Liz Cheney Restates Iraq-9/11 Link Her Father Disavowed, Chides Mitchell For Disagreeing

digg Share this on Facebook Huffpost - Liz Cheney Restates Iraq-9/11 Link Her Father Disavowed, Chides Mitchell For Disagreeing stumble reddit del.ico.us RSS


First Posted: 06- 4-09 02:42 PM   |   Updated: 06- 4-09 03:12 PM

I Like ItI Don’t Like It

Liz Cheney continues to be the gift that keeps on giving. Today's installment is downright Orwellian, In an interview with NBC News' Andrea Mitchell, Cheney insisted that her father had always disavowed the notion that there was a link between Iraq and al Qaeda and September 11th, while simultaneously suggesting that such a link was true. Then she sort of got snippy with Mitchell for the way she kept intimating that maybe this was all a little nonsensical.

The segment began generically enough, with Liz Cheney saying that she was, is, and continues to be troubled by the way the current administration keeps characterizing torture and rendition and the maintenance of Kafka-esque penal colonies as a bad thing. Where things really got testy -- downright mindbending -- was this exchange over Vice President Dick Cheney's appearance at the National Press Club, at which time, as Mitchell pointed out, he "seemed to be taking a step back" from contentions he had previously made about the connections between Saddam Hussein and 9/11.

[WATCH]

MITCHELL: Has he rethought that? Was he rephrasing it?


LIZ CHENEY: No, this is something he has actually said for many years. There was a report in the aftermath of 9/11 that came from the CIA that Mohammad Atta had met in Prague --

MITCHELL: It was quickly discredited!

LIZ CHENEY: Well, let me finish. So, there was a report, and when the report was outstanding, you had a number of people in the administration publicly talking about the fact that there could have been a connection in terms of the Mohammad Atta meeting. Once it became clear that the report didn't hold up, he and others in the administration were out publicly saying that and there's been a real attempt in my view to blur the distinction. He has not said that there is a connection between Saddam Hussein and 9/11.

She's correct that there's been a real effort to blur the distinction! But it's her father and the administration he participated in said effort. If you are looking for evidence of this, well, heck! Let's take a look at the 2002 Joint Resolution to Authorize the use of United States Armed Forces Against Iraq. In plain English, it says:

Whereas members of al-Qaida, an organization bearing responsibility for attacks on the United States, its citizens, and interests, including the attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, are known to be in Iraq;


Whereas Iraq continues to aid and harbor other international terrorist organizations, including organizations that threaten the lives and safety of American citizens;

Story continues below
advertisement

Whereas the attacks on the United States of September 11, 2001, underscored the gravity of the threat posed by the acquisition of weapons of mass destruction by international terrorist organizations;

Additional false foundation comes later in the Authorization:

Whereas Congress has taken steps to pursue vigorously the war on terrorism through the provision of authorities and funding requested by the President to take the necessary actions against international terrorists and terrorist organizations, including those nations, organizations or persons who planned, authorized, committed or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such persons or organizations;


Whereas the President and Congress are determined to continue to take all appropriate actions against international terrorists and terrorist organizations, including those nations, organizations or persons who planned, authorized, committed or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such persons or organizations

That's the core foundational document of the Iraq War and in it, clearly, the administration is arguing vehemently that there was a link between Iraq and both the September 11th attack and al Qaeda.

This warped recall of historical fact continues:

LIZ CHENEY: The issue is whether there's a connection between Saddam Hussein and al Qaeda, which as he mentioned in that speech, George Tenet himself testified to, there's much evidence between the connection of Saddam and al Qaeda and Saddam and other terrorist organizations.


MITCHELL: Well, al Qaeda in Iraq, which was an offshoot, but didn't exist before the start of the war.

LIZ CHENEY: That's actually not true.

No, Liz, it actually is true, the testimony of "George Tenet himself" (I gather the "himself" is added to imply we should revere this historic bungler) notwithstanding.

In July of 2004, the 9-11 Commission found that there was no "collaborative operational relationship" between Iraq and al Qaeda:

"We have seen no evidence that these or the earlier contacts ever developed into a collaborative operational relationship. Nor have we seen evidence indicating that Iraq cooperated with al Qaeda in developing or carrying out any attacks against the United States."

At around the same time, the Senate Intelligence Committee agreed with these findings:

The Senate Intelligence Committee's report said CIA analysts were reasonable in their conclusion that there was no "established, formal" relationship between Iraq and Al Qaeda, nor proof that the two had collaborated in attacks. The committee noted that no new information had emerged since the CIA's key reports to suggest otherwise.

And if you are interested, at their worst, the al Qaeda franchise known as "al Qaeda in Iraq," who filled the post-Saddam vacuum, never amounted to very much:

How big, then, is AQI? The most persuasive estimate I've heard comes from Malcolm Nance, the author of The Terrorists of Iraq and a twenty-year intelligence veteran and Arabic speaker who has worked with military and intelligence units tracking al-Qaeda inside Iraq. He believes AQI includes about 850 full-time fighters, comprising 2 percent to 5 percent of the Sunni insurgency. "Al-Qaeda in Iraq," according to Nance, "is a microscopic terrorist organization."

