the enemies who planned and carried out and rejoiced in the death of thousands of Americans.”
The idea that the Iraqi government under Saddam Hussein helped al-Qaeda plan the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, a view once promoted by Bush administration officials, has since been rejected even by the president himself. But it is widely agreed that militants allied with al-Qaeda have taken root in Iraq since the U.S.-led invasion.
“America can never go back to that false sense of security that came before September 11, 2001,” she said at the deployment ceremony, which drew hundreds of military families who walked from their homes on the sprawling post to the airstrip where the service was held.

Here’s video of the Palin speech in question:


The pertinent quote:

You’ll be there in service to the same cause of freedom from tyranny and from violence. You’ll be there to defend the innocent from the enemies who planned, carried out, and rejoiced in the death of thousands of Americans.

Notice that Palin didn’t mention that the “enemies who planned” and “carried out” the 9/11 attacks was Saddam Hussein and his henchman specifically. What Palin meant was that the troops she was address would be facing al Qaeda in Iraq.
And she was absolutely right. Al Qaeda was (and still is, though they’ve been badly beaten) in Iraq. Their leader, at one point, was a guy named Zarqawi who had declared his allegiance to Osama bin Laden himself and was killed in Iraq by an American bomb. To say that our troops weren’t fighting the same group, the same people, who had a hand in 9/11 is, frankly, a lie.
Palin was right. Anne Kornblut is wrong. But unfortunately President Bush has been accused of this same thing by liberal partisans for years now despite never having said that Saddam Hussein was responsible for 9/11, so I imagine this bit of untruth will plague Palin as well.

Tags: , , , ,


«
»
  • http://Array Hannitized

    Rob squirms, like a worm:

    So you admit that sometimes the troops do fight al Qaeda, and that Palin was exactly right in telling the troops as much.

    No, not at all. When you lie about who they will be fighting, you are not “exactly right”. You are half-right and it you are only telling half the truth intentionally, you are being deceptive. And if your intent is to deceive you are lying.

    It’s clear she is lying. Because that is all she’s got.

  • Hannitized

    Whats the problem Rob?

    The problem is that sometimes they won’t be fighting Al Qaeda, they will be fighting Shiites.

    This is why you have zero credibility on these subjects. Because you lie, or because you are so ignorant it is downright scary.

    Shiites from the Sadr Movement in Iraq have been signing oaths in blood to struggle against the foreign military occupation of their country. This ritual affirmation comes despite the command from Sayyid Muqtada al-Sadr to lay down their arms. Sadr has also spoken of creating a special forces unit to kill US and other coalition troops, despite the cease-fire he affirmed between his Mahdi Army and the US and Iraqi forces. Al-Sadr had called for these pledges signed in blood, but appeared to see them as binding the signers to a non-violent struggle. This AFP article suggests most of the signers do not see it that way.

  • http://proof-proofpositive.blogspot.com/ proof_positive

    Nancy Pelosi…two heart beats away!

    Image and video hosting by TinyPic

  • Rob Spooner

    The Washington Post misspoke and so did Palin. It is correct that Palin did not link our current struggle with Saddam, although the fact that it is not leads to the question, if we invaded to overthrow Saddam, why are we still there?

    On the other hand, she did link the current struggle to the al-Qaeda folks who committed the 9/11 attacks. Which is also wrong. Those guys, or what is left of them, are holed up somewhere in Pakistan. The “al-Qaeda in Mesopotamia” group arose independently, after we invaded. They may admire Osama bin Laden, but they aren’t run by his group.

    This is not a minor point, and Palin’s inability to get it straight is not comforting.

  • Hannitized

    Or mabye if The bearded Merkin got up and spoke at the next McCain rally, he could tell them about destroying Iran. That would sell the American public.

  • http://www.dartemis.net/blog/ sayanything-42

    sparkless-arse-fuckin-buckle, a junior partner to eunuchized the beardless catamite offers this stirring call to what passes for patriotism amongst them:

    It does sound better than, “You will be going to fight someone else’s civil war.” or “You will be going to fight against people who are unpleased with occupiers.” or “You will be going to fight so we can pith away our resources and continue our descent from World Superpower to Whiney Sabre Rattlers.”

    If we could get these two on national TV as Obama campaign spokescreatures, it would all be over but the crying.

  • http://www.dartemis.net/blog/ sayanything-42

    MikeAdamson posits:

    If America wanted to fight AQ then Iraq was a poor choice of venues…of course Palin’s statement was wrong.

    Mike, where are most of al Qaeda’s senior leadership types? Answer: the border region of Afghanistan and the Tribal Authonomous areas of Pakistan.

    Recall now that professionals concern themsleves with logistics, and you’ll see one of the reasons going after al Qaeda primarily in Afghanistan was a suboptimal choice. Now throw in the political instability of Pakistan, the lack of Pakistani control of the autonomous areas bordering Afghanistan, and the mohammedean infiltration of the ISI.

    Now consider that:

    1. Saddam Hussein’s Iraq was a persistent problem in the Arabian Gulf region.

    2. We had unsettled business with Hussein’s Iraq (like a ceasefire they continuously violated).

    3. As part of the dar el islam, al Qaeda could not sit idly by if the United States (as a “crusader” nation) invaded Iraq.

    4. Sure enough, Iraq became jihadi fly paper.

    Also consider that regardless of initial intentions, the fight in Iraq now (and for the last few years) has largely been a fight against al Qaeda.

  • Hannitized

    Sarah Palin,

    One heart beat away.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_iogEFNlRpg&eurl=http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/

    Notice how Rob clammed up on all his Palin Hype!!! Bleh..

  • http://ndgoon.blogspot.com/ goon

    They just keep digging seeing if something will stick, if the left is not scared why are they attacking her like a pack of wolves.

