This New York Times article speaks for itself. It's almost as if they don't read their own paper. I quote "Congress would never have given President Bush a blank check for
military action if it had known that there was no real evidence that
Iraq was likely to provide aid to terrorists."
How can their editorial board look at people with a straight face when they make implicit claims such as that, yet in an article on the very front page they write for, they clearly state Saddam's Iraq harbored terrorists?
Iraq and Terrorist Ties Redux
Posted on July 19, 2004