Liz Cheney went on to disingenuously assert that the presence of Abu Musab al-Zarqawi in Iraq, prior to the war, was evidence of an Iraq/al Qaeda link. Once again, Liz Cheney is wrong. Zarqawi operated in an area of Iraq that was outside of Saddam's control, and independently of al Qaeda:

From the AP: January 24, 2004:

Zarqawi was widely regarded to be the "leader" of Ansar al-Islam prior to the war against Iraq. However, according to the AP, "Ansar al-Islam operated in a region of northern Iraq that was outside of Saddam's control before the war. It was bombed by U.S. warplanes during the fighting."

From the Washington Post, June 16, 2004:

In a statement to the Senate Armed Services Committee in March 2004, "CIA Director George J. Tenet described Zarqawi's network among other groups having 'links' to al Qaeda but with its own 'autonomous leadership, own targets [and] they plan their own attacks.' Although Zarqawi may have cooperated with al Qaeda in the past, U.S. officials say it is increasingly clear he had been operating independently of Osama bin Laden's organization."

It honestly baffles the mind that one has to keep going over these facts, again and again.

[Would you like to follow me on Twitter? Because why not? Also, please send tips to tv@huffingtonpost.com -- learn more about our media monitoring project here.]

Get HuffPost Politics On Facebook and Twitter!

Liz Cheney continues to be the gift that keeps on giving. Today's installment is downright Orwellian, In an interview with NBC News' Andrea Mitchell, Cheney insisted that her father had always disavo...
Liz Cheney continues to be the gift that keeps on giving. Today's installment is downright Orwellian, In an interview with NBC News' Andrea Mitchell, Cheney insisted that her father had always disavo...
 
Comments
1972
Pending Comments
0
iPhone App Promo

Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to

View Comments:
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next › Last » (71 pages total)

If Liz would return the courtesy of letting people finish their sentences like she rudely demands each time, she may get more credibility.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:43 PM on 06/29/2009

When you do not have the truth to any given situation you are stuck trying to decipher what really happened from all of the news that you do take in. Are you getting all of the news? How do you fill in those empty spots before more information is forthcoming? Whether you are getting all of the relevant information or not, how do you decide: Is this where belief (or the forced need to believe) enters the picture?
You see, we all have a real problem here; we cannot tell first hand the real, truthful, information from junk, but in order to run this country properly for ourselves and our posterity...'We the People'. need the truth! We need that real, honest, information!
Our present system of government operates on the facts as they can obtain them, but 'We the People' have to try and decipher what is happening in our world from the second hand ramblings of wealthy people who really do not care about much more than their own wealth, presented to us by corporate news programs that are funded (if not owned) by those same wealthy people!
Liz Cheney's, and her father's, continued showering of ineptitude's upon our present President's hard work at bringing this country back on line shows just how far from the truth much of our public media has strayed.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:06 AM on 06/08/2009
- djsi I'm a Fan of djsi permalink

Do i get an opinion on my dads work?

The amount of press time this women gets is ridiculous

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:43 PM on 06/07/2009
- rshrink I'm a Fan of rshrink 48 fans permalink

Ex VP Cheney has never had any difficulties with lying. He is as smooth as one can be with his spontaneous fabrications. It appears that there is a genetic predisposition to that trait.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:59 PM on 06/07/2009
photo

Who is this woman? Please don't presume to tell me she secured her job at the State Department via ability and merit only? She was a nepotistic appointment, and now she's the opening act (and a pretty rude one too) for The Dick Cheney Redemption Tour, playing on a television station near you. Isn't it amazing that she listened to the President's speech and heard something remarkably pejorative? She's so condescending in her attitude toward him too. I noticed even Andrea Mitchell, pretty much very professional, was having a hard time masking her own adverse reaction to such an arrogant guest.

http://emiliawahoo76.blogspot.com
http://myspace.com/virginiadem

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:10 PM on 06/07/2009
- levibatgirl I'm a Fan of levibatgirl 276 fans permalink
photo

Andrea got skeered and backed down.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:44 PM on 06/07/2009

What makes Liz Cheney an expert, and how did she get access to information that seems to be classified? I don't know what her background is, but what makes her qualified to speak of these issues.
If Cheney was so concerned about the direction in which the country was gonna go, why didn't he run for the presidency? Isn't this what vice presidents do?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:57 PM on 06/07/2009
photo

To borrow a few words from Whoopi, Liz Cheney is a lying sack of dog mess!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:36 PM on 06/07/2009
- LeslieM I'm a Fan of LeslieM 2 fans permalink
photo

Shocking. We were all there, but this constant barrage of re-vision-ist "his"-story has my mind spinning. Thank goodness we live in a time where things are better achived, and access is free.

