Yes, old man, surprise, surprise -- I can write a coherent letter. And although you're a bit late to the party, I forgive you because you've finally caught on. If you had been a bit more open-minded to my previous opposing points of view, you might have noticed this phenomenon much earlier.

The truth be told, Garry -- and I'm sure much to your chagrin -- I actually make my living as a writer. Jeeze Louise, who woulda thunk it!?!

As for attacking the idea, not the writer, that's easier said than done, especially when the writer (Joan, for instance) is always hitting the same tired note, as you put it earlier (i.e. Blaming Bush for Baksheesh). With her, it's ALWAYS Bush's fault. How can you NOT attack such a broken, predictable and tiresome record?

AND -- if you dare take a trip down memory lane -- YOU, my friend, are as guilty as me of attacking the writer, only in your case it's not the writer of the original article -- it's the writer of any post who serves up a different point of view.

However...

In the spirit of Christmas (and all that jazz), I promise to renew my resolve to attack the message to a much greater degree than the writer (or poster's response) whenever it's possible, but ONLY if you will agree to do the same.

Civility. Imagine that.

You know, Garry, I recently read somewhere something that rang so true it was scary. It was this: The blogosphere is the only medium that never bothers to inspire a debate that seeks common ground.

Sadly, I think that is true. Maybe we can change that. At least here. All the best.

Pah-leeze, Joan. Why in the world would you glom onto another report from the NIE? Because it’s politically expedient, perhaps? That’s the only reason I can possibly think of.

After all, back in 2002, it was the NIE that told us with “high confidence" that “Iraq is continuing, and in some areas expanding its chemical, biological, nuclear, and missile programs contrary to UN resolutions.” It also concluded with "high confidence" that “Iraq could make a nuclear weapon in months to a year once it acquires sufficient weapons-grade fissile material.”

Yikes!

And yet you’re going to swallow this new report lock, stock and barrel?

Even if it happens to be true, Joan, the report is NOT speculating that Iran has abandoned their nuclear program. It’s speculating that they’ve suspended part of it. And it’s the part that’s the least difficult in building a nuke -- which is turning enriched uranium into a bomb. Again, if it’s even true.

The rest of Iran’s technological chase has never halted. So all that may or may not have happened here is that a wider window may or may not have opened in as far as how soon the Iranians will finally acquire a bomb. And that may or may not mean our military option may or may not have become slightly less urgent. Again, if it's even true. And that’s rather questionable based on the NIE’s track record.

Furthermore, the folks in the intelligence community who put this report together have also been leaking material to the press in order to undermine George W. Bush for several years now (i.e. telephone surveillance of terrorists). Given that and the fact that the NIE was wrong on WMDs, isn’t it far more likely, Joan, that THESE are the reasons Bush is so reticent about pulling back on sanctions. Or taking the military option off the table.

Lastly, there’s the matter of your statement (intertwined with Leverett’s), which misleads readers into thinking that that the new NIE report was leaked. You stated:

“That the full document was made public now, Leverett believes, represents an embattled intelligence community fighting back. ‘The intelligence leadership made a judgment that basically for their own protection they needed to make it public,’ Leverett says.”

Well, Joan, the truth of the matter is that the new NIE report was never leaked, it was released only after the White House authorized its publication.

Unfortunately, what the Democrats are doing with what’s being speculated in the new NIE report is using it to accuse Bush of exaggerating the threat and/or being an outright liar -- all the usual demagoguery at the expense of national security.

What Democrats SHOULD be doing is scrutinizing the living hell out of this new report, due to the NIE’s appalling track record. Then, after digesting its ramifications thoroughly, they should be thankful that JUST MAYBE we MIGHT have more time to resolve the Iranian nuclear threat and retool their political stance accordingly.