Home Store In Memoriam Deborah Newsletter Forum Topics Blogfeed Blogroll Facebook MySpace Contact Us About

Rumsfeld denies Iraq is cause of recent terror attacks

Reported by Chrish - July 26, 2005

As part of a wide-ranging segment by Bret Baier on Special Report today 7/25/05, he said that Defense Secretary Rumsfeld was asked today if he believed the attacks in London and Egypt were retaliation for the war in Iraq. Never one to take responsibility for his miscalculations, Rumsfeld replied "There was no war in Iraq on 9/11. People have been, terrorist attacks have been happening well before the war in Iraq. It's just utter nonsense."

Baier went on to say that while the bombings in London and Sharm el-Shiekh have not been determined to be directly linked to one another, US intelligence officials say the same Al Queda or Al Queda-linked groups compete for funding. One official is quoted as saying "They may have different packaging but they're selling the same product."

The next segment, primarily about whether the British government is sufficiently tough on radical Islamists living within the country, was introduced with "Britain considers itself a cradle of democracy, where the rule of law and free speech thrive." Next video was shown of young Muslim men burning a British flag and a speaker shouted "Pull your troops out of Iraq! And if you do not pull your troops out, you will get bloodshed on the streets of London." Fox News correspondent Simon Marks went on to say that now there's been blood shed in the streets, and "the government is rethinking whether the right to free speech includes the right to campaign against the very society that allows it."

Comment: Rumsfeld denied the current situation and invoked 9/11 again. Fox chose to air that because it supports the administration's stance and gives supporters a simple talking point.

The denial was refuted in the next piece with the video of the angry cleric.

Hume and the All-stars panel (Fred Barnes, Mort Kondracke, Jeff Birnbaum) took up the subject later in the show. In this clip, Rumsfeld is first heard to say, "oh, that's ridiculous." After a pregnant pause the reporter had to ask "why is that?"

Hume actually offered the pov that a case could be made that we've gotten people all stirred up over there; we shouldn't have, but...

Ever faithful Barnes immediately said that Rumsfeld had a point and ticked off acts of terrorism that happened prior to 9/11/01, mssing or ignoring the point that the debate is about the recent bombings and possible reasons (in the bombers' minds) for doing such a thing.

Kondracke says their goal with these bombings and the insurgency is to have the coalition withdraw and allow them to have a Taliban-like fundamentalist rule in the Middle East. Birnbaum takes it one step further saying they want to ultimately rule the world.

Comment: All three panelists were of the same mind. No one said that Rumsfeld was once again denying that the ill=planned Iraq invasion has made us and our allies less safe, and terrorism and terrorists' numbers are on the rise.

Question: Has anyone ever taken the position that the 1993 WTC bombing was in retaliation for the first Bush foray into Iraq?

Comments
Post a comment




Remember Me?


We welcome your opinions and viewpoints. Comments must remain civil, on-topic and must not violate any copyright or other laws. We reserve the right to delete any comments we deem inappropriate or non-constructive to the discussion for any reason, and to block any commenter for repeated violations.

Your email address is required to post, but it will not be published on the site.