In your dreams, Teribus. Nice try.

"Looks like there was no propaganda campaign"--either that, or most people are thoroughly sick of trying to make you see what's obvious to the rest of the world.

I wonder which it is.

Teribus 2:223 AM 4 Jan 2006--"...a partialy (sic) successful anonymous a-symetric attack on the 11 Sept 2001."    A singularly clumsy way to describe it.

But fascinating.

"anonymous"--but not when Bush got through with it. Why mention Saddam Hussein in the context of your favorite sentence?--yes, that old chestnut'--"Before September the 11th many in the world believed Saddam Hussein could be contained."

Congratulations, you have proven your mastery of cut-and-paste. The only thing left for you to do now is to actually answer the question.

To save your ego, you are stubbornly--indeed, as I noted earlier, beyond stubbornly, insisting on no link between Saddam and 11 Sept in this speech.

Sorry--any reasonable person would see a link--and many have already said so.


The only charitable explanation is that since you are not an American, you cannot imagine the state of mind of Americans since 9-11. After being immune from foreign attack at least since 1941-- (the first Trade Center attack was, you may recall, not as serious), suddenly the illusion of security is shattered.
And the 1941 attack was not on the mainland.

The UK had been under direct terrorist threat for decades--in fact been hit quite a few times. The US had not.

When I start telling you about the UK response to the first IRA bombings, you can start telling me about the US public's reaction to 9-11. And even after toppling the Taliban (but not "bagging" Osama), the US public was still jittery--and only too willing to see shadowy villains anywhere--especially if their President pointed them out. After all the President has all sorts of information sources the ordinary citizen does not--and would never mislead the public about anything as vital as national security-------right?

So you want more of the 2003 State of the Union speech--it really peeves you that I cite the one sentence. Pobre cito.

It's just a coincidence that Saddam and Sept 11 are mentioned in that context.

Anything you say.


And you obligingly provide more of the speech yourself--"Imagine those 19 hijackers with other weapons and other plans, this time armed by Saddam Hussein".

"19 hijackers"--any idea of the context there?   Heard that term before?

And "Saddam Hussein"?--ever heard of him?


Well, look at that, another total coincidence--no connection at all.

Somehow, it's not likely.

As a sage once said "That particular dog won't hunt".


Only the wilfully blind--or a prisoner of his own ego--like your good self?---would fail to see the connection.

On top of that, you have yet to come up with even one quote in the period mid-2002 to March 2003 in which Bush or one of his minions clearly denies a link between Saddam and 11 Sept 2001. The 8 Sept 2002 quote you love so much is unfortunately fatally flawed--Cheney undercuts his own "clear" statement badly.


You may now resume desperately floundering.