Monday, February 26, 2007

My Latest Onanistic Blog Triumph

Let's face it, the title is redundant.

My last post concerned a discussion I've been having with Biga over at Biga's Rants about the President's attempt to go to war with Iraq while in no way attempting to link them to the 9/11 attack. I said it seemed like he had, he said Bush never did.

Even though I'm clearly wrong about this as far as he's concerned, Biga has devoted three or four separate posts to this subject, to explain to me WHY I'm mistaken. He has no idea how the public got the impression that Bush linked 9/11 to Iraq. Biga says the letter to Congress included that language because he was obligated to put in the whole paragraph, but anybody could see that last part didn't apply to Iraq. I responded that that seemed weaselly to me.

Finally this morning he wrote the final word on the subject.

What doesn't cease to amaze me is how people have hung onto this false charge for this long period of time. It is proved false over and over again yet it still persists. Just when you think it's going away some politician makes the charge again that keeps it circulating.
Here comes the fun part: I commented "Why are we arguing? I never said Bush linked Iraq to 9/11." And he must have reread the posts, because he admits I'm right, I never did say that. I merely said it seems that he did, and I don't understand why this is juxtaposed with that, and so on. So he's going to correct the post to say that I implied Bush had made the claim.

Heh heh.

1 comment:

James Biga said...

I posted the correction this morning. Also, the debate started in declaring and then changed to implied. Which I include in a comment with the actual words we started with.