AS I boarded the local train to Philadelphia a few weeks ago, a headline of The New York Times, being read by a man across from me, grabbed my attention. "Panel Finds No Qaeda-Iraq Tie," it blared in its smug boldness. Intrigued, I opened my copy of Metro, which featured a similarly defiant headline. I read the article, only to find that, actually, the 9/11 panel didn't report that at all. "No Qaeda-Iraq Tie" was, in fact, a pretty blatant lie. Aha. I half-expected to find an "LM" branded into my seat. The Liberal Media strikes again.
What the 9/11 Commission reported was that they had found no "collaborative evidence" between Saddam Hussein and the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks. This really comes as no surprise, as no one, least of all the Bush administration, ever claimed that Saddam Hussein was behind the attacks. What the Bush administration has actually been saying for the past year is that there have been "contacts between Saddam's regime in Iraq and al-Qaeda."
If one reads the articles below these grossly misleading headlines, one finds that the 9/11 panel has, indeed, confirmed this. Staff Statement 15 of the report reads, "With Al-Qaeda as its foundation, Bin Ladin sought to build a broader Islamic army that also included terrorist groups from Egypt, Libya, Algeria, Saudi Arabia and Oman, Tunisia, Jordan, Iraq, Lebanon, Morocco, Somalia, and Eritrea. Not all groups from these states agreed to join, but at least one from each did." Hmm