There does seem to be a huge investment on the part of some people in keeping 9/11 and Iraq separate? Why? So what if there was a link? Is this something the American public is not supposed to know?
There's some information about the motivations of the government participants before and after 9/11 that's missing here. I'd sure like to know.
"There does seem to be a huge investment on the part of some people in keeping 9/11 and Iraq separate? Why? So what if there was a link? Is this something the American public is not supposed to know?"
From the beginning - when we were struggling with getting the UN onboard - the dems have said that Bush had no reason to go into Iraq .. because Iraq had no connection to 9/11.
Since the dems made these statements from the beginning .. I suspect they knew about Able Danger at that time, and just did what they always do when they don't like the truth .. THEY LIED. This lie about "no connection between Iraq and 9/11" was just to keep Bush from going to war with Iraq.
France, Germany and Russia were totally against going into Iraq for their own monetary reasons .. and since the liberals love those leaders - more than their own country - they were willing to try to sabotage our getting approval from the UN .. hoping this would stop us from going to war with Iraq.
Bush defied them and went to war anyway .. and thus began the constant drumbeat of negative stuff about Iraq .. and it continues today. The democrats need to pay a very hefty price for this concocted "no connection" garbage.
And now that a chemical manufacturing facility has been found in Iraq - with chemicals present - the dems need to pay a very hefty price for their constant "no WMD", besides the insinuation that we only went to Iraq for that reason .. which is false.