Monday, July 12, 2004


Nevermind the intelligence itself, the exaggeration of it lies by Bush et al or the fact that there was never an immediate, imminent, grave, gathering or existent threat to our country but the number of times we have seen this headline should be evidence enough that there was no rationale for invading Iraq.

2 Comments:

Blogger TM Lutas said...

Back when there was a WTC, there was a bomb attack against in in 1993. While it's still not settled whether Iraq had a role in that first bombing, they are certainly an accessory after the fact by sheltering at least one of the plotters after the attack. No threat? Yeah right.

12:04 PM  
Blogger CJ said...

TM,
I suggest you do a little independent research as opposed to the nonresearch research of Laurie Myrolie and her ilk. However, let's say, purely for the sake of argument, that your assertions are valid. That being the case wouldn't you have expected BushCo to roll that out amongst their rotational rationales for invading Iraq? Yet, zero, nada, zip, bupkis. One thing you have never heard them assert -that the invasion was anything other than 'pre-emptive' (which obviously, if an attack on our soil could have been attributed to Saddam/Iraq that would not be the case). Why do you suppose this is?

9:29 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home