As for historical link 1, I posted a lot of information (links) about Sabah Khodad before. Unfortunately they have long since cycled through. TOMB: Did you happen to bookmark one of those posts?

You will find he is associated with the INC, who I don't find trustworthy, who have motives and agendas for having the US invade Iraq- indeed have been trying to instigate an invasion for over a decade.
Plus, as demonstrated by Challaby, the INC are not exactly moral and upstanding.

Suppose I knew that, in the basement of your house, there is a wooden chair. Suppose I go to the police and claim to them that you killed people on that wooden chair. Should the police believe my entire story because they can confirm that you have a wooden chair there?

Furthermore, should we believe that it was a al-qaeda linked terrorist training ground because SIMPLY on the say-so of this man, any man- even superman.

Interestingly, the ONLY corroborator is a fellow by the name of 'Abu Zeinab' - who is actually the originator of this whole story. (in fact Sabah Khodad is the man Zeinab told the FBI/CIA to go 'confirm' facts with) So here we have 2 people linked through the INC with clear motive to lie. Hmmm. Don't you think we nedd better evidence before we go off to war? OOOPS! too late.

That there is a plane there is true. That this plane was, pre-war, a terrorist training camp was entirely underdetermined by the evidence. That THIS was our entire reason indicates again, as I charge, a lack of evidence that made this conflict predicated on belief.

As for historical link 2: a quote:

"Salman Pak, located 30-40 km SE of Baghdad, engaged in laboratory scale research on Anthrax, Botulinum toxin, Clostridium, perfringens (gas gangrene), mycotoxins, aflatoxins, and Ricin. Researchers at this site carried out toxicity evaluations of these agents and examined their growth characteristics and survivability. "

All of these are detectable (and indeed lethal) in even miniscule trace amounts. Why have we not found them yet?

This is essentially my response to your links marked "current 1" and "current 2".

A quote from your link marked current 1

"Located a mile east of the Tigris River, the Salman Pak base was exactly where U.S. terrorism experts and Iraqi defectors said it would be. "

Again. This is the wooden chair... Its existence does not prove the entire story.

But the POINT ABOUT THE CURRENT LINKS here is that, In my reading (and in fact I urge you to correct me if I wrong), that NO FURTHER SUPPORTING EVIDENCE of this place being a terrorist camp.

Instead- one of the links, the one marked april 7th, says that we are 'investigating' and 'we will be hearing more as the data comes out'.

So this means we have had access to that site for well over a month. No paperwork, forged documents, trace amounts of toxins, equipment etc have materialized. Remember how much data we found at the Afghan training camps?

Do you find this odd?

So your two "historical" facts really boil down to the say-so of two linked persons. A defector who is in the INC and has every desire/motive/profit to lie.

And your two "Current" sources offer no new evidence regarding Salman Pak, just post-facto re-iterations of the pre-war claims.

Interesting.

And so you call my multi-quote source from the new-yorker my 'belief'...

Tell me, if you were coming in from the outside and we were talking about terrorist connections BEFORE 9/11, who would you think was/had acted off of belief?

Davin