Exhaustive review sponsored by the Pentagon finds NO link between Saddam, al Qaida

DadsDream said
It's not something obscure...it's in the headline and first two paragraphs of the article which is the subject of the thread.

Wrong. Arguing over the various naunces and semantics over the DoD definition of "operation" is obscure and obfuscates larger issue here.

DadsDream said
So, rather than posting an opinion about the subject of the thread and reading the opinions of others about the subject of the thread, we should focus on me and why I post the things I do?

Simple enough, then.

The opinions you’re expressing about me and my intentions are totally wrong and way off base, besides being totally off-topic.

:smilielol: Really, how long are you going to play the victim card? You decided to run with this intellectual football, and continue to dig your heels in. One. More. Time.

You were not just "providing information" for the sake of it, you were expressing an opinion, albeit in a round-about way about the veracity and truthfullness of the Administration's claims about AQ and Hussein before the invasion of Iraq.

Why the focus on you? Well you were the one who INSISTED for some odd reason to focus on something obscure and non-sequiter. You were queried SEVERAL different times as to what motivated you. You provided a pretty unbelievable excuse and frankly, got called on it. And based on your posting history, I'm still sticking to option C, based on how many times you've stepped up to the plate to bat defending the Bush administration. :9: