[dirtboy]

But, as Barnes says, he's a crack reporter.

Oh, puh-leeze - how on earth do you believe someone who claims to have interviewed a comatose man? Woodward's books belong in fiction, with the preface "The accounts in this book are BASED on actual events"

[Wordsmith]

I don't know the details of the Casey thing, although I remember hearing about it. Obviously, it hasn't been enough to sway the opinion of Barnes and the rest of the DC insiders as to Woodward's basic credibility.

The point remains. You say you won't make any guesses or inferences regarding the origin of the anthrax, it's possible implications for war policy, or what the President may be weighing when making his decisions. Are you willing to discuss, hypothetically, what might follow if there was intelligence indicating Iraqi involvement in 9/11 and the anthrax mailings?

If all you are willing to discuss is what is evident from agreed upon facts, what is your basis for believing that the only reason we haven't attacked Baghdad yet is because the forces weren't in place? What is your basis for believing that an attack is imminent? Please quote your sources.

[oceanview]

I still don't see any of your replies that are to the point trying to be made here, and please, no personal attacks.

In your opinion, do you believe the Hatfill story? Is it likely that Hatfill, or some domestic person like him, was the source of the 9/11 anthrax? You must have an opinion, "I don't know" is essentially a "no". So if you don't believe the Hatfill story, then who could have sent the anthrax? Who has anthrax, name the country that you see anthrax being linked to right now with regards to the UN resolutions? Do you really think that these resolutions are about whether a missile can fly 112 instead of 92 miles? Who has anthrax, and would have synchronized the mailings to occur in the same time frame of the WTC attacks?