Bush: U.S. Looking Into Whether Iran Involved in 9/11

[conjur]

http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=topNews&storyID=5708694

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President Bush said on Monday the United States was trying to determine whether Iran was involved in the Sept. 11 plot and accused the government of harboring al Qaeda leaders.

"We want to know all of the facts," Bush said when asked about reports that at least eight of the 19 hijackers passed through Iran before attacking the United States.

The commission investigating the attacks will detail links between al Qaeda and Iran in its final report this week, raising new questions about why Bush turned his focus to Iraq after Sept. 11, 2001. The commission has found more al Qaeda contacts with Iran than with Iraq, officials said.

Bush, at a meeting with Chilean President Ricardo Lagos, quoted acting CIA director John McLaughlin as saying "there was no direct connect between Iran and the attacks of Sept. 11."

The U.S. intelligence community has been harshly criticized for overstating the Iraqi threat before the war, leading to calls for its overhaul and for the creation of an intelligence czar. White House spokesman Scott McClellan said Bush was willing to consider this step, although McLaughlin Sunday questioned whether it was necessary.

Bush said the United States will continue to look into whether Iran was involved. "As to direct connections with Sept. 11, we're digging into the facts to determine if there was one."

Iran, branded like Iraq by Bush as part of an "axis of evil" that threatens to fuel global terrorism, was "harboring al Qaeda leadership there," the president said. He urged Tehran to have them "turned over to their respective countries" of origin.

"If the Iranians would like to have better relations with the United States there are some things they must do," including halting the country's alleged nuclear weapons program and support for terrorism, Bush said.

IRANIAN BORDER CROSSING

The New York Times reported on Sunday that the Iranian government had ordered its border guards not to stamp the passports of Saudi al Qaeda members moving through Iran after training in Afghanistan.

An Iranian stamp could have made the al Qaeda members subject to additional scrutiny upon entering the United States, U.S. officials said. Continued ...

Bush wants to know all of the facts?? What complete and utter bullsh*t!!

If he wanted to know all of the facts he'd have waiting to invade Iraq until inspections had continued and the intelligence agencies reviewed all of their data for accuracy and validity.

If the 9/11 Commission can determine that Iran was part of the 9/11 attacks, then why couldn't this administration?

 

[RabidMongoose]

Iran, you're next! :disgust:

 

[NightCrawler]

The Mulahs are nervous

 

[burnedout]

Some think the Iraq invasion represents a small piece of a much larger picture.

<disclaimer>Not necessarily my opinion</disclaimer>

 

[sMiLeYz]

Look anywhere but Saudi Arabia!

 

[InlineFive]

Originally posted by: RabidMongoose
Iran, you're next! :disgust:

Sadly if Bush is reelected this is probably true.

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: burnedout
Some think the Iraq invasion represents a small piece of a much larger picture.

<disclaimer>Not necessarily my opinion</disclaimer>

Slow site on those maps.

Will have to read that article later tonight.

 

[Todd33]

So many wars, not enough time, money or troops. Poor GeeDub.

Iran has oil, all we need is some crappy intel to give us justification. Maybe we need another attack like 9/11 too.

 

[eigen]

Originally posted by: sMiLeYz
Look anywhere but Saudi Arabia!

A more poignant phrase was never uttered.

 

[sandorski]

Originally posted by: conjur
http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=topNews&amp;storyID=5708694

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President Bush said on Monday the United States was trying to determine whether Iran was involved in the Sept. 11 plot and accused the government of harboring al Qaeda leaders.

"We want to know all of the facts," Bush said when asked about reports that at least eight of the 19 hijackers passed through Iran before attacking the United States.

The commission investigating the attacks will detail links between al Qaeda and Iran in its final report this week, raising new questions about why Bush turned his focus to Iraq after Sept. 11, 2001. The commission has found more al Qaeda contacts with Iran than with Iraq, officials said.

Bush, at a meeting with Chilean President Ricardo Lagos, quoted acting CIA director John McLaughlin as saying "there was no direct connect between Iran and the attacks of Sept. 11."

The U.S. intelligence community has been harshly criticized for overstating the Iraqi threat before the war, leading to calls for its overhaul and for the creation of an intelligence czar. White House spokesman Scott McClellan said Bush was willing to consider this step, although McLaughlin Sunday questioned whether it was necessary.

Bush said the United States will continue to look into whether Iran was involved. "As to direct connections with Sept. 11, we're digging into the facts to determine if there was one."

Iran, branded like Iraq by Bush as part of an "axis of evil" that threatens to fuel global terrorism, was "harboring al Qaeda leadership there," the president said. He urged Tehran to have them "turned over to their respective countries" of origin.

"If the Iranians would like to have better relations with the United States there are some things they must do," including halting the country's alleged nuclear weapons program and support for terrorism, Bush said.

IRANIAN BORDER CROSSING

The New York Times reported on Sunday that the Iranian government had ordered its border guards not to stamp the passports of Saudi al Qaeda members moving through Iran after training in Afghanistan.

An Iranian stamp could have made the al Qaeda members subject to additional scrutiny upon entering the United States, U.S. officials said. Continued ...

