Re: "Intelligence reports said there was no cooperation on 9-11 or any Saddam Al Qaeda alliance"
Biased media reports state it that way. But the reports you refer to simply do not. And, evidence of meetings between Iraq and Al Qaeda exist per the reports. Tideglider instructed you on this and I repeat, "absence of evidence is not evidence of absence." This is the same wisdom Tideglider shared with you.
Re: "CIA said nope...no cooperation"
No, it didn't. It said it had no evidence of it. It also makes clear as I recall, that what took place at said meetings is unknown to us.
Evidence of meetings in not proof that Iraq helped with 911. But as I said, given Iraq's known support for terrorism through Palestine, reasonable people may reasonably believe that meetings between avowed enemies as you may have often noted Saddam and Al Qaeda were, must MOST likely be about shared interests such as the shared hatred of the U.S., and support of very bad plans both parties would cheer if completed, indeed (and both must certainly have been happy about 9/11). I would not here too, as a worthy point to ponder, that Palestinian elements, like Al Qaeda, no doubt weren't happy with Saddams "secular" Iraq either.
Re: "So If Bush didn't lie, present evidence that Iraq and Al Qaida were allies. No evidence...means Bush lied."
No, if Bush believed as, for instance, I still do (which you can glean from the above), he by definition could not have lied. And for all the intelligence reports, he and I may well be correct about Saddam having a role and foreknowledge of 9/11.
Dan B. |
