Replies

I agree with all the points you raise.

And that Pres. Bush did the right thing.

Just to let you know - the part of the Intelligence Community that I am in touch with, is twisting on itself to discover how this mistake was made.

Was the information so needed, that someone spiked a report to give credence, believability to something that should have read "might be", "best guesses at", "from past experience", "the general pattern of", and "may be rebuilding stockpiles" and on and on.

The real question is, how did so many intelligence analysts, here and abroad, come to the same conclusion if there wasn't hard evidence to support such a positive, unequivocal statement.

While I would hope that the group that Pres. Bush appointed to investigate the intelligence he received would have a clear shot at producing some good conclusions, I'm not sure that any of them are either qualified or cleared (a really BIG problem) to investigate the source information, or the systems from which that source information was extracted.

I'm not sure that any of them are either qualified or cleared (a really BIG problem) to investigate the source information, or the systems from which that source information was extracted.

Can they be removed if they don't pass clearance? I don't know how this part works.

BTW..still wating for a response to my freepmail before I post :-)