Terrorist Involvement - Was There Or Wasn't There? (well duh!)

GOP USA ^ | 01-10-06 | Thomas D. Segel - Commentary

[FreeKeys]

oops. SB: places we don't want the enemy TO KNOW we're looking.

[T.L.Sink]

We were talking about why Bush seemed to be dragging his feet in translating the documents that Hayes of the Weekly Standard wrote about that would give support for the decision to invade Iraq and establish stronger ties between al Qaeda and Saddam. The editorial page in today's Wall Street Journal may have the answer. It involves the CIA but I'll let you read it and decide for yourselves. I'd be interested in hearing your views. All best, (see www.opinionjournal.com)

[FreeKeys]

Stephen Cambone and the CIA's deliberate leak weapons. I have trouble believing those are unreparable problems. I thought Porter Goss was cleaning all that up.

The most interesting part of the article to me was where it said, Other than that,Mr. Hayes writes that he had no fewer than 11 corroborating sources, and yesterday he told us he'd added several more since publication.