Millions of Bush Admin Emails Recoverd.

[macfan881]

http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/12/14/white.house.emails/index.html

these were dated back to 2003 to 2005

I smell big time scandal from the bush admin within the next few months ;)

[bobber205]

Can't wait till the Climategate peeps get in here and completely reverse positions.

[Zombie Acorn]

Can't wait till the Climategate peeps get in here and completely reverse positions.

If there is a scandal of any sort Bush should be held accountable. For instance, if an email conversation showed that Bush was purposely misleading people to get us into Iraq I have no problem with him being charged with war crimes. f

[XNine]

If there is a scandal of any sort Bush should be held accountable. For instance, if an email conversation showed that Bush was purposely misleading people to get us into Iraq I have no problem with him being charged with war crimes. f

What, like you mean his way of insinuating that Iraq and Al Quaeda conspired together in the 9/11 attacks? Or the fact that Iraq had WMD's and were very capable of attacking the United States with them? How about the Patriot Act? Or the NSA surveillance programs on citizens?

[obeygiant]

What, like you mean his way of insinuating that Iraq and Al Quaeda conspired together in the 9/11 attacks?

Actually I've never heard this from anyone other than those who were pissed at the Bush Administration. Never once have I thought Saddam and al Qaeda were in league together.

Or the fact that Iraq had WMD's and were very capable of attacking the United States with them?

Yeah there were no WMDs, but the fear wasn't that Iraq would attack the US, but to have them fall into terrorist hands or attack Israel. Saddam generated the illusion of WMDs to intimidate Iran. He miscalculated the US response, which he thought would be sanctions and/or drone attacks.


Anyway, I find it hard to believe that these emails will present anything damning to the Bush Administration due to that fact that the firings of the lawyers was legal and were not a unique occurrence.

[hulugu]

Actually I've never heard this from anyone other than those who were pissed at the Bush Administration. Never once have I thought Saddam and al Qaeda were in league together.

That's interesting because according to a 2003 poll (http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2003-09-06-poll-iraq_x.htm), 70 percent of Americans...

...believe it is likely that ousted Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein was personally involved in the Sept. 11 attacks, says a poll out almost two years after the terrorists' strike against this country.

Additionally, from the Christian Science Monitor, March 14, 2003:

In his prime-time press conference last week, which focused almost solely on Iraq, President Bush mentioned Sept. 11 eight times. He referred to Saddam Hussein many more times than that, often in the same breath with Sept. 11.
Bush never pinned blame for the attacks directly on the Iraqi president. Still, the overall effect was to reinforce an impression that persists among much of the American public: that the Iraqi dictator did play a direct role in the attacks. A New York Times/CBS poll this week shows that 45 percent of Americans believe Mr. Hussein was "personally involved" in Sept. 11, about the same figure as a month ago.


Sources knowledgeable about US intelligence say there is no evidence that Hussein played a role in the Sept. 11 attacks, nor that he has been or is currently aiding Al Qaeda. Yet the White House appears to be encouraging this false impression, as it seeks to maintain American support for a possible war against Iraq and demonstrate seriousness of purpose to Hussein's regime.
"The administration has succeeded in creating a sense that there is some connection [between Sept. 11 and Saddam Hussein]," says Steven Kull, director of the Program on International Policy Attitudes (PIPA) at the University of Maryland.
The numbers
Polling data show that right after Sept. 11, 2001, when Americans were asked open-ended questions about who was behind the attacks, only 3 percent mentioned Iraq or Hussein. But by January of this year, attitudes had been transformed. In a Knight Ridder poll, 44 percent of Americans reported that either "most" or "some" of the Sept. 11 hijackers were Iraqi citizens. The answer is zero.
According to Mr. Kull of PIPA, there is a strong correlation between those who see the Sept. 11-Iraq connection and those who support going to war.
In Selma, Ala., firefighter Thomas Wilson supports going to war with Iraq, and brings up Sept. 11 himself, saying we don't know who's already here in the US waiting to attack. When asked what that has to do with Iraq, he replies: "They're all in it together - all of them hate this country." The reason: "prosperity."
Al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden himself recently encouraged the perception of a link, when he encouraged attacks on the US in response to a US war against Iraq. But, terror experts note, common animosity toward the United States does not make Hussein and Mr. bin Laden allies.
Hussein, a secularist, and bin Laden, a Muslim fundamentalist, are known to despise each other. Bin Laden's stated sympathies are always toward the Iraqi people, not the regime.
This is not to say that Hussein has no link to terrorists. Over the years, terrorist leader Abu Nidal - who died in Baghdad last year - used Iraq as a sometime base. Terrorism experts also don't rule out that some Al Qaeda fighters have slipped into Iraqi territory.
The point, says Eric Larson, a senior policy analyst at RAND who specializes in public opinion and war, is that the US public understands what Hussein is all about - which includes his invasion of two countries and the use of biological and chemical agents. "He's expressed interest - and done more than that - in trying to develop a nuclear capability," says Mr. Larson. "In general, the public is rattled about this... There's a jumble of attitudes in many Americans' minds, which fit together as a mosaic that [creates] a basic predisposition for military action against Saddam."
Future fallout
In the end, will it matter if some Americans have meshed together Sept. 11 and Iraq? If the US and its allies go to war against Iraq, and it goes well, then the Bush administration is likely not to face questions about the way it sold the war. But if war and its aftermath go badly, then the administration could be under fire.
"Going to war with improper public understanding is risky," says Richard Parker, a former US ambassador to several Mideast countries. "If it's a failure, and we get bogged down, this is one of the accusations that [Bush] will have to face when it's all over."
Antiwar activist Daniel Ellsberg says it's important to understand why public opinion appears to be playing out differently in the US and Europe. In fact, both peoples express a desire to work through the UN. But the citizens get different messages from their leaders. "Americans have been told by their president [that Hussein is] a threat to security, and so they believe that," says Mr. Ellsberg. "It's rather amazing, in light of that, that so many Americans do want this to be authorized by the UN. After all, the president keeps saying we don't have to ask the UN for permission to defend ourselves."

