If 15 of the 19 9/11 highjackers had been Iraqis would it not have been

[keithyboy]

enough to claim that Saddam was behind the attack? You bet it would have been...Bush claimed that eventhough NONE of the highjackers were Iraqis. So, why isn't the Crown Prince of Saud being held responsible and blamed for 9/11? Why didn't we invade SA? Surely there are many Al-qaeda cells there. There were NONE inside Iraq until the US invaded. The only terrorists cells inside Iraq were the special US and Israeli ops that operated in the Kurdish territories prior to 9/11. So why will Saddam be put on trial years after the fact of his atocities in which the US was complicit if not the enabler?

[Caution]

1. one word. MONEY.

[arcane1]

2. if it had been 15 Iraqis, the headlines on September 12 would be:

"IRAQ ATTACKS THE U.S."

[rkc3]

3. How long do you think....

it will be before Saddam ever gets to trial?

I wonder what stories he'll have to tell when he gets his 15 minutes in front of the world. Will he detail his revenues from the CIA under Reagan and Bush I? Will he tell the world about the money and weapons he received from the US to support his war in Iran and atrocities against the Kurds?

Or will he have sudden heart attack in the weeks leading up to his trial?

[aden_nak]

4. Hussein will never testify.

He'll have an accident of some kind, or else he'll be so heavily drugged and sedated that he won't have a clue where the hell he is. He's a World Class Prick, but he's not stupid. He knows the only cards he has left have to do with what HE KNOWS about the Bushes, and the kind of damage it could do. He'll never get out with his mind in one piece.

[damnraddem]

5. More importantly, the Saudi's have more oil -- why weren't they invaded?

Oh yeah: 'Banadar Bush.' Hey, they're Dubya buds -- he can't invade them.