.
Hussein Link to 9/11 Lingers in Many Minds
"...The Post poll, conducted Aug. 7-11, found that 62 percent of
Democrats, 80 percent of Republicans and 67 percent of independents
suspected a link between Hussein and 9/11. In addition, eight in 10
Americans said it was likely that Hussein had provided assistance to al
Qaeda, and a similar proportion suspected he had developed weapons of
mass destruction..."
By Dana Milbank and Claudia Deane
Washington Post Staff Writers
09/06/03: Nearing the second anniversary of the
Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, seven in 10 Americans continue to
believe that Iraq's Saddam Hussein had a role in the attacks, even
though the Bush administration and congressional investigators say they
have no evidence of this.
Sixty-nine percent of Americans said they thought it at least likely
that Hussein was involved in the attacks on the World Trade Center and
the Pentagon, according to the latest Washington Post poll. That
impression, which exists despite the fact that the hijackers were mostly
Saudi nationals acting for al Qaeda, is broadly shared by Democrats,
Republicans and independents.
The main reason for the endurance of the apparently groundless belief,
experts in public opinion say, is a deep and enduring distrust of
Hussein that makes him a likely suspect in anything related to Middle
East violence. "It's very easy to picture Saddam as a demon,"
said John Mueller, a political scientist at Ohio State University and an
expert on public opinion and war. "You get a general fuzz going
around: People know they don't like al Qaeda, they are horrified by
September 11th, they know this guy is a bad guy, and it's not hard to
put those things together."
Although that belief came without prompting from Washington,
(ed. note: this is completely wrong. As we all know so well, Bush et al
specifically inculcated this belief. This is pernicious propaganda at
its most obvious and dangerous. See below)
Democrats and some independent experts say Bush exploited the apparent
misconception by implying a link between Hussein and the Sept. 11, 2001,
attacks in the months before the war with Iraq. "The notion was
reinforced by these hints, the discussions that they had about possible
links with al Qaeda terrorists," said Andrew Kohut, a pollster who
leads the nonpartisan Pew Research Center for the People and the Press.
The poll's findings are significant because they help to explain why the
public continues to support operations in Iraq despite the setbacks and
bloodshed there. Americans have more tolerance for war when it is
provoked by an attack, particularly one by an all-purpose villain such
as Hussein. "That's why attitudes about the decision to go to war
are holding up," Kohut said.
Bush's opponents say he encouraged this misconception by linking al
Qaeda to Hussein in almost every speech on Iraq. Indeed, administration
officials began to hint about a Sept. 11-Hussein link soon after the
attacks. In late 2001, Vice President Cheney said it was "pretty
well confirmed" that attack mastermind Mohamed Atta met with a
senior Iraqi intelligence official.
Speaking on NBC's "Meet the Press," Cheney was referring to a
meeting that Czech officials said took place in Prague in April 2000.
That allegation was the most direct connection between Iraq and the
Sept. 11 attacks. But this summer's congressional report on the attacks
states, "The CIA has been unable to establish that [Atta] left the
United States or entered Europe in April under his true name or any
known alias."
Bush, in his speeches, did not say directly that Hussein was culpable in
the Sept. 11 attacks. But he frequently juxtaposed Iraq and al Qaeda in
ways that hinted at a link. In a March speech about Iraq's "weapons
of terror," Bush said: "If the world fails to confront the
threat posed by the Iraqi regime, refusing to use force, even as a last
resort, free nations would assume immense and unacceptable risks. The
attacks of September the 11th, 2001, showed what the enemies of America
did with four airplanes. We will not wait to see what terrorists or
terrorist states could do with weapons of mass destruction."
Then, in declaring the end of major combat in Iraq on May 1, Bush linked
Iraq and the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks: "The battle of Iraq is one
victory in a war on terror that began on September the 11, 2001 -- and
still goes on. That terrible morning, 19 evil men -- the shock troops of
a hateful ideology -- gave America and the civilized world a glimpse of
their ambitions."
Moments later, Bush added: "The liberation of Iraq is a crucial
advance in the campaign against terror. We've removed an ally of al
Qaeda, and cut off a source of terrorist funding. And this much is
certain: No terrorist network will gain weapons of mass destruction from
the Iraqi regime, because the regime is no more. In these 19 months that
changed the world, our actions have been focused and deliberate and
proportionate to the offense. We have not forgotten the victims of
September the 11th -- the last phone calls, the cold murder of children,
the searches in the rubble. With those attacks, the terrorists and their
supporters declared war on the United States. And war is what they
got."
