sledge - 22 Jun 04 - 03:03 AM

Just an example of how things are reported. From your post the item you pasted from the Financial Times website states:

"In March President George W. Bush was forced to concede publicly that the White House had no evidence that Mr Hussein played any role in the September 11 attacks."

Now the above would tend to indicate that George W Bush was only "forced" to concede this point in March this year.

Colin Powell, on behalf of the current US administration, made a very clear statement within days of the attacks of 9/11, that Al-Qaeda were responsible for those attacks and that there was no evidence of involvement on the part of Iraq, or any othef foreign government.

My question to the author of that article from the Financial Times would be, "How can you be forced into making a statement something that you had clearly made two and a half years ago?"