Dude, even Fox News used biased terms like that just Monday evening. I've acknowledged too many times that the commission and the CIA have said they didn't find proof of collaboration with Iraq in 9/11. But when you combine an "absence of evidence," with a known widespread destruction of evidence, it is doubly true that "absence of evidence is not evidence of absence."
Then throw in, of course, what you know as well as I: That the CIA has provided lots of information about links between Iraq and Al Qaeda. A member of Iraqi intelligence attended the so-called "911 summit" in Spain, a week before the attacks. We've been given the evidence of travel for meetings between Iraq and Al Qaeda, many even considered "believable" by writers on YOUR side apparently, going back to '92. In '93 the indictments in the first WTC bombing included information concerning ties to Iraq. Iraq harbored for near a decade a fellow behind the first WTC attack. Clinton attacked a so-called milk plant, but as he would hope, we found VX nerve gas in the soil there after the bombing. Funny, the "milk plant" manager had been phoning the head of Iraqi chemical weapons development during those times. Ahhh, well....but just because a president is aware of the above information, and more, I guess he's not allowed to feel Iraq is an ally of Al Qaeda. No matter that he's not alone in feeling that way, no matter that Al Qaeda fights in Iraq today, yes, surely Bush is a liar! LOL...reasonably? NOT!
Dude, get off the bus, it's heading for a smash-up with reality.
Dan B. |
