Public opinion 2 days after 9/11:

In a poll 9/13/01 %78 of people polled answered it was likely that Saddam was involved in 9/11.

Public opinion during the alleged propaganda campaign:

In a poll conducted 2/6/03 %72 of people polled answered it was likely that Saddam was involved in 9/11.

I don't know why those facts get Ron so upset. TIA has already said polls mean nothing. By the way she says another piece of information is necessary so she needs to find that information and prove that it is necessary.

I ould say a third piece of information is required for her to prove her point about polls being worthless and it is therefore her obligation to find that information. But I won't because it is just her last ditch attempt to discredit fact in favor of sayso evidence.

Did it occur to TIA that the NYT was responsible for making the case for WMDs in Iraq? Should I tell her that she needs to find that evidence and present it here to disprove herself? That would be ridiculous so here it is:

The Source of the Trouble

"Pulitzer Prize winner Judith Miller's series of exclusives about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq—courtesy of the now-notorious Ahmad Chalabi—helped the New York Times keep up with the competition and the Bush administration bolster the case for war. How the very same talents that caused her to get the story also caused her to get it wrong."