A lie by any other name

As I was driving home from work, I heard White House Press Secretary Tony Snow state something to the effect of as far back as 2002 President Bush had asserted there was no connection between Saddam Hussein and the 9/11 attacks, and that any assertions the President or his administration had made such claims were "lies".

That must be news to the majority of people who believed there was a link as late as six months after the Iraq war started. I can't imagine how all those people mistakenly ended up with the wrong impression.

Oh yeah ... it might have been statements like these:

Vice President Dick Cheney: "[Iraq is] the geographic base of the terrorists who have had us under assault for many years, but most especially on 9/11."

President Bush (as part of the now infamous "Mission Accomplished" speech, Apr. 2003): "The battle of Iraq is one victory in the war on terror which began on September the 11th, 2001 - and still goes on ... the liberation of Iraq ... removed an ally of al Qaeda."

Cheney again (Sept. 14, 2003):

"With respect to 9/11, of course, we've had the story that's been public out there. The Czechs alleged that Mohammed Atta, the lead attacker, met in Prague with a senior Iraqi intelligence official five months before the attack, but we've never been able to develop any more of that yet in terms of confirming it or discrediting it. We just don't know. "

At the time he made the above statement, Cheney was well aware both the CIA and FBI had determined the alleged meeting "probably did not take place", that Czech government officials were doubtful about it, and America records showed Atta being in Florida at the time of the supposed meeting.

Bush again (Sept. 25, 2002): "You cant distinguish between al Qaeda and Saddam when you talk about the war on terror.”

And so on ...

Now, in the narrowest sense of the term, I believe Snow is at least partly correct - I am not aware of any administration quote explicitly claiming Saddam Hussein had a direct hand in the 9/11 attacks. However, the earliest record I can find of President Bush explicitly stating this dates to Sept. 2003, six months after the invasion. It's possible there is a similar statement dating to 2002, but it's well-hidden.

However, it's certainly possible to lie by implication, and it seems beyond any reasonable question the administration, including the President, regularly, knowingly, willfully lied in this manner.

A lie by any other name is still as ... well ... not sweet.