>>All I ask for is evidence.
>
>A smoking gun will not be forthcoming. Nor will a Perry Mason "gotcha" moment. These organizations are too intelligent for that.

These organizations aren't exactly composed of rocket scientists and Nobel Laureates. We were able to quickly link al Qaeda to 9/11. We were certainly capable of determining where al Qaeda was (Afghanistan, not Iraq). Of course, the administration has also declared be wiped out 75% of their leadership.

So, for an organinization we now know quite a bit about, we can't produce any evidence of collaboration between it and Saddam? Sorry, that doesn't fly.

>Yes, when our financial and symbolic centers were finally in flames with dead bodies piled under rubble. But where was this kumbaya attitude when the Cole was bombed? What about in '93 when Osama attacked us the first time? Is there some dead American civilian threshold we have to surpass before the rest of the world stops merely moving their lips and actually pitches in to finally rid the world of these cockroaches??

The rest of the world? Tell me what we did first. Then you can acuse the rest of the world of not doing anything.

>Everywhere and anywhere. US and international. Print, internet, tv, and radio. Liberal and conservative. I try to get all points of view and then decide for myself where in the middle the "truth" apparently lies. But one thing I've learned... I trust virtually no sources. I'm always skeptical and ask myself, "What outside forces have a hand in this report?"

Of all these source you have read, watched, and listened too, which of them produced any evidence, no matter how flimsy, of collaboration between al Qaeda and Saddam?