Not that I would believe this for one second...the constant pleas and denials are telling. Especially as member after member try to get their stories aligned. The only question is how we do tolerate it? I am not happy to learn what was done in the name of "safety." Especially not if more people now target us.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:03 PM on 06/07/2009
photo

Andrea, how do you like your "new one?"

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:09 AM on 06/07/2009

Andrea Mitchell didn't really go head to head with Liz Cheney. She asked sheepish question and let Liz Cheney blurt out her nonsense. Andrea Mitchell did not ask piercing questions and confront (in a journalistic way) her as a good journalist would do as did Katie Couric. Mrs. Mitchell is just as vague as her husband Mr. Allan Greenspan when it comes to her job.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:17 AM on 06/07/2009

One section of my comments did not make it into the board the first time so here it is again:

This woman and her father are both liars who have no sense of shame or responsibility unless their own personal selfish needs require either. She, nor he, represent me, my beliefs, my values or the Constitution I swore to, and defended, for 20 years in the military. In my own humble opinion they should both shut up and go away. No amount of spin is going to change the fact that the policies of the last administration were voted out by a majority of the people.

This President, OUR President, is doing the job he was elected to do and I fully support him in that capacity.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:03 PM on 06/06/2009
- ViperVera I'm a Fan of ViperVera 2 fans permalink

WRITE TO MSNBC LETTERS@MSNBC.COM

Here's mine:
To MSNBC,

I would like to know on what grounds we are subjected to Liz Cheney on a regular basis as a commentator on MSNBC?

She holds no elected office nor is a published pundit. She is the daughter of a former vice president and former State Dept' employee.

She is one steaming lump of negativism with no sense of perspective when dealing with the Obama administration.

I can deal with an intelligent argument a la Pat Buchanan. However Liz Cheney has to go - her "commentary" about the Cairo speech was the last straw today.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:37 PM on 06/06/2009
- ikez78 I'm a Fan of ikez78 8 fans permalink
photo

Why is it so unspeakable to hear opposing views?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:35 PM on 06/06/2009

Opposing views from people who have credibility and speak from the facts are always welcome. Lynn Cheney has no credibility and appears to be either ignorant of the facts or is deliberately lying about them. There really can be no debate when one side's debater refuses to admit the facts.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:15 PM on 06/06/2009

It is not unspeakable to hear opposing views my dear friend, but these are not opposing views mouthed by Ms. Cheney, but contrived lies and openly blatant obfuscations of known truths. This whole style of presenting severely slanted (fake) news Fox (faux) style is being perfected big time by the likes of these, and any news anchor who is not hip to being used will succumb to their prowess.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:33 AM on 06/08/2009
- ViperVera I'm a Fan of ViperVera 2 fans permalink

What credentials does Liz Cheney have besides being the daughter of a former vice president and low level state departrment employee that entitles her to spout off with such frequency on MSNBC.

Regarding Obama, Liz Cheney is nothing but a steaming lump of negativism.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:34 PM on 06/06/2009
- ikez78 I'm a Fan of ikez78 8 fans permalink
photo

Saddam's goons WERE linked to al Qaeda. The evidence is conflicting and takes some work (like actually reading ALL the reports of detainee interviews and document analysis) but they WERE linked.

http://regimeofterror.com

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:05 PM on 06/06/2009
- Mij13 I'm a Fan of Mij13 62 fans permalink
photo

This is like saying Liz Cheney WAS linked to the murder of Dr. Tiller. That wouldn't surprise me, by the way, but I know there is no REAL evidence to back it up. She IS linked to it though. Link is such a convenient word.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:22 PM on 06/06/2009
- ikez78 I'm a Fan of ikez78 8 fans permalink
photo

Documents from inside both groups and confessions isn't "real?"

Is it only "real" when it's politically acceptable for the preferred political party?

There were conflicting views inside BOTH camps about cooperation and those who were for it managed to hook up. Why is that so hard to believe?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:40 PM on 06/06/2009
- deke4 I'm a Fan of deke4 7 fans permalink

"Reading all the reports", unequivocal assertions such as, "Saddam's goons WERE linked to al Qaeda." are no more truthful than Cheney's and his daughter's backtracking of taped evidence of the very words that bespoke the lie. Tell me, Omnicient One, Did you read all the reports? If so, list where when and by whom to bolster your assertions.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:18 AM on 06/07/2009
- kamachanda I'm a Fan of kamachanda 25 fans permalink

"detainee interviews"? Are these the same type of interviews that the Vice President used to justify the invasion of Iraq in the first place?

Justifying that type of evidence is impossible, the same problems we have with Gitmo, evidence obtained by torture cannot be admitted in court and is know to be unreliable.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:51 AM on 06/07/2009
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next › Last » (71 pages total)
Comments are closed for this entry

 You must be logged in to comment. Log in  or connect with 

Connect