I have always thought of CIA people as very brave. Even considering what I KNOW about them and their dirty wars here in Latin America and elsewhere, these people are willing to put their collective asses on the line, therefore I don't find it at all hard to understand why CIA agents are the one's giving up the ghost on Bush Administration dirty tricks and lies.

Drumheller is the latest... By tomorrow morning, his relevance will be questioned, as will his patriotism. He will likely be called a political hack, and if he is really unlucky, Michelle Malkin will publish his home phone number on her website.

Some Predictions
Whatever happens, the man is about to catch a WHOLE LOT OF HELL, from the Wingnuts. They will spin this as a non event(Bush may have gotten this report, but it was one of MANY conflicting reports, yada, yada). They will attack the a.) credibility b.) patriotism c.) motivations or d.) all of the above, of Drumheller. It's early yet, and I have not seen any of the usual suspects comment on it. Likely they are all waiting to see what the spin will be. (Although they deny it, you ever notice how when something like this happens, most of the big Righty Tighty Blogs tow the same line?)My conservative readers will post somethign like, "David, I thought you were smarter than this... yada yada." Someone will dig up that Drumheller made a contribution to Kerry or John F. Kennedy or something to that effect, and therefore is a rabbid Democrat. Someone will ask why he never spoke up until now... You got the picture. Lets wait until tomorrow... See how many of my predictions shake out.

Hmmmm, looks like some of my questions have already been answered:

Marshall says:

   "Did the Robb-Silverman Commission not hear about what Drumheller had to say? What about the Roberts Committee? He was quite clear. He was interviewed by the Robb-Silverman Commission. Three times apparently... Now, quite a few of us (me included) have been arguing for almost two years now that those reports were fundamentally dishonest in the story they told about why we were so badly misled in the lead up to war. The fact that none of Drumheller's story managed to find its way into those reports, I think, speaks volumes about the agenda that the writers of those reports were pursuing.

   "But what it shows even more clearly is that none of this stuff has yet been investigated by anyone whose principal goal is not covering for the White House."

Will the media finally start asking the right questions for a change? Please don't fall for Dan Bartlett's excuses.

Atrios says: "The real point isn't the actual revelation, it's that he's revealed it before to people tasked with investigating this stuff, who promptly filed it in the circular filing cabinet."

FDL is wondering when the swiftboating will begin. 

So it looks like the guy DID speak up before, and it was promptly covered up. And I figure the swiftboating will begin by tomorrow morning, when these guys have had time to read their GOP memos and had their morning coffee.

It's coming, and more than likely the Europeans will be on board.

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the hardline President of Iran, launched an angry tirade against the West yesterday, accusing it of a 'dark ages' mentality and threatening retaliation unless it recognised his country's nuclear ambitions.

In a blistering assault, Ahmadinejad repeated the Islamic regime's position that it would press ahead with a nuclear programme despite threats by the European Union and United States to refer Iran to the UN Security Council, where it could face possible sanctions. He added that Iran was a 'civilised nation' that did not need such weapons. Iran insists its nuclear programme is a wholly peaceful attempt to generate electricity.

Addressing a rare press conference in Tehran, he appeared to issue thinly veiled threats against Western countries, implying that they could face serious consequences unless they backed down. 'You need us more than we need you. All of you today need the Iranian nation,' Ahmadinejad said. 'Why are you putting on airs? You don't have that might.'

Reminding the West that it had supported the monarchical regime of the former Shah, Mohammed Reza Pahlavi - overthrown in the 1979 Islamic revolution - he went on: 'Those same powers have done their utmost to oppress us, but this nation, because of its dignity, has forgiven them to a large extent. But if they persist with their present stance, maybe the day will come when the Iranian nation will reconsider.' He added: 'If they want to deny us our rights, we have ways to secure those rights.'

Ahmadinejad, an ultra-Islamist populist elected last June, did not elaborate on his apparent threat. But Iran is the world's fourth-largest oil producer and analysts have predicted that any disruption to its supplies could have a grave impact on global markets.

The Iranian President's outburst - the latest in a series asserting Iran's nuclear rights and questioning Israel's right to exist - came after the EU last week effectively abandoned two-and-a-half years of negotiations with the Iranians. The move came after Iran decided to remove UN seals at a nuclear plant in Natanz, enabling it to resume research into uranium enrichment, a process that can be used to produce a nuclear weapon.