That is an idiotic retort. More of a factual statement than anything else. You have half the story,and are content with that.
More on the reality of Saddam's sponsorship of terror and Al Quaeda:
Why don't you write of Bush-1's sponsorship of terror and bin Laden,Al Quaeda,etc? Hell,they pre-date those of Saddam.
"You have half the story,and are content with that."
You are content with being wrong and lashing out when challenged. You bring up a lie to 'retort' the truth. Pathetic.
Now you claim Bush-1 sponsored BinLaden, oh puhleeze,
YOU ARE A PATHETIC APOLOGIST FOR SADDAM AND ANTI_BUSH WEENIE.
YOu have yet to refute the fact of Saddam's sponsorship of terror:
http://www.washingtondispatch.com/cgi-bin/artman/exec/view.cgi/1/32/printer