SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: tekboy who wrote (28240)5/4/2002 12:15:18 PM
From: carranza2  Read Replies (1) of 281500
 
if there were some justice in these things, the people who blathered on and on about Iraq's involvement in the 9/11 attacks (Woolsey, Mylroie, Safire, practically every neocon on the planet) would pay a significant price in terms of credibility now that their pet theory has been debunked

Though I tend to agree with you on this point, I wouldn't necessarily close the door on the idea. There may be things that are not in the public domain. Nevertheless, the pundits to which you refer likely had an agenda--get rid of Saddam at any cost, for any reason--and were willing to use factually erroneous arguments to support it.

The fact that factually inaccurate arguments may have been used does not necessarily mean Saddam should stay. His possible, even probable, lack of involvement in 9/11 is only part of the picture.

C2@isthatwhyPollackisnotonyourlist_obvious.com
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2026 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News