A number of nongovernment officials close to the Bush administration
have made the link more directly. Richard N. Perle, who until recently
was chairman of the Pentagon's Defense Policy Board, long argued that
there was Iraqi involvement, calling the evidence
"overwhelming."
Some Democrats said that although Bush did not make the direct link to
the 2001 attacks, his implications helped to turn the public fury over
Sept. 11 into support for war against Iraq. "You couldn't
distinguish between al Qaeda and Saddam Hussein," said Democratic
tactician Donna Brazile. "Every member of the administration did
the drumbeat. My mother said if you repeat a lie long enough, it becomes
a gospel truth. This one became a gospel hit."
In a speech Aug. 7, former vice president Al Gore cited Hussein's
culpability in the attacks as one of the "false impressions"
given by a Bush administration making a "systematic effort to
manipulate facts in service to a totalistic ideology."
Bush's defenders say the administration's rhetoric was not responsible
for the public perception of Hussein's involvement in the Sept. 11,
2001, attacks. While Hussein and al Qaeda come from different strains of
Islam and Hussein's secularism is incompatible with al Qaeda
fundamentalism, Americans instinctively lump both foes together as
Middle Eastern enemies. "The intellectual argument is there is a
war in Iraq and a war on terrorism and you have to separate them, but
the public doesn't do that," said Matthew Dowd, a Bush campaign
strategist. "They see Middle Eastern terrorism, bad people in the
Middle East, all as one big problem."
A number of public-opinion experts agreed that the public automatically
blamed Iraq, just as they would have blamed Libya if a similar attack
had occurred in the 1980s. There is good evidence for this: On Sept. 13,
2001, a Time/CNN poll found that 78 percent suspected Hussein's
involvement -- even though the administration had not made a connection.
The belief remained consistent even as evidence to the contrary emerged.
"You can say Bush should be faulted for not correcting every single
misapprehension, but that's something different than saying they set out
deliberately to deceive," said Duke University political scientist
Peter D. Feaver. "Since the facts are all over the place, Americans
revert to a judgment: Hussein is a bad guy who would do stuff to us if
he could."
Key administration figures have largely abandoned any claim that Iraq
was involved in the 2001 attacks. "I'm not sure even now that I
would say Iraq had something to do with it," Deputy Defense
Secretary Paul D. Wolfowitz, a leading hawk on Iraq, said on the Laura
Ingraham radio show on Aug. 1.
A top White House official told The Washington Post on July 31: "I
don't believe that the evidence was there to suggest that Iraq had
played a direct role in 9/11." The official added: "Anything
is possible, but we hadn't ruled it in or ruled it out. There wasn't
evidence to substantiate that claim."
But the public continues to embrace the connection.
In follow-up interviews, poll respondents were generally unsure why they
believed Hussein was behind the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, often
describing it as an instinct that came from news reports and their
long-standing views of Hussein. For example, Peter Bankers, 59, a New
York film publicist, figures his belief that Hussein was behind the
attacks "has probably been fed to me in some PR way," but he
doesn't know how. "I think that the whole group of people, those
with anti-American feelings, they all kind of cooperated with each
other," he said.
Similarly, Kim Morrison, 32, a teacher from Plymouth, Ind., described
her belief in Hussein's guilt as a "gut feeling" shaped by
television. "From what we've heard from the media, it seems like
what they feel is that Saddam and the whole al Qaeda thing are
connected," she said.
Deborah Tannen, a Georgetown University professor of linguistics who has
studied Bush's rhetoric, said it is impossible to know but
"plausible" that Bush's words furthered such public
impressions. "Clearly, he's using language to imply a connection
between Saddam Hussein and September 11th," she said.
"There is a specific manipulation of language here to imply a
connection." Bush, she said, seems to imply that in Iraq "we
have gone to war with the terrorists who attacked us."
Tannen said even a gentle implication would be enough to reinforce
Americans' feelings about Hussein. "If we like the conclusion,
we're much less critical of the logic," she said.
The Post poll, conducted Aug. 7-11, found that 62 percent of Democrats,
80 percent of Republicans and 67 percent of independents suspected a
link between Hussein and 9/11. In addition, eight in 10 Americans said
it was likely that Hussein had provided assistance to al Qaeda, and a
similar proportion suspected he had developed weapons of mass
destruction.
© 2003 The Washington Post Company
Join our Daily News Headlines
Email Digest
|
|
Information
Clearing House
Daily News Headlines
Digest
|
HOME
COPYRIGHT NOTICE
|