Without the details of what info she held and more important why she held the story your point deosn't mean shit.

EVERY network holds stories and parts of stories for many different reasons only one of which is political. A few monts ago when Bush secretly visited Iraq all the major networks were handfed PR info from the Bush administration but they were all asked to hold off on the story until after Bush left Iraq. They held the story because of security. Since they all held the story does it mean all the networks are conservative?

So Max,

Her story was about the alleged spying of the man who we were paying $300,000 per month to advise us on the war and post war.

Sorry you didn't understand my original post.

By the way, in the future, if you want a response from me, use respectful language.

That man, Chalabi, is someone we will never find out about. The CIA hates him but the Pentagon adores him. The problems he is linked to are very bare at the moment. You can't assign him blame if you don't know what's going on fully yet. And I truly don't see him as passing on secrets to Iran simply because of the history between the two countries. Maybe it's because he's a chicago alum...who knows.

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/05/24/op...24SAFI.html?hp
Here is a quick op-ed post at the NYTimes that talks about Chalabi and in-fighting within US orgs.

"WASHINGTON — The three factions controlling Iraq — long suspicious of one another — are now on the brink of open tribal warfare. Not the Sunnis, Shiites and Kurds — I mean the Pentagon, State Department and C.I.A. "

-Rudey

Rudey,

You may be right. It sounds like the guy "sold" us a lot of information and advice that turned out to be flat out wrong. The question CIA or whomever will need to prove is if he did that purposely or not.

Again, we don't know what information was given. We, the people, will have difficulty judging how much was right and wrong until it is available to us for examination. Also it's difficult to see how he went into a country where he had little support outside of the US and would want to sell us out that quickly.

-Rudey

Thanks to AnchorAlum , again, I don't need to post! Especially liked your reference to Moore!!!:p

Heard today (Mike Gallager) the reporters who HEARD Kerry's statement were trying to dismiss it as "off the record". They did not WANT it to get out. The majority of print media LOVES Kerry.

Thanks, Mom! I'm getting doubed teamed on the "ouch" thread.

"Ouch" because the truth hurts, I suppose. For the opposition, of course!

Oh, I think you're hangin' in there OK, Anchor.

It's all good as long as we understand that though we don't agree on THIS issue, we all still LUV one another!http://www.handykult.de/plaudersmili.../remybussi.gif