If something is anticipated and acted on, it is a propaganda campaign and a scare tactic.

If something is not anticipated and acted on, it is a miserable failure.

Please describe a rational person.

I do not believe a rational person could conclude that Bush was trying to convince people there was a link between Saddam and 9/11 which was your original accusation made on:

Ron Davies
Date: 19 Jan 07 - 10:11 PM "trying--skilfully--and very successfully--to draw links between 11 Sept 2001 and Saddam in the minds of the US public."

Now, after you failed to prove that and backtracked by denying you ever made that assertion by saying falsely:

Ron Davies
Date: 28 Jan 07 - 10:21 PM
"I have more than once pointed out that nobody is alleging Bush was trying to convince the public that Saddam had caused 9-11"

And changing the assertion to:

From: Ron Davies
Date: 28 Jan 07 - 02:46 PM

As I said, the Bush regime's goal was not to allege that Saddam caused the 11 Sept 2001 attacks---but to convince the US public that Saddam would link up with the next attackers--and would supply them with WMD.

I believe a rational person would want the US government to anticipate possible security threats and take steps to prevent them.

I also believe a rational person would not need to constantly change his assertions and change his requirements on what would constitute proof in order to keep their argument viable and falsely claim "you have provided zero evidence".

I also believe a rational person could recognize the fact that if the number of people that believed there was a connection was decreasing while the alleged campaign was underway could still claim "it was brilliantly successful"

I don't believe that any rational person could believe that after years (going back before Bush) of congress men, Military men etc issuing dire warnings that Saddam had WMD's and we must do something about it, could claim that "The regime, with no proof whatsoever, sought to make the case in the public mind that Saddam had WMD with which he would supply the next attackers on the US." Examples:

Bill Clinton 1998
"The community of nations may see more and more of the very kind of threat Iraq poses now: a rogue state with weapons of mass destruction, ready to use them or provide them to terrorists. If we fail to respond today, Saddam and all those who would follow in his footsteps will be emboldened tomorrow."

Sandy Berger, Feb 18, 1998
"(Saddam) will rebuild his arsenal of weapons of mass destruction and some day, some way, I am certain he will use that arsenal again, as he has 10 times since 1983"


I believe a rational person could state what he believes and answer questions directly without personal attacks on people that disagree with them.