I posted that link for a purpose, yes, to show you that "there are no WMDs" is not exactly a slam-dunk mathematically true statement (much as you might like it to be one). Did you not read it?
Your original (unsolicited) post to me
Well there I go again, committing the sin of making unsolicited posts to people in a FREAKING DISCUSSION FORUM. Shame on me!
Perhaps if you hadn't conveniently ignored the previous post I made to you earlier in this thread....
was in regards to why I raised the 9/11 and Saddam specter, which was in context to certain people.
Fair enough, you can discuss all you like 9/11 and Saddam, with Peach.
I remind you though that my "original" (i.e. most recent, #323, not #235) post to you was about lots of other stuff besides just 9/11-Saddam links or non-links. In fact there's only one little sentence fragment about the 9/11-Saddam link issue in particular.
The CIA reported the links between Saddam's government and Ansar al-Islam as a couple of meetings where Saddam's government determines links with A a-I would be suicidal for him. Where did you get this information that Saddam was "supporting" Ansar a-I? I don't get the impression you read that much on the subject.
Here for example. A link I posted way farther up in this thread already.
Where's your link to the CIA finding?
Funny how between the two of us only one has posted links backing up his position on this particular issue, and yet he's the same one who gets accused of having no links and not reading much....
RE: LOL 'Global Democratic Revolution' was Bush's term.
Heh you got me there. I stand corrected. I do readily admit that I don't exactly voraciously read the speeches and writings of (yawn) George W. Bush. ;-)
So Bush indeed has used the phrase "global democratic revolution". Reading further, what he seems to mean by that is, for dictatorships around the Middle East and elsewhere to crumble.
Sounds good to me. Your problem with it, is what?
How are we suppose to take y'all seriously?
Don't "take me seriously" if you don't want to. No skin off my nose. But that doesn't absolve you of need to rebut my points.
And your lack of understanding basic intellectual history is certainly a danger to us all.
!? Wait, who's the one we're not supposed to "take seriously" again? ;-)
Please kindly, if you will, explain in more detail why you think I have a "lack of understanding basic intellectual history", and how my supposed lack, translates into being a "danger to us all". I can't wait to hear this!
I don't suspect any problems between the two camps, and I'll keep paying my extortion fees to the DC tax regime every April 15, but come for my first born to fight in your endless debt financed wars and we will have problems.
------------------------------ This first article speaks to the ambiguity I mentioned in regards to exactly what kind of relationship this White House believes there is a connection between AQ and Saddam's government, but also note that the Adminstration has taken the leap of equating A a-I with AQ, using the terms interchangeably.
Bush Asserts That Al Qaeda Has Links to Iraq's Hussein President Cites Potential Cooperation as Concern The administration had begun deemphasizing claims of links between Hussein and global terrorism. Senior intelligence officials told The Washington Post this month that the CIA had not found convincing proof, despite efforts that included surveillance photos and communications intercepts.
U.S. officials have continued to hint at connections, however. Evidence linking Hussein to the Sept. 11 attacks could help erode reservations on Capitol Hill and among world powers about the justification for a U.S.-led invasion of Iraq.
A few hours before Bush's remarks, Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld was asked by reporters traveling with him in Warsaw if there are linkages between al Qaeda and Iraq. "I have no desire to go beyond saying the answer is yes," he replied. Rumsfeld had just appeared before NATO defense ministers with CIA Deputy Director John McLaughlin to give an intelligence briefing on the Iraqi threat. Rumsfeld said McLaughlin told them about linkages between Hussein and al Qaeda.
White House press secretary Ari Fleischer tried to play down the specificity of Bush's charge, saying the president was talking about what he feared could occur. Fleischer repeated the administration position that it would be a mistake to wait for a smoking gun. "Clearly, al Qaeda is operating inside Iraq," he said. "In the shadowy world of terrorism, sometimes there is no precise way to have definitive information until it is too late."
Iraq-al Qaeda links weak, say former Bush officials
Bush overstated Iraq links to al-Qaeda, former intelligence officials say Experts Doubt Iraq, al-Qaeda terror link
"While there are contacts, have been contacts, there is no co-operation. There is no substantial, noteworthy relationship," said Daniel Benjamin, former terrorism adviser to the U.S. National Security Council.
Experts scorn Saddam link to al-Qaeda
AN EXPERT on international terrorism yesterday backed the findings of a British intelligence report which concluded that there was no evidence to show Iraq was supporting al-Qaeda.
“The chairman of the monitoring group appointed by the United Nations Security Council to track Al Qaeda told reporters that his team had found no evidence linking Al Qaeda to Saddam Hussein.” [NY Times, 6/27/03]
"U.S. allies have found no links between Iraq and Al Qaeda.'We have found no evidence of links between Iraq and Al Qaeda,' said Europe's top investigator. 'If there were such links, we would have found them. But we have found no serious connections whatsoever.’" [LA Times, 11/4/02]