Bush wants to know all of the facts?? What complete and utter bullsh*t!!

If he wanted to know all of the facts he'd have waiting to invade Iraq until inspections had continued and the intelligence agencies reviewed all of their data for accuracy and validity.

If the 9/11 Commission can determine that Iran was part of the 9/11 attacks, then why couldn't this administration?

Yup, by Default the Bush Admin has lost any justification to Act on this. It is for:

1) Iran's involvement is rather passive, as far as the current Intel shows

2) Why should we accept another arguement for War by the Bush Admin? Their credibility is < nil

3) Should have paid attention to the Facts about Iraq when they were coming out

 

[alchemize]

Originally posted by: burnedout
Some think the Iraq invasion represents a small piece of a much larger picture.

<disclaimer>Not necessarily my opinion</disclaimer>

Good read though, for the neocons Good quotes:

The knee-jerk reaction of many Americans to September 11 is to say, ?Let?s get off our dependency on foreign oil, and then we won?t have to deal with those people.? The most naïve assumption underlying that dream is that reducing what little connectivity the Gap has with the Core will render it less dangerous to us over the long haul. Turning the Middle East into Central Africa will not build a better world for my kids. We cannot simply will those people away.

The Middle East has long been a neighborhood of bullies eager to pick on the weak. Israel is still around because it has become?sadly?one of the toughest bullies on the block. The only thing that will change that nasty environment and open the floodgates for change is if some external power steps in and plays Leviathan full-time.

So if the United States is in the process of ?transforming? its military to meet the threats of tomorrow, what should it end up looking like? In my mind, we fight fire with fire. If we live in a world increasingly populated by Super-Empowered Individuals, we field a military of Super-Empowered-Individuals.

I know most Americans do not want to hear this, but the real battlegrounds in the global war on terrorism are still over there. If gated communities and rent-a-cops were enough, September 11 never would have happened.

 

[NightCrawler]

Iran, Syria, North Korea....just do it !

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: NightCrawler
Iran, Syria, North Korea....just do it !

I suppose you'd rather just nuke them all. Kill every living creature and then setup some military bases?

 

[NightCrawler]

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: NightCrawler
Iran, Syria, North Korea....just do it !

I suppose you'd rather just nuke them all. Kill every living creature and then setup some military bases?

Have we perfected the neutron bomb ?

 

[CaptnKirk]

I - R - A - N
I - R - A - O
I - R - A - P
I - R - A - Q

Hell, Bush only missed by 3 letters.

 

[StageLeft]

It's more pitiful scapegoatism.

 

[Klixxer]

Maybe they have *gasp* WMD's, do you REALLY want the smoking gun to be a mushroom cloud? Go get them, the sooner the better.

:roll:

 

[Taggart]

INVADE IRAN NOW

Seriously, I'm all for this 'assertive' US foreign policy. Yes, the Bush administration and necons set a double standard when they attacked Iraq and not Iran, NK, etc etc. Now they can show it's not a double standard. Won't the world be a better place without these brutal dictatorships?

 

[sMiLeYz]

Theres not a dictatorship in Saudi Arabia?

 

[conjur]

And Chalabi was being accused of being a spy for Iran?

Why do I have the feeling this story has long legs and Chalabi will be a big part of it?

 

[PELarson]

In the words of secret agent Maxwell Smart "Missed it by that much."

Iraq... Iran what's one letter.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

So the question for you "anti this war"/"anti war because it's a Republican war"/"Anti-war for oil" people...

Would you support action against Iran if they did help in the attacks? Yes/no and please use concrete with any goalpost type responses...we wouldn't want them to creep

CkG

 

[DealMonkey]

Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
So the question for you "anti this war"/"anti war because it's a Republican war"/"Anti-war for oil" people...

Would you support action against Iran if they did help in the attacks? Yes/no and please use concrete with any goalpost type responses...we wouldn't want them to creep

CkG

I know this question wasn't directed at me, but I hardly think it will be possible to justify yet another war in the Middle East region. I mean, if nothing else, our administration, and clearly our intel community have some pretty serious credibility problems. It would be difficult if not impossible for most Americans to choke down yet another load of crap from this administration.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: DealMonkey

Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
So the question for you "anti this war"/"anti war because it's a Republican war"/"Anti-war for oil" people...

Would you support action against Iran if they did help in the attacks? Yes/no and please use concrete with any goalpost type responses...we wouldn't want them to creep

CkG

I know this question wasn't directed at me, but I hardly think it will be possible to justify yet another war in the Middle East region. I mean, if nothing else, our administration, and clearly our intel community have some pretty serious credibility problems. It would be difficult if not impossible for most Americans to choke down yet another load of crap from this administration.

Actually I had you in mind when typing out those descriptions. J/K

But that really wasn't what I was asking. I'm not asking if you think the public would support it - I'm asking if you would support it(assuming the link is made).

I don't think the public would support it either but that doesn't really matter at this point because it's all conjecture. I want to see who has the guts to cement the goalpost.

CkG

 

[DealMonkey]

I'd have to see the evidence first. Seriously.