From Ron,

"Teribus--

So sorry--you're in the distinct minority--not just on Mudcat but in the whole world--in denying the Bush regime's propaganda campaign--from about mid 2002 to the actual invasion in March 2003."

Ron is very handy with phrases like "vast majority", "distinct minority", the only thing is he uses them without justification and when asked to provide evidence to support his statements he conveniently forgets the question and attacks the person daring to challenge "the truth according to Ron".

To answer your question Ron, there are many things in this world that requires a clear cause-effect statement in order to be effective. It is an essential part of the decision making process.

Now having been asked to provide details of this so-called propaganda campaign that was centred around Saddam Hussein being involved in the attacks of 11th September, 2001. You have singularly failed to do so. Instead I am tasked with having to provide you with an example where, within the completely arbitrary period that "Ron the always-right" selected, the US Administration made the categoric statement that Saddam Hussein had nothing whatsoever to with those attacks. I believe I did so.

Right then Ron, now how about putting forward some substantiation for the points that you have delighted in making on this thread?

1. "Most of the men Bush took instruction with in learning to be a pilot were going to Vietnam." - How many Ron?

I won't be too surprised Ron when your research turns up the answer "None".

2. During the period GWB served in the ANG the "vast majority of pilots" served in Vietnam.

This contention of yours Ron is statistically impossible.

3. The propaganda campaign - one example Ron, just one, of where anyone in the US Administration from 11th September, 2001 until the present day has ever said that Saddam Hussein was involved in the attacks of that day.

I do hope that this wasn't too long a post for you and Bobert, I realise that you both may have extremely short concentration spans and rely totally on someone else having to tell you what to think and why because neither of you can be bothered to read and listen to what is actually being said.