    Hum, must be after some self reflection they realized they have to two candidtes Plugs and NOBAMA that are gaff a minute and they are falling like a prom dress at a post prom party.

  • Jeugenen

    AMERICA’S MALIGNANT NEO-MARXIST CANCERS

    America suffers from Podhoretz Neo-Con and Leiberman Neo-Lib political cancers, in her executive, legislative, and judicial organs; and the entertainment and news media. Their subversion of foreign policy, Christian morality, and labor relations are notorious.

    The 9/11 Terrorist Spectacle is one of the lesser symptoms caused by their hate provoking foreign military interventions. The un-patriotic and illegal Neo-Con Iraq War in support of Judeofascist Israel is costing over a trillion dollars and killing more than 4,000 young patriots; and doing worse damage to Iraq.

    Roe vs. Wade is sacrificially killing more than 45 million children of Christian mothers. Naturally, Neo-Marxists and their following of Christian heretics, not wanting to be stigmatized as morally depraved child killers, want every woman to sacrificially kill her children.

    Money scammed and extorted from blue-collar rednecks and school teachers by the Neo- Marxist union lobbies, SEIU and NEA, is electing Congressional political prostitutes who enact legislation that subverts Christian culture, nationalistic unity, freedom from excessive governmental regulation, and capitalistic free enterprise.

    These malignant cancers got started in America 60 years ago, when millions of pitiful defeated Marxist refugees from Nazi Germany and Marxist Soviet Union were trustingly accepted as immigrants by inexperienced America, after their rejection by experienced Europe. History suggests that their destruction will inevitably occur, with surprising speed. Russia was utterly devastated by Marxist cancers for two generations, and is very slowly recovering with the gradual introduction of democracy, freedom of speech, nationalism, and Christianity. But Germany under Hitler, and Spain under Franco, quickly destroyed their Marxist cancers, before they could seize control over vital governmental organs. Each healthy nation naturally has a unique defensive immune system for destroying malignant political cancers. England’s immune system is so effective that Marxist cancers are unable to grow.

    America’s Constitution is quite extraordinary in that the supreme defensive governmental organ of the People is the grass-roots town militia. When executive, legislative, and judicial organs become tyrannical, militias spring-up over-night in every town to restore freedom and democracy, by guns and gallows revolutionary justice. America promises to put on the greatest revolutionary show on Earth, to the tune of “God Bless America”.

    Staunch Protestant, Catholic, Mormon, Evangelical, and Fundamental crusaders in the Cultural War indirectly support the revolutionary militias, when they forcefully condemn the heresies and inter-denominational strife that is destroying America’s Christian culture. The militia man with Freedom of Speech, Freedom of Assembly, and the Right to Bear Arms go into action in a minute, clutching his Crucifix and gun. With Separation of Church and State, his pastor never tells him how to fight for his Country, and his general never tells him how to pray to his Christian God.

  • MikeAdamson

    If America wanted to fight AQ then Iraq was a poor choice of venues…of course Palin’s statement was wrong.

  • http://www.thedailyslant.com/ Hairy Polemic

    Umm. Is the Washington Post aware that Saddam and his regime have been dead a while now? I’m pretty sure that’s not who Palin meant the soldiers would be fighting…

  • Hannitized

    Now let’s see if Rob can admit Sarah Palin was intentionally being deceptive. (lying)

  • http://www.dartemis.net/blog/ sayanything-42

    One knows a meme has really gone bust when eunuchized the beardless catamite pronounces its evident truth. It’s a highly reliable contra-indicator.

  • http://sayanythingblog.com/readers/author/sparkiearbuckle sayanything-81

    Palin said plainly that the troops she was addressing would be fighting against the people responsible for 9/11.

    And I thought they were deploying to Iraq and not Saudi Arabia.

  • http://sayanythingblog.com/readers/author/sparkiearbuckle sayanything-81

    Randy GayRaver

    it would all be over but the crying

    what the war? i don’t know when that’ll be over. i do know the iraqis want us out. i fear it won’t be over by the time we leave.

  • http://sayanythingblog.com robport

    Sparkie, Palin said plainly that the troops she was addressing would be fighting against the people responsible for 9/11.

    That’s al Qaeda. We know we’ve been fighting al Qaeda in Iraq. So what’s the problem?

  • http://sayanythingblog.com robport

    The problem is that sometimes they won’t be fighting Al Qaeda, they will be fighting Shiites.

    So you admit that sometimes the troops do fight al Qaeda, and that Palin was exactly right in telling the troops as much.

    Glad we agree on something, Hannitized.

  • http://sayanythingblog.com/readers/author/sparkiearbuckle sayanything-81

    The problem is that sometimes they won’t be fighting Al Qaeda, they will be fighting Shiites.

    They’re all the same, right. Don’t fuck with the simpleton narrative, hankytime. You might confuse the ‘rational’ right.

  • http://sayanythingblog.com/readers/author/sparkiearbuckle sayanything-81

    It does sound better than, “You will be going to fight someone else’s civil war.” or “You will be going to fight against people who are unpleased with occupiers.” or “You will be going to fight so we can pith away our resources and continue our descent from World Superpower to Whiney Sabre Rattlers.”

  • http://sayanythingblog.com/readers/author/sparkiearbuckle sayanything-81

    Notice that Palin didn’t mention that the “enemies who planned” and “carried out” the 9/11 attacks was Saddam Hussein and his henchman specifically.

    Oh. Thanks for addressing the dialectically sensitive nuances for us Rob.

Create a SAB Readerblog


Recent Comments

Powered by Disqus

Blog Advice and Support
Installs and Upgrades
Theme Modifications
Custom Plugins
Theme Design
Conversions and Relocations
Hacked Site Recovery
Mobile Apps Development