I had intended on going to the Snow Party but I hit a snag and couldn't make it. I hate owing shit to people.

Firstly, HAPPY B-DAY (e:hodown)!! I was interested to see that (e:jessbob) was there, as well as the usual suspects. I'm glad that some people posted some pictures from the party - looks like it was a blast!

You should be the last guy questioning sources, considering that you constantly use things like the Guardian here, which is unabashedly anti-American. You want me to give you credit for using a government document for once? Lol. Firstly, the 9/11 Commission is not a government entity, so it wasn't a document produced by the government of the United States of America. Secondly, this same document and the people who wrote it contradicts itself on several occasions.

Lets talk a while about who is wasting who's time here. Thomas Kean, you know... the guy who lead the 9/11 Commission? This is what he said on July 22, 2004 - 10 days after the usual suspects like the NYT blared on their front pages that the Commission found no link between Iraq and Al-Qaeda -

"THERE WAS NO QUESTION (my emphasis) in our minds that there was a relationship between Iraq and al Qaeda."

Go ahead and look through the 9/11 Report (something that I don't think you've read, either). Stop stealing from liberal talking points for once and read it for yourself. You'll find several references to "friendly contacts" between Al-Qaeda and the Iraqi government.

By the way, what you aren't telling our good readers here is that the Report also doesn't mention that the guy who made the chemicals for the 1993 WTC attack was an Iraqi, which the Commission conveniently brushed aside.

You also aren't telling our readers that the Report mentions thinks like meetings between bin Laden and Iraqi officials as early as 1998, when several Iraqi officials went to Afghanistan.

You also aren't mentioning that these meetings were arranged by, according to the report, Zawahiri.

The report also mentions, although once again in a passing glance, that an Iraqi named Ahmed Hikmat Shakir was part of the 9/11 planning sessions - apparently for some Commissioners this was not important and received a footnote... a footnote!

The report mentions an email from Richard Clarke to Sandy Berger, the same guy who provided evidence against the connection, who speculated that the heavy Iraqi presence at Sudanese chemical factories was "probably the direct result of the Iraqi/Al-Qaeda agreement." What was Richard Clarke talking about?

The report also mentions that the Clinton Justice Department noted the Iraq-Al Qaeda connection in its sealed indictment of Osama bin Laden. Gee, Billybob, there sure weren't any connections there between terrorists and Al-Qaeda, hyuk hyuk!

Clinton's former SoD William Cohen testified to the Commission, suggesting that Iraq and bin Laden collaborated on the construction of a VX factory in Sudan. Chairman Kean was asked why this testimony wasn't given weight. His answer was that the information was given weight, but the lefties on the Commission didn't believe William Cohen!

Pay attention to the document and the testimony, and you'll find the argument that there was no connection between Iraq and Al-Qaeda laughable - if the commission ignored its own information and would not connect the dots (although the LEADER of the damn organization said that there was no doubt of a connection) thats another story.

Actually, I have to admit that I set a trap for you. There was a speciic reason why I chose The Weekly Standard -

a) The article was based on REAL government documents, not some whitewashed report produced by people who helped cause the communication problem between intelligence agencies and law enforcement, a major problem during 9/11 (coughjamiegorelickcough). You may not like the Weekly Standard, although you've never read it, but the facts of the matter are unclassified and part of the public record now. You need to do your own homework. Even organizations such as the World Socialists agree with me, which is scary.

b) I wanted people to see that you would ignore the facts of the matter and jump on a conservative magazine that you'd never read. You've still not countered the cross-referenced GOVERNMENT documents that show that Zawahiri met with Saddam in 1992, and that Saddam paid the guy $300,000. I can't blame you; if the Democrat politicians can't figure out a way to counter it, you probably couldn't either.

c) I wanted people to see that you weren't actually interested in debate, and that despite your own admission you ARE trying to bait people.

