Well, one follows from the other. The old argument from 2003, IF he has connections to Al Qaeda, THEN we had to invade. Then the neo-cons move information around in a big shell game so they can hope to make the impression that they didn't screw up totally with a bunch of lies they told to themselves. Yeah, the lies are proven a long time ago, too. It's just Bush believed them, like you and Ron.

I mean the article is a joke:

"This created both the appearance of and, in some way, a 'de facto' link between the organizations."

So Saddam had "the appearance of and, in some way, a 'de facto' link." The appearance in some way? A de facto link, like, say, not an actual one? Sounds solid!

"At times, these organizations would work together in pursuit of shared goals but still maintain their autonomy and independence because of innate caution and mutual distrust."

So, if they worked together, it was only by accident and "defacto" and they really didn't like each other. Sounds like bullshit to me. IN other words NO LINK. And all this from the original, formerly high-riding neo-con bullshit machine, The Weekly Standard. They sure proved reliable. It was the sort of lying that was going around the White House in 2003: if it fits the argument in any way, it is good, if it contradicts, the argument it is bad. It is still lying if you are lying to yourself.

Bush's war has killed a thousand more Americans than Osama. And for this?

"Debating" bullshit gives the impression to the bullshitter that his bullshit may have some merit. That's why I never bother with FreeinTX.

Yes, we do know. HE WAS NO THREAT. Period.

You PERCIEVE that there "wasn't a ton of debate" because you were watching the MSM, you know those screeching liberals. They drowned out all debate with propaganda issued directly by the White House. Case in Point: Judith Miller's articles for the NYT in which she repeated near verbatim the claims of WMD DIRECTLY, as we know now, from the office of Dick Cheney. To anyone who looked at the available information AT THE TIME, in 2003, it was absolutely clear that the war was sheer lunacy. How do I know this? Because there is not a single thing that has happened since, that I and anyone else who was paying attention to the facts at the time did not see coming from the very beginning. The insurgency, the chaos, the fact that there were no WMD? It was a no-brainer. Anyone who lived on a foreign shore knew it and thought Americans had gone insane because it was obvious to every one else but us, because of our supposedly liberal media would have no debate.

So, yes, if you watched the MSM, you thought it was pretty certain. Some folks let their country go to ruin waving flags all the way, while people like me fought it at every step and were called anti-american. Who was the real patriot? ME. Which is what Obama is talking about with the lapel pin. Wearing a flag gives people the impression that that's all they have to do. Watch TV and wear a pin. Democracy and caring about your country is work, not just a bumpersticker.

I didn't need a billion times more knowledge. I needed what was readily available to anyone who was looking. You think I would be against military action in almost every circumstance because of your own need to fit "liberals" into a cliche. Virtually everyone I know who was for the war in Afghanistan was against the war in Iraq. I was for the war in Bosnia. In retrospect the Gulf war was a mistake and at the time I knew it was totally avoidable. But I supported it when we were in the fight.

Still waiting for you to print the truth of anything. It's 2008, and the Standard and you are a joke.

Yeah, yeah, the old "The UN said it" lie. I played this shell game and won it a million times in 2003. We know Congress voted on the basis of fixed intel from the White House. We know the "the UN said it" lie is based on selected information, which when, if were to engage in this dead debate, you would switch around in a merry-go-around as I knocked down every point. Everyone has moved on.

Get over it.

"Yeah, yeah,"   That pesky truth thing again. The truth on this subject is five years old now and should sound old.

"We know Congress voted on the basis of fixed intel from the White House"  They did?

"I knocked down every point"  Like Bush witholding intelligence from Congress? Knock downs like that?

" Everyone has moved on."  Except for those of us pointing out the deliberate lies being and exposing those all too willing to believe.

Hilary Clinton also said something about gunfire in Bosnia.

And, no, they were privy to the intelligence the White House packaged for them thru the Office of Special Plans, which was formed specifically to keep any dissenting voices out of the intel reports.

*yawn*