[Wolfstar]

What the above information boils down to is that the Commission could not prove it either way. The Commission's report does not say when the source for this first reported the information to the Czech intelligence service. If it was before the 9/11 attacks, that lends considerable credibility to the report. If it was after, that doesn't necessarily discredit the source, but his or her memory could have been influenced by news reports.

The truth is we'll probably never learn the truth, unless Saddam or one of his senior staff spill the beans.

[Southack]

"The truth is we'll probably never learn the truth, unless Saddam or one of his senior staff spill the beans."

Ha! Who says that it was Saddam?! Other countries have Ba'ath Parties besides the old Iraq, you know!

Why, Middle-Eastern agents have even been known to work for more than just 1 government.

6 Full Legislative Days Left Until The AWB Expires

[Shermy]

"The Commission's report does not say when the source for this first reported the information to the Czech intelligence service. If it was before the 9/11 attacks, that lends considerable credibility to the report. If it was after, that doesn't necessarily discredit the source, but his or her memory could have been influenced by news reports."

Maybe it's "Eliska?"

"Eliska T. interview (May 20, 2004)."

Then there's this statement:

"Shortly after 9/11, the source reported having seen Atta meet with Ahmad Khalil Ibrahim Samir al Ani, an Iraqi diplomat, at the Iraqi Embassy in Prague on April 9, 2001, at 11:00 A.M."

This comport's with EJE's reporting. Thereby, the disinformation that a witness was influenced by reports of prior Atta's trips to Prague is untrue - that information hadn't been publicized yet. The story that the witness figured out who the person was by the then-published pics of Atta would seem to be true.

Naturally the witness could be confused by faces and trauma, though Atta is distinctive looking.