On the heels of the 9/11 Commission report stating there is/was no evidence of a "collaborative relationship" between Saddam Hussein and al-Qaida, a bipartisan Senate report (511 pages!) was issued yesterday (note it wasn't issued on a Monday or Tuesday, but rather a Friday, where it can then get muted by the weekend) slamming the CIA for misleading / shoddy intel reports leading up to the Iraq war. Here's a key segment:

"The Central Intelligence Agency reasonably assessed that there were likely several instances of contacts between Iraq and Al Qaeda throughout the 1990's but that these contacts did not add up to an established formal relationship," the Senate report said, adding that the C.I.A's assessment that "there was no evidence proving Iraqi complicity or assistance in an Al Qaeda attack was responsible and objective."

GW's response? "We removed a declared enemy of America, who had the capability of producing weapons of mass destruction, and could have passed that capability to terrorists bent on acquiring them."

Based on that glib answer, it begs the question: shouldn't we then be invading / attacking North Korea next? And then Iran? Both are declared enemies of the U.S. who we already know for certain have nuclear capabilities -- as compared to Iraq who had none.

My hope is that Edwards will quickly take on the traditional attack-dog role for Kerry and hound Bush/Cheney on this issue.