Originally Posted by BonzoAPD
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?
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.
I assume that the evidence that the commission is reviewing includes all of the intelligence that was available at the time...so if they were to find inconsistencies in those reports and what the public was told, then that points towards the public being misled.