What else would they "find"?

The "bi-partisan" 9/11 Blame-Bush-and-Elect-Kerry Circus has found that there is no evidence to support the assertion that Iraq helped Al Qaeda to strike the US. As I have blogged before, "Duh! What else would you expect?" This "bi-partisan" commission is controlled by the Democrats ("bi-partisan" is a Congressional buzz-word for stacking the deck with Democrats) and after having already determined that Bush is responsible for the attacks on 9/11, is looking for evidence to support their forgone conclusion. Although the final report isn't due out until after the election, the commission will leak items to the press to support their conclusion.

As for no evidence that Iraq helped Al-Qaeda, they probably would have "found" that there was "no evidence" that Germany helped Japan during World War II either. Since most Arabs consider other Arabs to be their brothers, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that if Al-Qaeda wanted to support with their attacks on the US, the most logical place to go would be Saddam Hussein and Iraq. It also doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that if Saddam Hussein wanted to strike back at the US for Iraq's humiliation during the first Gulf War and 10 years of sanctions, what better way than funding a group of islamic terrorists who already had a proven track record in striking the US. If by some very, very, very bad luck, Senator Flip-Flop wins the presidency, "suddenly", everyone will "miraculously" find, in the same way that Hilary Clinton "miraculously" found the Rose Law Firm billing records, that Saddam Hussein and Al-Qaeda where in bed together. As a corolary, as long as Gerorge Bush is president, the media will always state categorically that Saddam Hussein never helped Al-Qaeda. Remember, you heard it from the Great El-ahrairah first.