McGentrix wrote:They were Muslim terrorists who happened to be born in Saudi Arabia, I wasn't aware that was in doubt.
I am sure you guys know that, but the truthiness of what you said is much better for your little jabs, huh?
I was actually directing my response to oralloy McG....but thanks for your response anyway. I needed to hear you say truthiness just one more time on this board. It has not quite gotten old yet....
Oralloy claimed that "they" (presumably meaning Muslims) launched a greivous attack on his country, and feels that a counter strike against "them" is/was in order. That part was obvious.
I wanted clarification on who precisely you strike out against. If there is a "them" that one can refer to, then fine. I thought the "them" was bin Laden and al Qaeda....but, as we have come to realize, Bush is no longer concerned with bin Laden....or al Qaeda. He just doesn't "spend that much time on him..."
From whitehouse.gov
I guess if I was oralloy, and aggravated with the attacks "they" orchestrated against my country....and my government knew who the perpetrators were....I'd be a little more than aggravated that my President simply became disinterested in bringing to justice the perpetrators of the horrors of 9/11.
To fill in some blanks McG..."they" are bin Laden's al Qaeda. "They" were Saudi's. Make me understand why "they" are not in the crosshairs. Make me understand why Saddam, who has since been proven to have had no connection to 9/11, bin Laden or al Qaeda was given military priority over bin Laden and al Qaeda. The "war" in Afghanistan is a joke....it was given a fraction of the interest of Iraq. Make me understand.