The New York Times strikes back ...

------------------------------------------------------------------

Show Us the Proof

Published: June 19, 2004

When the commission studying the 9/11 terrorist attacks refuted the Bush
administration's claims of a connection between Saddam Hussein and Osama
bin Laden, we suggested that President Bush apologize for using these
claims to help win Americans' support for the invasion of Iraq. We did not
really expect that to happen. But we were surprised by the depth and
ferocity of the administration's capacity for denial. President Bush and
Vice President ***** Cheney have not only brushed aside the panel's

and questioned its expertise, but they are also trying to rewrite history.

Mr. Bush said the 9/11 panel had actually confirmed his contention that
there were "ties" between Iraq and Al Qaeda. He said his administration

never connected Saddam Hussein to 9/11. Both statements are wrong.

Before the war, Mr. Bush spoke of far more than vague "ties" between Iraq
and Al Qaeda. He said Iraq had provided Al Qaeda with weapons training,
bomb-making expertise and a base in Iraq. On Feb. 8, 2003, Mr. Bush said
that "an Al Qaeda operative was sent to Iraq several times in the late
1990's for help in acquiring poisons and gases." The 9/11 panel's report,
as well as news articles, indicate that these things never happened.

Mr. Cheney said yesterday that the "evidence is overwhelming" of an
Iraq-Qaeda axis and that there had been a "whole series of high-level
contacts" between them. The 9/11 panel said a senior Iraqi intelligence
officer made three visits to Sudan in the early 1990's, meeting with Osama
bin Laden once in 1994. It said Osama bin Laden had asked for "space to
establish training camps, as well as assistance in procuring weapons, but
Iraq apparently never responded." The panel cited reports of further
contacts after Osama bin Laden returned to Afghanistan in 1996, but said
there was no working relationship. As far as the public record is
concerned, then, Mr. Cheney's "longstanding ties" amount to one confirmed
meeting, after which the Iraq government did not help Al Qaeda. By those
standards, the United States has longstanding ties to North Korea.

Mr. Bush has also used a terrorist named Abu Musab al-Zarqawi as evidence
of a link between Iraq and Al Qaeda. Mr. Bush used to refer to Mr. Zarqawi
as a "senior Al Qaeda terrorist planner" who was in Baghdad working with
the Iraqi government. But the director of central intelligence, George
Tenet, told the Senate earlier this year that Mr. Zarqawi did not work

the Hussein regime, nor under the direction of Al Qaeda.

When it comes to 9/11, someone in the Bush administration has indeed drawn
the connection to Iraq: the vice president. Mr. Cheney has repeatedly
referred to reports that Mohamed Atta met in Prague in April 2001 with an
Iraqi intelligence agent. He told Tim Russert of NBC on Dec. 9, 2001, that
this report has "been pretty well confirmed." If so, no one seems to have
informed the C.I.A., the Czech government or the 9/11 commission, which
said it did not appear to be true. Yet Mr. Cheney cited it, again, on
Thursday night on CNBC.

Mr. Cheney said he had lots of documents to prove his claims. We have

that before, but Mr. Cheney always seems too pressed for time or too
concerned about secrets to share them. Last September, Mr. Cheney's
adviser, Mary Matalin, explained to The Washington Post that Mr. Cheney

access to lots of secret stuff. She said he had to "tiptoe through the

mines of what's sayable and not sayable" to the public, but that "his job
is to connect the dots."

The message, if we hear it properly, is that when it comes to this

issue, the vice president is not prepared to offer any evidence beyond the
flimsy-to-nonexistent arguments he has used in the past, but he wants us

trust him when he says there's more behind the screen. So far, when it
comes to Iraq, blind faith in this administration has been a losing
strategy.