From: Julia Thompson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Andrew Paul wrote: >> According to our morning news, the 9/11 commission has >> "conclusively established" that there was no link between >> Saddam and Al Qaeda. Is this what you read from it, or is >> that a misquote? >What I heard regarding it was that there was no direct link between 9/11 >and Iraq, but links between Al Qaeda and Iraq. >Of course, what I get off the radio on the way to the grocery store at >9PM may be suspect. :) Yes, just as what I heard at 8am on my way to work may be suspect. It was the local colouring that interested me. We get this for example : "Two senior bin Laden associates have adamantly denied that any ties exist between Al Qaeda and Iraq," a report from the commission said. "We have no credible evidence that Iraq and Al Qaeda cooperated on attacks against the United States." Labor's foreign affairs spokesman, Kevin Rudd, says the findings destroy the credibility of the Government's argument for war in Iraq. "It's quite plain from what's been produced in the United States that the core argument advanced by John Howard, that attacking Iraq was part of the war against terrorism, has been blown apart by this report," Mr Rudd said. Is this the sort of conclusion being drawn by the media in the US? Andrew
_______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
