Alas, Arne, my little viking - you have got it exactly 180 degrees out:

"You are demanding that Dubya use precise and very specific words (your "Simon Says" ploy) to assert that Dubya claimed that Saddam was involved in 9/11. But that wasn't the issue, was it? It was whether Saddam and al Qaeda were in cahoots."

I have absolutely no doubt that links did exist between Iraq and Al-Qaeda going back years prior to 911. What I said, and what Ron Davies took exception to and contradicted me on, was that very early after the attacks of 911 the Bush Administration came out with very clear statements that Saddam Hussein and Iraq had nothing to do with those attacks. Did they investigate whether he did or not, did they ask people to look into it - I am bloody certain that they did - resulting in the statements made regarding Iraq's non-involvement.

Teribus...."Now so far, between a few of us, the actual words spoken by GWB and members of his administration, within context have been provided."

I can clearly establish that the quotes and references I provide are from transcripts of speeches, press conferences and official records. Now where do yours come from Arne:

Remember my comment..."you have totally grown accustomed to relying on what somebody else has reported and commented on."

Arne's own words...."no, I rely oon what reputable media (and even disreputable media, such as "www.whitgehouse.gov") report on what the maladministration said."

Therin lies the difference Arne - I read and listen to what the person says, you, on the other hand, read and listen to what somebody else has reported.

Maybe like Ron, you could furnish us with what you regard as being reputable media (Al-Jazeera for example, although their coverage on the 180,000 deaths, at the hands of the Muslim Government troops and Muslim Janjaweed Militia in Darfur was a trifle sketchy - understandable oversight eh Arne?)

OK Arne maybe we are getting somewhere after all - You now apparently accept that the idea of regime change in Iraq came not from George W Bush but from the previous administration under Bill Clinton.

Teribus..."But after the US has been attacked, the President and his Administration are pilloried for exercising the power at their disposal to act in the best interests of the country, even after having gone to both houses of Congress, even after having gone to the United Nations."

Arne....."News flash: Iraq didn't attack us on 9/11!!!!"

Arne, would you like to point out exactly where in that sentence of mine quoted above where I have said, inferred, alluded to Iraq attacking the US. And also tell us exactly how the following paragraph of that post of mine started - "Afghanistan...." correct?

You see Arne that's your problem, supplied by ideas from others you do not read, you just react along your pre-programmed misconceptions.

By the way Arne the head of state of any country is free to act in the defence of his/her country, or its national interest if they believe them to be threatened - it does not require approval from the United Nations - That is a fact of life, that is the reality, learn to live with it.

Teribus..."Afghanistan had the general concensus of world opinion behind it, maybe not the anti-war, anti-Bush, peace-at-any-price brigade, but enough of the world all the same."

Arne...."News flash for your: Afghanistan is not located in Iraq. Moving the goal posts a couple thousand Km, eh?"

Another example, where have I stated that Afghanistan is in Iraq Arne? You seem to be the one not only setting but moving goal posts, due to your complete and utter inability to read something and understand it - Oh unless somebody tells you what to think first.

Another little exchange that proves my point perfectly:

Arne...."Plenty of quotes have been given by myself, TIA, Davies, and others by the maladministration making definitive links between Saddam and Iraq."

Teribus..."Unfortunately that is what they have been quoting - themselves, or journalists reports of what that journalist thought was said...."

Arne..."Oh, horsepuckey. We've quoted Dubya, Cheney, etc. Do you deny THAT THEY SAID WHAT REPORTERS SAID THEY SAID?"

As stated previously, I tend to read what the person says, not what the reporter says he says - because in my experience Arne newspaper reporters and journalists lie, nine times out of ten their story is written before they even leave their desks to go and do the interview.

Reference the required quote:

Dick Cheney interview "Meet the Press" 8th September 2002. Already posted.

Now you give us one direct quote (Note Arne direct quote - not what some reporter or journalist thinks was being said) where GWB or any member of his administration stated that there was a link between Saddam/Iraq and the Al-Qaeda attacks of 11th September 2001.

What you thought in the period 18th December 1998 to 20th March 2003, with regard to WMD, is immaterial Arne. Thankfully, it was never going to be your call to make, fortunately, for the country in which you live, you Arne Langsetmo, were not the person responsible for safeguarding the security and national interests of the United States of America.

UNMOVIC is irrelevant Arne? - How so

Do you deny that between 18th December 1998 and December 2002 the person and regime keeping UNSCOM and latterly UNMOVIC out of Iraq was Saddam Hussein and the Ba'athist Government of Iraq?

Do you deny that the only reason UNMOVIC were eventually invited back into Iraq (Oh yes Arne they had to be INVITED BACK IN) was because the President of the United States of America parked a quarter of a million members of the armed forces of the US on his doorstep, with the clear message comply, co-operate or you will be removed irrespective.

With regard to the words spoken by Dr. Hans Blix, Arne flounders around alot here, mainly because there's nobody telling him what to think, but he does come up with this absolute GEM:

Arne....."Words have meaning."

Yes they do Arne, my little american viking, EVEN THE ONES CONTAINED IN UNITED NATIONS SECURITY COUNCIL RESOLUTIONS, especially if you happen to be on the receiving end of them. Paragraph 9 of resolution 1441 required the immediate, unconditional and active co-operation of the Iraqi Authorities from day one, not the stirrings of it 3-4 months down the track, no attempts on the Iraqi side to impose, or attach conditions. Yes Arne, words do have meanings, and people are best advised to heed them, but that is not selective, it applies goes right across the board.

Cheers.