[decibel]

This is truly disturbing. Our intelligence can't be this bad and fabricated. This is a blatant puff piece that could not get close to passing the rules of evidence. Are we this desperate?

[Interesting Times]

"We?"

[First Amendment]

I'm curious about you - you just signed on to FR, and now you're slamming Bush & co - saying a bunch of evidence that supports Bush's position as a "puff piece".... You couldn't possibly be a DU sort, posting here just to criticize, could you? Do you have any conservative views at all?

[cibco]

"Are we this desperate?"

All your ZOT! belongs to us...

[Dr. Frank fan]

This is a blatant puff piece that could not get close to passing the rules of evidence.

What "rules of evidence" are you referring to?

Are you under the mistaken impression that this is a legal trial in a court of law?

[HighWheeler]

adios DUfus

[WOSG]

Like Tom Daschle, you sound 'deeply saddened' by this blow to the hopes of the defeatist Democrats. "Are we this desperate?" Why dont you ask Howard Dean that. He's sounding desperate already.

4. According to a May 2003 debriefing of a senior Iraqi intelligence officer, Iraqi intelligence established a highly secretive relationship with Egyptian Islamic Jihad, and later with al Qaeda. The first meeting in 1992 between the Iraqi Intelligence Service (IIS) and al Qaeda was brokered by al-Turabi. Former IIS deputy director Faruq Hijazi and senior al Qaeda leader [Ayman al] Zawahiri were at the meeting--the first of several between 1992 and 1995 in Sudan. Additional meetings between Iraqi intelligence and al Qaeda were held in Pakistan. Members of al Qaeda would sometimes visit Baghdad where they would meet the Iraqi intelligence chief in a safe house. The report claimed that Saddam insisted the relationship with al Qaeda be kept secret. After 9-11, the source said Saddam made a personnel change in the IIS for fear the relationship would come under scrutiny from foreign probes.

[lasereye]

This is truly disturbing. Our intelligence can't be this bad and fabricated. This is a blatant puff piece that could not get close to passing the rules of evidence. Are we this desperate?

You're trashing the piece yet don't have one substantive argument to make against it. None of your sentences seem to even have any logical connection with one another. Geez, you sound like a liberal/Clinton administration/Moveon.org type BS artist or something.

[Coop]

Our intelligence can't be this bad and fabricated. This is a blatant puff piece that could not get close to passing the rules of evidence. Are we this desperate?

I'm an old intel analyst, and this is not even close to a puff piece. Multiple sources, appropriate caveats, and significant attempts at corroboration.

But you already knew that, given that you've been here on FR a whopping three days, huh?