Shurely Shome Mishtake?

April 1st, 2006 | researchmaterial

Interview of Vice President Dick Cheney by Tony Snow:

Q: I want to be clear because I’ve heard you say this, and I’ve heard the President say it, but I want you to say it for my listeners, which is that the White House has never argued that Saddam was directly involved in September 11th, correct?

THE VICE PRESIDENT: That’s correct. We had one report early on from another intelligence service that suggested that the lead hijacker, Mohamed Atta, had met with Iraqi intelligence officials in Prague, Czechoslovakia. And that reporting waxed and waned where the degree of confidence in it, and so forth, has been pretty well knocked down now at this stage, that that meeting ever took place. So we’ve never made the case, or argued the case that somehow Osama bin Laden [sic] was directly involved in 9/11. That evidence has never been forthcoming. But there — that’s a separate proposition from the question of whether or not there was some kind of a relationship between the Iraqi government, Iraqi intelligence services and the al Qaeda organization.


10 Responses to “Shurely Shome Mishtake?”

  1. While that’s a hell of a Freudian slip, it is addressed later on in the interview.

    Q Okay. A couple of things, I think a couple of minutes ago — I want to make sure — you said Osama bin Laden wasn’t involved in 9/11 planning. You meant Saddam Hussein, correct? That Saddam Hussein was not involved in September 11th?

    THE VICE PRESIDENT: Correct. Yes, sir.

    Q Okay.

    THE PRESIDENT CHENEY: Thanks for straightening that out. I didn’t realize I’d done that. (Laughter.)

    Q Yes. Well, otherwise we’d have a whole lot more stories to deal with.

    THE VICE PRESIDENT: Oh, yes. All right. Well, I appreciate it.

  2. AGAIN? This is the Nth time a white house official has said Osama when they meant Saddam, or vice-versa. I think they do it on purpose. It’s brilliant.

  3. The only time we get any truth from these filthy fucks is when they slip up.

    Remember when Rumsfeld accidentally referred to the object striking the Pentagon as a “missile” instead of a plane?

    It’s not on purpose, at least not always. Even the swirling mass of snakes and bats that is Dick Cheneys brain can’t keep all the lies and BS straight all the time.

  4. The report must have been fairly early as Czechoslovakia doesn’t exist since 1993.

  5. lummox:”The report must have been fairly early as Czechoslovakia doesn’t exist since 1993. ”
    Only in the hearts of nostalgics.

    And even if Cheney “misspoke”, he’s lying his ass off in the entire interview. It’s all just so much Bovine Residue.

  6. “So we’ve never made the case, or argued the case that somehow [Saddam Hussein] was directly involved in 9/11″

    “But there — that’s a separate proposition from the question of whether or not there was some kind of a relationship between the Iraqi government, Iraqi intelligence services and the al Qaeda organization.”

    Anyone else not get how that’s a separate question, at all?

    God damn.

  7. let me just check the date really fast. 1984?

  8. Heh. Oceania? Always at war with? That’s us!

    Or, rather, them.

    Or something.

  9. The audio is creeeeepy.

    Here’s an hour plus vid on the 911 conspiracy. Also creepy: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2023320890224991194

  10. […] From Found   […]