Bertie the Bunyip wrote:

Frank Stutzman wrote in news:fbk548$2v43$1
:

Paul Tomblin wrote:

[much snippage citing some very credible press sources]

What do I win?

Got me.

But humor me and reconcile your above snipped cites with the
following exchange that happend at a white house press conferance
held January 31, 2003 with the president and Tony Blair:

Q: One question for both of you. Do you believe that there
is a link between Saddam Hussein, a direct link,
and the men who attached on September the 11th?

THE PRESIDENT: I can't make that claim.

THE PRIME MINISTER: That answers your question.

This after he was caught lying for the umpteumpth time.

OK, just show us the quote where he's "caught lying" about Iraq's
direct connection to the 9/11 attacks. So far, no one's been able to
show a single quote. I'm guessing you won't do any better (though you
seem to be VERY certain of your position - I'm not sure how big a
number "umpteum" is, but all you need is one quote - should be a piece
of cake, right?).

Is there anyone left that still thinks any part of this was a good idea?

We'll know in 20-40 years. If we lose a major city to state-sponsored
terrorism suddenly it's going to be a race to blame whoever is in
power for not doing MORE preemptive strikes to stop it.

Mark "I really, really hope I'm wrong" Hickey

Bertie