Now three years later opponents insist that the Bushies said Iraq was cooperatively responsible for 9/11

It’s as if you say «if it is meat we should eat it, if not we shouldn’t», I reply «it’s soy bean curd». We eat it. and later, you contend that I must have said it was meat.

Something similar seems to have occured. opponents said «we should only invade Iraq if it was responsible for 9/11», the Bush Administartion said «No , it doesn’t have to be linked to 9/11, it is enough that it is a state that supports terrorists».

As for the rest of your post and the reasons you believe that Iraq was involved in 9/11, they are all valid and I have no intention of refuting them, only to say that based on my own analysis of the evidence, I do not find such a connection likely

As for the 70% –I suspect most see gobs of motive, a few pieces of evidence, and think it likely.

> > A woman in a hot air balloon realizes she is lost so > > she lowers her altitude > > and spots a man in a boat below. She shouts to him, > > «Excuse me, can you help > > me? I promised a friend I would meet him an hour > > ago, but I don’t know where > > I am.» > > > > The man consults his portable GPS and replies, > > «You’re in a hot air balloon > > approximately 30 feet above a ground elevation of > > 2346 feet above sea level. > > You are 31 degrees, minutes north latitude and > > 100 degrees, > > minutes west longitude.» > > > > She rolls her eyes and says, «You must be a > > Republican.» » I am,» replies > > the man. «How did you know?» > > > > «Well,» answers the balloonist, «everything you told > > me is technically > > correct, but I have no idea what to make of your > > information, and I’m still > > lost. Frankly, you’ve not been much help to me.» > > > > The man smiles and responds, «You must be a > > Democrat.» «I am,» replies the > > balloonist. «How did you know?» > > > > «Well,» says the man, «you don’t know where you are > > or where you’re going. > > You’ve risen to where you are due to a large > > quantity of hot air. You made a > > promise that you have no idea how to keep, and you > > expect ME to solve your > > problem. You’re in EXACTLY the same position you > > were in before we met, > > but. > > > > > > somehow, now it’s MY fault!

Actually, you are correct, this issue is very much like that since what is being debated is the impression the administration gave the American people, and not what exact words did the administration say (although for the record, the administration DID use the words imminent threat, just not the president himself).

Nevertheless, I appreciate your arguments and your ability to express them fairly and thoughtfully

As for the 70% figure, it is entirely possible that most or all of those people did their own independent investigations and decided, as you have, that the evidence suggests Iraqi culpability in the attacks. However, I do not believe that. I believe that many people believed in a connection because the administration gave them information that pointed to a connection, even without explicitly saying so. The media certainly made no attempt to question the poll, or to do anything that might challenge it, and it was not until after the war that Bush explicitly denied any evidence suggesting a link to the attacks. I do not claim to speak for anyone, but all of my conservative friends believed in a link until Bush came out publicly and denied evidence to it. For everyone I know, in other words, Bush’s confession of the situation made a HUGE difference.