There are alot of people in the CIA who don't want to believe that there was ever any sort of link between al Qaeda and Iraq. It doesn't fit with thier worldview that secular Baathist Saddam and religious radical bin Laden could work together.

That view is accurate - for the year 1988. The world has changed since then.

I note that the refutation that you emphasized comes from a retired source.

Baathist Iraq provided technical training and safe haven for al Qaeda. That's reason enough to invade right there.

Don said: >>Because under questioning to support his exaggerated remarks, he couldn't offer evidence to support them. He made his original remarks on September 11th, presumably to create the erroneous impression of a connection between the WTC tragedy and current events in Iraq. His excuse for his erroneous and irresponsible remarks is just more Bushspin<<

First, I'd like to see a transcript of the interview.

Second, Wofowitz made his original remarks not on Sept. 11, but for a Sept. 6 Washington Post interview.

Third, the article which you yourself subsequently cited contains a connection between al Qaeda and Iraq, and therefore a connection between the WTC attack and current events in Iraq.

Fourth, my name is not Greg.

Don said: >>Wolfowitz's exact words on thrusday were: "We know it (Iraq) had a great deal to do with terrorism in general and with al-Qaida in particular, and we know a great many of bin Laden's key lieutenants are now trying to organize in cooperation with old loyalists from the Saddam regime to attack in Iraq." Instead of a "great many" he now says he's was only talking about one guy and he's not offered one iota of evidence to suggest Al-Zarqawi is currently involved in Iraq.<<

Zarqawi is an example of one of these associates. He's a figure we all know. There are others.

Do you want Wolfowitz to bring a tape recorder to each interview with NSA intercepts on them? Is that it?