I could bury this board with the number of times facts I have raised have been dismissed wholesale because the source was deemed somehow "suspicious" to those who didn't like the facts.

Other Iraqi bloggers, with zero evidence, are routinely accused of being in the pay of the U.S. government. Individual military sources are accused of being PR "setups." Government sources, science papers, you name it. If the info doesn't match the agenda then it is apparently, by definition, false.

Every piece of information I have on Riverbend came off her own blog, which was one of the earliest in Iraq, and one I followed for some time.

There is no doubt she and her family held a privileged position under Saddam's regime. If you think this is irrelevant to a judgment of her current positions, fine.

And if I post something from Fox News, a conservative blog, or the White House Press office, I don't want to hear anything about the possible bias of the source, okay?