In your opinion this has some validity in mine its political propaganda. I personally don't care what your OPINIONS are.
The fact remains you cannot show 1 as in ONE small bit of legitimate evidence that show these alleged documents are authentic. That may wash in your country but not in this one.
And answer me this is Michael Smith a anti-war Bush hater?
Is he?
"And answer me this is Michael Smith a anti-war Bush hater?
Is he?"
I've no idea. I don't personally know him you understand. I don't habitually read his writing. I'm really not contesting his personal character or opinions.
"The fact remains you cannot show 1 as in ONE small bit of legitimate evidence that show these alleged documents are authentic"
What evidence would convince you? I've told you what convinces me, the point that you have not addressed in any way or offered any kind of alternative explanation. If the documents were fabricated, Tony Blair and the rest of the government would be shouting their outrage from every rooftop and demanding resignations at the Times (owned by the renowned Communist Rupert Murdoch of course...). They are not doing this, I infer that the documents are genuine.