tom wrote: " do notice you've raised the bar to "active collaboration." I suppose that's progress of a sort. "

I have raised no such bar- Active collaboration was the claim made pre-war, and active collaboration is the only way you can construe a threat. Active collaboration is what you must have. I have nothing to do with that bar, rather thank the Bush Administration.

tom wrote: "I'm frankly stumped as to what would constitute "evidence" to you. Written documents, photos, all these sorts of things would have to be filtered through the CIA or other intelligence sources. They could be forged, right? Even if they were delivered to you personally, how would you know they were real?"

Evidence meand evidence. If Documents, photos and paper-trails exist, and if they are made public by the CIA and corroborated by just one other source, I would be swayed.

Whatyou have presented, here and time and time again, is a collection of allegations that rest upon the CIA (who was MASSIVELY wrong about WMD), the Administration (Who was MASSIVELY wrong about WMD), about 5 defectors (the Kamels, Khoboda and friend, are among them) and ONE prisoner of the Kurds (who is the source of origin for all the AAI stories that I have EVER seen posted by you or others).

Trying to criticise my Bar for belief is like all the UFOlogists and Area-51 loonies who dredge up slightly re-woven sack-cloth of circumstanbtial and unm-documented allegations YEAR AFTER YEAR, and then claim that the weight of all the 'evidence', taken together, is impossible to refute.

I don't care how much Bullshit you have, or how you move it around and pile it differently- its still bullshit until you have some (any!) proof. The evidence for Area-51 UFOs are JUST as strong as this stuff, and I don't buy the Area-51 crud either.

Davin L.