Yeah there were no WMDs, but the fear wasn't that Iraq would attack the US, but to have them fall into terrorist hands or attack Israel. Saddam generated the illusion of WMDs to intimidate Iran. He miscalculated the US response, which he thought would be sanctions and/or drone attacks.

Here I agree with you. Saddam's weapons program was a Potemkin Village. Some have argued that even Saddam actually believed his own propaganda. Nonetheless, the intelligence that indicated Iraq had a viable WMD program was wrong and the UN team was correct.
There's a lesson there.

[Thomas Veil]

Can't wait till the Climategate peeps get in here and completely reverse positions.I expect them to vigorously hold the position that Bush's administration was a fake.

[Queso]

If there is a scandal of any sort Bush should be held accountable. For instance, if an email conversation showed that Bush was purposely misleading people to get us into Iraq I have no problem with him being charged with war crimes. f
Blair has all but admitted it, yet remains free to rape gullible idiots for public speaking fees.

I don't expect Bush will fair any worse. After all, they only indirectly killed poor people, and poor people don't count do they? :rolleyes:

[Gelfin]

Actually I've never heard this from anyone other than those who were pissed at the Bush Administration. Never once have I thought Saddam and al Qaeda were in league together.

Good for you, but it puts you in the minority. Most Americans were misled into believing exactly that, perhaps because of quotes like this (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A50679-2004Jun17.html):

The reason I keep insisting that there was a relationship between Iraq and Saddam and al Qaeda: because there was a relationship between Iraq and al Qaeda. There's numerous contacts between the two.

How about in the infamous "Mission Accomplished" speech (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/05/01/iraq/main551946.shtml) when Bush said,

The Battle of Iraq is one victory in a war on terror that began on September the 11th, 2001, and still goes on.

Are we not to infer from this that Iraq shared in responsibility for the September 11 attack? Why else mention it as a victory over the perpetrators of that attack?

[IntheNet]

Are we not to infer from this that Iraq shared in responsibility for the September 11 attack?

What you could infer, from that quote by former President Bush, is that addressing Al Qaeda terrorists within Iraq was one component "...in a war on terror that began on September the 11th, 2001, and still goes on," just as the president said.

Number Two Al Qaeda terrorist Abu Azzam is taken down in Iraq
September 27, 2005
http://www.theodoresworld.net/archives/2005/09/aide_to_alqaedas_zarqawi_kille.html

Al-Zarqawi Killed In Iraq Air Raid
Jun 08, 2006
http://www.life.com/image/71154825

Senior al Qaeda chief Abu Qaswarah killed in Iraq
October 15, 2008
http://edition.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/meast/10/15/iraq.alqaeda.leader/index.html

[bobber205]

What you could infer, from that quote by former President Bush, is that addressing Al Qaeda terrorists within Iraq was one component "...in a war on terror that began on September the 11th, 2001, and still goes on," just as the president said.

Number Two Al Qaeda terrorist Abu Azzam is taken down in Iraq
September 27, 2005
http://www.theodoresworld.net/archives/2005/09/aide_to_alqaedas_zarqawi_kille.html

Al-Zarqawi Killed In Iraq Air Raid
Jun 08, 2006
http://www.life.com/image/71154825

Senior al Qaeda chief Abu Qaswarah killed in Iraq
October 15, 2008
http://edition.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/meast/10/15/iraq.alqaeda.leader/index.html

You mean since that significant Al Qaeda leaders where in Iraq years after 9/11 and years after we invaded and tempted not just them but many others to come into Iraq and fight us, that Iraq was involved with 9/11?! GENIUS!

