Originally Posted by Spood
But, if he told the American people that Iraq had something to do with the WTC attacks and he knew they didn't, then he was lying. Lying is NEVER an acceptable thing for an American president to do to the American people.
That said, however...I do agree that Saddam needed to be removed from power, being the bastard that he is. Hell, I don't think he should even get a trial. They should beat him senseless, drag him out back, and shoot him like the common fu cking scum he is...and just be done with the whole thing.
But, I digress...
If it's found out that the president has been lying to us, that will do nothing but promote paranoia and mistrust among the population. Then, we're all forced to wonder who else has been lying to us and about what. I'd say it's pretty much downhill from there. Knowing our luck, in the confusion, Al-Quaeda would probably manage to smuggle in an extra dirty nuke...and then we're fu cked.
How do you know he was lying? The intelligence that he received at the time may have told him otherwise. I also belive that even though the 9-11 comission may not have been able to find a connection, that does not mean that there was no connection. It just means that the tracks were covered up well. Saddam has been known to support terrorists an have supportred Al Queda before. Why would 9-11 be any different?