<Here's the evidence. Oh wait, you mean it's no good? Well, since it's so obviously bogus, that means we didn't do it, because if we were to try to deceive, we'd use stuff so good that nobody could tell.

Yes, the logic can get pretty tortured down that rabbit hole, but anyway, say hello to Alice.

Seriously though, if the forgeries were so poor, why were they presented by Powell as evidence? And why is a US congressman calling on the FBI to investigate?

Before you're so quick to apologize for the liars, maybe you ought to acquaint yourself with the concept of plausible deniability.

CNN (sometimes) reports the news, but they are not the final authority as to the source of these documents. Maybe you've seen their Certificate of Infallibility, but I have not.

Since the United States and the UK were using these bogus documents to advance their claims about the alleged Iraqi nuclear program, why should any logical person think that these same parties were not the source of the phony materials?

Who else would have the motivation to engineer this kind of attempt to deceive except those who stood to gain from the deception?

And again, if the documents were so obviously fake, why did Secretary of State Colin Powel try to foist them on the world as proof of a Iraqi nuclear program?

Twist, turn, spin and squirm all you want, but at the end of the day, a lie is a lie.

YoursTruly