[IntheNet]

You mean since that significant Al Qaeda leaders where in Iraq years after 9/11...

Refresher on Al Qaeda in Iraq Pre War
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1973193/posts

The compilation of Al Qaeda/terrorist presence in Iraq pre-war was assembled by Free Republic and is dated, starting in 1991 through 1999, but certainly goes back much further.

[yg17]

Refresher on Al Qaeda in Iraq Pre War
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1973193/posts

The compilation of Al Qaeda/terrorist presence in Iraq pre-war was assembled by Free Republic and is dated, starting in 1991 through 1999, but certainly goes back much further.

You really expect us to take anything posted on a right wing extremist website like Free Republic seriously?

[bobber205]

You really expect us to take anything posted on a right wing extremist website like Free Republic seriously?

That's all InTheNet reads it seems like sometimes.

[obeygiant]

"Mission Accomplished" speech (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/05/01/iraq/main551946.shtml) when Bush said,

The Battle of Iraq is one victory in a war on terror that began on September the 11th, 2001, and still goes on.


Are we not to infer from this that Iraq shared in responsibility for the September 11 attack? Why else mention it as a victory over the perpetrators of that attack?

Actually no. That statement to me doesn't implicate Iraq in regards to the 911 attacks. As you know, our government's belief window in regards to terrorism shifted after the September 11th. The notion of a global war on terror was born and anyone out-to-do-terror was now an enemy. That means anyone "doing" terrorism, i.e. hijacking planes, providing weapons to, training, threatening, harboring was now a terrorist. Saddam Hussein and his cronies and Iraq became the central front in the war.

Anyway, this topic has been discussed ad nauseum. Nothing we can say or do will change it.

[skunk]

Actually no. That statement to me doesn't implicate Iraq in regards to the 911 attacks. As you know, our government's belief window in regards to terrorism shifted after the September 11th. The notion of a global war on terror was born and anyone out-to-do-terror was now an enemy. That means anyone "doing" terrorism, i.e. hijacking planes, providing weapons to, training, threatening, harboring was now a terrorist. Saddam Hussein and his cronies and Iraq became the central front in the war.Nonsense: Saddam Hussein did none of the things in your list. Who were his "cronies", anyway? And what the hell is a "belief window"? Is it a new-fangled propaganda term?

[obeygiant]

Nonsense: Saddam Hussein did none of the things in your list. Who were his "cronies", anyway? And what the hell is a "belief window"? Is it a new-fangled propaganda term?

Skunk, there a volumes of information on this subject. Besides committing genocide, launching SCUDs into Israel, or bankrolling terrorist organizations, Saddam was probably an okay guy. Kind of like a crazy uncle. His "cronies" would refer to his government, the republican guard, and his two psychopathic sons.

"Belief window" is the term I chose to describe how the world shifted for the US Government after 911.

try volume 1 to start (http://www.fas.org/irp/eprint/iraqi/index.html)
Abstract: Captured Iraqi documents have uncovered evidence that links the regime of Saddam Hussein to regional and global terrorism, including a variety of revolutionary, liberation, nationalist, and Islamic terrorist organizations. While these documents do not reveal direct coordination and assistance between the Saddam regime and the al Qaeda network, they do indicate that Saddam was willing to use, albeit cautiously, operatives affiliated with al Qaeda as long as Saddam could have these terrorist–operatives monitored closely. Because Saddam’s security organizations and Osama bin Laden’s terrorist network operated with similar aims (at least in the short term), considerable overlap was inevitable when monitoring, contacting, financing, and training the same outside groups. This created both the appearance of and, in some ways, a “de facto” link between the organizations. At times, these organizations would work together in pursuit of shared goals but still maintain their autonomy and independence because of innate caution and mutual distrust. Though the execution of Iraqi terror plots was not always successful, evidence shows that Saddam’s use of terrorist tactics and his support for terrorist groups remained strong up until the collapse of the regime.

[synth3tik]

Unfortunately, this is going to make little differences to the lives of Americans, now if we could get the Patriot Act repealed, then we will be doing alright.

[Peterkro]

His "cronies" would refer to his government, the republican guard, and his two psychopathic sons.



Surely that should be "the elite republican guard".

[Cave Man]

Surely that should be "the elite republican guard".

That would be Rumsfeld, Cheney, Rove and all the other Republicans? :cool:

[skunk]

Skunk, there a volumes of information on this subject.Volumes of misinformation.His "cronies" would refer to his government, the republican guard, and his two psychopathic sons.That's a lot of cronies.

"Belief window" is the term I chose to describe how the world shifted for the US Government after 911.You could do better to choose a term which means something intelligible.

[Gelfin]

You could do better to choose a term which means something intelligible.

You just need to reform your semantic portcullis.