Good point, but it brings Mr. Bush's judgment into question since his
interpretation turned out to be wrong and General Zinni's turned out
to be right.
About 9/11, I'm angry too but the data connecting Iraq has never
existed. There has been data, however, connecting both Saudi Arabia
and Iran. Maybe one of them was a better target?
----- Original Message -----
From: G <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 13:15:45 -0500
Subject: Re: Define Terrorism (was Re: Poll - Did you believe ...)
To: CF-Community <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Problem is, only one matters in the end, Bush's. You can bring up
thousands of people who saw the same report, and can get 1000
different interpretations. Was his interpretation tainted by some
latent desire to attack Iraq no matter what? I dunno, some people sure
think so.
[Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings] [Donations and Support]
