The 9-11 commission doesn't mention Saddam claiming responsibility. I can find no news article. You claim he did, now prove it.
Never said it was in the report. It was on the news. I'll try and dig up the articles from the day after the attack for you, but you'll just have to wait till then.
]]>If you believe Saddam was involved in 9/11, you are an imbecile. Furthermore, you might know something the 9/11 commission itself would like to have heard.
I never said he was directly involved. He claimed responsibility, then retracted his statements. Oh, and the 911 Commission did report that Saddam's regime was funding terrorist organizations, including Al Qaeda. Saddam himself allowed many terrorist groups to set up and train in Iraq. It's in the report. It's a good read. I suggest picking up a copy.
]]>Also, crusade is comonly used in place of "war" or "fight." They are synonyms. So, he used flowery, politician-speak. When have I ever set up a standard against that? It's commonplace.
You're pulling crap out of your ass here, Cat. (which is still a far cry better than pulling it out of your mouth like most liberals. 
)
I can find no article in which Saddam claimed responsibility for 9/11. You think that sort of thing would make the news.
]]>Oh, and Bush called it a crusade. If I say I'm on a crusade to rid my house of dust, that doesn't mean it's a holy war. That's just silly.
]]>This doesn't mean Democrats support bin Laden/Saddam any more than Saddam and Osama "worked together" so to speak. I recall Dubya calling this a holy war (crusade) to, does that make him a jihadist?
http://www.recordonline.com/archive/200 … /rdp16.htm
If you believe Saddam was involved in 9/11, you are an imbecile. Furthermore, you might know something the 9/11 commission itself would like to have heard.
]]>Osama: "Death to the infidels!"
Saddam: "This is a holy war."
Osama: "This is a holy war."
Osama, talking about 911: "We are responsible."
Saddam, talking about 911 before he realized the extent of the damage: "I am responsible."
No connection..... Sure..... 
The New York Senator who introduced Bush said something along the lines of "Some people will question why we liberated Iraq. Some people still ask about weapons of mass destruction. On September 11th we learned that a weapon of mass destruction can come in the form of a box-cutter."
Frankly, this disturbs me.
First off, he is indirectly drawing a fake connection between Saddam and 9/11. A trick the Republicans have been using since the tragedy. And it's worked. Second of all, by listing a box cutter as a WMD he is basically saying that anyone, and anything armed with a toothpick could be a threat, great enough to go to war- therefore, not only disregarding that we DIDN'T find WMD, but justifying the Iraq war and any following wars using 9/11- which is low, and sick.
This is actually one of many times which i've witnessed republicans drawing said connection, and/or blaming the tragedy on Saddam.
by listing a box cutter as a WMD he is basically saying that anyone, and anything armed with a toothpick could be a threat, great enough to go to war
And this is why America is so overzealous, paranoid, and deceiving.
]]>Frankly, this disturbs me.
First off, he is indirectly drawing a fake connection between Saddam and 9/11. A trick the Republicans have been using since the tragedy. And it's worked. Second of all, by listing a box cutter as a WMD he is basically saying that anyone, and anything armed with a toothpick could be a threat, great enough to go to war- therefore, not only disregarding that we DIDN'T find WMD, but justifying the Iraq war and any following wars using 9/11- which is low, and sick.
]]>