Exactly. Mr. Levin's essay proves nothing. In fact, I am embarrassed for him. He takes the ambiguous language of the 9/11 Commission Report and creates a definitive conclusion that ignores the definitive and all important conclusion of the Report.
Read the excerpts carefully. You will find these kind of caveats are littered throughout: "reportedly, apparently, There are indications, may even, is said to have, may have occurred ,indicate." That is why the Report concludes that "We have no credible evidence that Iraq and al Qaeda cooperated on attacks against the United States." and that there was no evidence that a "collaborative operational relationship" existed between Al Quaida and Iraq.
Yet Mr. Levin claims that all these weasel words support his contention that there were "serious connections between Iraq and al Qaeda."
Did Iraq pose a serious threat to our national security? Yes. Did Congress believe Iraq posed a serious threat? Yes. Did Iraq have or seek to obtain weapons of mass destruction? Yes. Those are the facts.
Those are not the facts. We know that Iraq did not pose a serious imminent threat to our national security because Iraq did not have WMD's. It had no delivery system to attack the U.S. with WMD's even if it did have them. According to the Duelfer Report, all of Iraq's unconventional weapons programs were abandoned or had decayed after Desert Storm and sanctions were applied to Iraq. Congress was misinformed, as we now know, " We were wrong about almost everything" Mr. Duelfer told the Senate committee, echoing David Kay's findings. Mr. Levin ignores facts.
Riiiight.
Just like your statements in the other thread.
Thanks for confirming what you are.
You mean the Dems, like you, ignore facts.
Like Salman Pak terrorist training camp in Iraq, and how it was there BEFORE we went into Iraq?
*cough cough*
http://www.foia.cia.gov/duelfer/Iraqs_WMD_Vol3.pdf
Link does work you liar.