Steve, you misread the opening graf:

An alcoholic cousin of an aide to Ahmed Chalabi has emerged as the key source in the US rationale for going to war in Iraq.

I would think, given Islamic codes against (most forms of) alcohol consumption, than an alcoholic Iraqi would be a particularly unreliable source... regardless of if he was Rumsfeld's second cousin's roommate's best friend's sister's co-worker's long-lost-uncle... or some such thing.

best

Oh, if it hadn't been Ahmed's boozer cousin, they would have found somebody else to tell them what they wanted to hear. Their desperation was hardly a well-kept secret.

Thanks Sean; correction made.

Oh I can rest easy now. At least it allows me to go on blindly believing Bubble Boy was not responsible for the failure. Why not let the masses hear about this?

Headline: Born again 10+ years sober and clean ex-susbtance abuser King George was not responsible for being duped by an alcoholic. /sarcasm

I harken back to the good old days when Nancy Reagan asked astrologers whether today was a good choice for invading Nicaragua. Next up Condi throws chicken bones seeking advice on toppling Iran...........

But in the Feb. 4, 2003, e-mail—written a day before Powell's U.N. appearance—the senior CIA official sharply rebuked one of those skeptical analysts. "Keep in mind the fact that this war's going to happen regardless of what Curve Ball said or didn't say and that the Powers That Be probably aren't terribly interested in whether Curve Ball knows what he's talking about," the CIA official wrote.

LINK

The article also notes this email did not make it into the commission's report. Gee I wonder why?

The death of the pope is so much more important than the fact that our "dead wrong" intelligence from a drunkard caused a war which resulted in the deaths of thousands, right?

Maybe Rummy can find some stoners to go accumulate intelligence on Iran and North Korea's nuclear programs.

When are you guys going to realize that the righteousness of America's wars does not depend on their so-called causes? By the time we've gone to war against other countries, the real reasons are already understood.

Your whining about WMDs is nothing in the face of a free Iraq. NOTHING.

Free Iraq...yep...that means that terrorists are free to murder Iraqis and U.S. troops. Iran and North Korea probably have WMDs. So Bush ignores them. Iraq has nothing. So he invades it. Brilliant! That makes a lot of sense. So it seems the moral of the story is that countries should get WMDs so we won't invade them

Your whining about WMDs is nothing in the face of a free Iraq. NOTHING.

Free Iraq? Where? There's nothing "free" in Iraq. As one Iraqi says:

The most outstanding American inventions in Iraq are the high, reinforced concrete walls that sprang up in and around Baghdad in the aftermath of the occupation. WatchingAmerica.com

Ahhhh. Now that's freedom!