Tony Tells Tale of Ties to Terrorists Today

By Kanrei Last week, a bi-partisan Senate Intelligence Report was released that stated there was no relationship between Saddam Hussein and either Al-Qaida or terrorist Zarqawi. They said quite clearly "Postwar findings indicate that Saddam Hussein was distrustful of al-Qaeda and viewed Islamic extremists as a threat to his regime, refusing all requests from al-Qaeda to provide material or operational support." In relation to Zarqawi it says "Saddam Hussein attempted, unsuccessfully, to locate and capture al-Zarqawi and…the regime did not have a relationship with, harbor, or turn a blind eye toward Zarqawi." That seems very clear to me. Almost cut and dry even in fact. It does not appear that way to Condi Rice as I reported on Sunday. It does not appear that way to Cheney in a story I decided to skip in honor of 9/11. According to Tony “Tar Baby” Snow it does not appear to the President that way…or maybe it does. Things are rarely clear with Tony Snow. You can ask the man a question and get every possible answer there is. A great example of this gift was reported by Editor and Publisherand took place at the press briefing on September 12, 2006. Tony Snow was asked if the President still believed there was a connection between Saddam and Zarqawi. Here is Tony’s answer. Follow the bouncing ball. “The president has never said that there was a direct operational relationship between the two. And this is important. Zarqawi was in Iraq…and there was a relationship in this sense: Zarqawi was in Iraq. Al Qaida members were in Iraq. They were operating, and in some cases operating freely. From Iraq, Zarqawi, for instance, directed the assassination of an American diplomat in Amman, Jordan. But did they have, you know, a corner office at the Mukhabarat? No. You know, were they getting a line item in Saddam’s budget? No. There was no direct operational relationship, but there was a relationship. They were in the country. And I think you understand that the Iraqis knew they were there. That’s the relationship.” Ok, so the President does believe they did not have a working relationship, but does believe they had a passive aggressive type of mutual ignoring relationship of nothing? Did I get that about right? The important questions are simple and Tony did answer them, and honestly in fact. It is in there if you look at it. You must break it apart. It is like the Bible code. You must know the answer before you ask the question to see the answer. Um, never mind that analogy. The first question Tony Snow answers is: Was there a working relationship between AQ and Saddam? The answer is no. “The president has never said that there was a direct operational relationship between the two” The second question Tony Snow answers is: Was Saddam funding Zarqawi? The answer is no. “You know, were they getting a line item in Saddam’s budget? No. There was no direct operational relationship” No funding and no working ties according to Tony Snow’s own words. The relationship he describes is one of the terrorists operating within Iraq with Saddam’s knowledge. According to the Senate report he was trying to capture the terrorists. “Saddam Hussein attempted, unsuccessfully, to locate and capture al-Zarqawi.” This would mean of course he knows they are in his country if he is trying to capture them. Now this is a fun statement: “The president has never said that there was a direct operational relationship between the two”. When Cheney speaks or Rice speaks, are they speaking for Bush? When Bush speaks, is he speaking for Bush? Or are all of them supposed to be speaking for us and telling the truth? So when Cheney says Saddam and Zarqawi were working together like he did on 1/22/2004 when he said "I continue to believe. I think there's overwhelming evidence that there was a connection between al-Qaeda and the Iraqi government” he must have been speaking for Bush as well, right? When Cheney said “And you can look at Zarkawi, (Abu Mussab) al-Zarkawi . . . Who was an al-Qaida associate, who was wounded in Afghanistan, took refuge in Baghdad, working out of Baghdad, worked with the Ansar al Islam group up in northeastern Iraq, that produced a so-called poison factory, a group that we hit when we went into Iraq. . . . We'll find ample evidence confirming the link, that is the connection if you will between al Qaida and the Iraqi intelligence services. They have worked together on a number of occasions" on 1/9/2004 was he not giving an example of an express working relationship between AQ and Saddam? Tony Snow goes to say “the president has never made the statement that there was an operational relationship, and that’s the important thing, because I think there’s a tendency to say, Ah-ha. He said that they were in cahoots and they were planning and doing stuff.” Being in cahoots and planning stuff and doing stuff is called an “operational relationship”. Say it with me Tony. “OP-ER-A-SHUN-AL Re-LAY-SHUN-SHIP”. Tony Snow is a great White House press guy and I mean that honestly. He tries so hard to lie and somehow the truth slips out every time. I mean we learned today that Saddam had no relationship with AQ, gave them no funding, and that Bush has lied about that. Thank you Tony and keep up the good work.