I'm not playing your game. If you are interested in debate, then stick to the topics instead of shifting away from things you are struggling with. And, for the love of God, do your own damn homework and come prepared before addressing me - otherwise, I'm going to insist on ignoring you. I'm not going to have my time wasted by some liberal who is falsely declaring that he is interested in legitimate discussion on serious matters. I was hoping for a lot more. Get the Kool-Aid out of your diet.

p.s. Why is it mindblowing to you that the President said something that all of us already knew? By the way, what Bush said is not a condemnation of every single bit of information the CIA and the REST OF THE FREAKING WORLD came up with regarding Iraq. To draw a conclusion like that is completely silly.

Just joking.

This is just an anonymous former e-stripper letting everyone know that I refuse to shave or cut my hair until the end of Dart League. It's like the NHL playoffs, yo!

I guarantee you won't be disappointed -

This is probably the silliest thing I've ever read in the "A" section of a major paper. Gee, who would think... an elite reporter dedicating a 2-page article proving their weeniedom and pettiness.

My answer to them would be this - shut up, sit down, put the food down your neck and move on, or fly coach like the rest of us. If somebody like that has a pathological and disturbing incapability to deal with whats served on Air Force 2, why should I pay attention to this person when they write something other than a fluff piece?

Ok... you can be a geek or a non-geek, but anybody with any bit of imagination at all would get a kick out of this -

Richard Branson is building a $225 million spaceport in New Mexico. At the moment, commercial spaceflight will begin in 2008 and will cost the traveler $200,000. I would give just about anything to be able to do this.

Cut and pasted from the site -

COUNTDOWN BEGINS. SIX DAYS TO LAUNCH
You may well fly Virgin Atlantic Upper Class into the nearest major city. Possibly we will pick you up in the Virgin Galactic executive jet and shuttle you to the Virgin Galactic space resort, where you will be guided to your luxury accommodation. This will be home during your stay.

Every morning you could be ferried by helicopter to the training base and spaceport where you might undergo six days of medical preparation, G-Tolerance training, talking to space experts about how to get the most from your experience, fly the simulator and in the evenings dine with astronauts and guest speakers.

You could possibly have the opportunity to ride in fast jets, to experience negative gravity in our executive jet and then watch as one of the other launches leaves earth for the near reaches of space; possibly you may even ride in the mother ship. That in itself will be phenomenal, as you watch the ship rise vertically to Mach 1 (around 600 mph) in less than 10 seconds and eventually disappear into space at over 3 times the speed of sound.

LIFT OFF

Your journey out of this world begins not on the launch pad like a conventional space rocket but on a runway. Virgin Galactic craft are carried under a mother ship to almost 10 miles above sea level. Then the countdown begins.

5, 4, 3, 2, 1.....the VSS Enterprise, your spaceship, is released from the mother ship. Almost immediately, as your astronaut pilot ignites the engine, you will hear the roar of the rocket behind you as the enormous power accelerates you at 4G to a speed faster than a bullet.

All the time, the ergonomic design of the seats will keep you comfortable.

As you hurtle through the edges of the atmosphere, through the panoramic individual windows you will be able to see the cobalt blue sky turn to mauve and indigo and finally black. Out will come the stars, clear and bright... even though it is daytime!

Soon the rocket motor cuts out. Now, from the rush of adrenalin and the rocket motor, everything is quiet.

You are weightless...

You are in space!

The ship will manoeuvre, so you can look for the first time back at the planet you have just come from. The view will be over a thousand miles in any direction. That's like seeing North Africa if you were in a spaceship above London or Miami from overhead Washington DC. You will see the clarity of the solar system and the harshness of the sun.

It will be humbling. It will be spiritual.

TOUCHDOWN

After these precious minutes soaking up the thrill of space, you will start your return to earth. Your seats will recline to make the journey through the atmosphere as comfortable as possible. At around 50,000 feet the spaceship will return to a glider-like configuration for the landing back at the spaceport.

Possibly, later that evening, at a magnificent gala dinner, you will be awarded your astronaut wings and maybe even a part of the rocket motor used on your trip for you to keep as a memento.

Video and photographic images of your moment of making space history will be yours to show your kids and grandkids. Remember, of course, in their lifetime Virgin Galactic might have made it possible so that space travel is as common and as fun as flying with Virgin Atlantic.

You can tell them you helped make it happen.