Kevin Drum puts it very well:
So did Iraq have zero contact with al-Qaeda? No. But that's not the point. What's telling — and never acknowledged by war supporters — is how little contact Iraq had with them despite enormous opportunity.
For entertainment, take a quick spin around the conservative blogosphere, where you will find sputtering charges of bias and/or partisanship, desperate grasping of straws, or the dulcet chirping of crickets.
UPDATE:
Good lord, they're sticking with their story.
President Bush insisted today that "numerous contacts" between the ousted government of Saddam Hussein and the al Qaeda terrorist network showed that the former Iraqi leader was a threat to the United States, despite a report by the Sept. 11 commission that found no "collaborative relationship" between Iraq and al Qaeda.
"The reason I keep insisting that there was a relationship between Iraq and Saddam and al Qaeda [is] because there was a relationship between Iraq and al Qaeda," Bush told reporters after a Cabinet meeting at the White House.
How I love these word games. Yes, there was indeed a "relationship" between Saddam and al Qaeda. Was it collaborative to any significant extent? No.
Using Bush's apparent standard for "relationship," one would be correct in saying that the U.S. has a "relationship" with militant Islam because of our support of the Saudis, and the Saudis' support of Wahabbist madrassas which continue to turn out extremists.
Come to think of it, using this standard I also have a "relationship" with Bush because I used to play guitar in a band with the son of one of Bush's main financiers. Given this relationship, where, I ask you, is my cushy government job? I'm not asking for anything fancy, just an ambassadorship to a small country where they serve umbrella drinks and have lawns fit for croquet.
No comments:
Post a Comment