But Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11 ... absolutely nothing.

I don't think the administration has ever come out and said there was a direct link between the two.

After 9/11 the spectrum changed...we got hit...we weren't prepared...and President Bush felt that we need not sit back and have this happen again...therefore, a new scheme developed, one of proactiveness and one that went to Afghanistan and eliminated a safe haven, then onto Iraq to topple a rogue dictator with past relations with terrorists and a past history of WMD, hence the thing called War on Terror.

I have a question that hasn't been addressed, as far as I know. I've heard several quotes on tv and even on BGP that Wallace ambushed Clinton with his questions. Just exactly what constituted the ambush?

I don't think the administration has ever come out and said there was a direct link between the two.

Not directly, but they've implied it on occasion. I remember Cheney doing so on "Meet the Press" five days after 9/11, repeating the assertion that Mohammed Atta (one of the 19 hijackers) had met with representatives of Iraqi intelligence in Prague ... meetings that have, to the best of my knowledge, never been confirmed.

 

And while the Bush administration hasn't directly linked the two, some on the right have taken great pains to try and do so.

After 9/11 the spectrum changed...we got hit...we weren't prepared...and President Bush felt that we need not sit back and have this happen again...therefore, a new scheme developed, one of proactiveness and one that went to Afghanistan and eliminated a safe haven, then onto Iraq to topple a rogue dictator with past relations with terrorists and a past history of WMD, hence the thing called War on Terror.

I understand that and don't disagree with it. I just don't see that Iraq was a logical or wise continuation of the War on Terror.

You made the comment about "pulling the trigger" and that is all I was referring to.

I prefer not to have a trigger-happy president. I suspect most of the American people would agree.

Not directly, but they've implied it on occasion. I remember Cheney doing so on "Meet the Press" five days after 9/11, repeating the assertion that Mohammed Atta (one of the 19 hijackers) had met with representatives of Iraqi intelligence in Prague ... meetings that have, to the best of my knowledge, never been confirmed.

 

And while the Bush administration hasn't directly linked the two, some on the right have taken great pains to try and do so.

I understand that and don't disagree with it. I just don't see that Iraq was a logical or wise continuation of the War on Terror.

Perhaps the link of Atta with Iraqi intelligence is one of the links that ties Iraq to terror.

I see 9/11 and Iraq as seperate entities. I think 9/11 and the Afghan invasion as one which is in reaction to 9/11, and then the Iraq war as the next phase which began our proactive stance.

I think the administration could have done a better job of laying this out to the American people. I think this is where many people confuse the two. Just my opinion.

Perhaps the link of Atta with Iraqi intelligence is one of the links that ties Iraq to terror.

I see 9/11 and Iraq as seperate entities. I think 9/11 and the Afghan invasion as one which is in reaction to 9/11, and then the Iraq war as the next phase which began our proactive stance.

I think the administration could have done a better job of laying this out to the American people. I think this is where many people confuse the two. Just my opinion.

 

There is no link between Atta and Iraq. Cheney acknowledged this a couple of weeks ago on Meet The Press when acknowledge his past statements on Meet The Press when played back for him and he would not confirm or deny.

That's as close as you will ever get to a retraction from the Bush Admin.

Did Wallace ask Clinton why there was no National Intelligent Estimates his final 5 years in office? If he was trying to get Bin Laden, as he said he was, don't you think he would have wanted to have some intelligence on it?

 

Did Wallace ask him why he granted clemency to 16 terrorists who had carried out bomings in America?