First of all lets look at who you are defending.
Falsified straw man. I'm attacking YOUR claims, no more. I'm not DEFENDING anyone.
Mr. Manafizzle is vilifying America for invading Iraq.
Then take that up with him, why don't you.
Then he goes one step further and vilifies America for "creating" Saddam, or so the inconvenient source claims.
You ought to be doing more reading. That "inconvenient" source isn't the only comment to that effect. Try the "Economist", perhaps, or even some good conservative news magazine.
So Mr. Manafizzle's argument is that America is evil for "creating" Saddam and evil for removing Saddam. Wow, can't argue with that line of logic.
Whatever your problem with Manifesto is, it doesn't justify your vilifying an organization for saying something that's been said in many places, softly to loudly, and with at least some shreds of what look like actual evidence.
Take your problems with Manifesto out on Manifesto.
And then out of the blue you're here to defend his sources. I know the CIA is into alot of things around the world. They are after all an external spy agency and external spy agencies can't lay down with dogs and not get a few fleas.
I agree, but that doesn't deny what he's pointed out.
The CIA has a very hard job, and their crystal ball, just like everyone else's, is completely cloudy.
On the other hand, there was a time in our foreign policy, and you should see who was running CIA at the time, when we had some apparently very ill-advised covert actions in many places, not just Iraq. It's something you have to admit, I think, if you've read the details.
Some I can ascribe to the cloudy crystal ball, of course, but some appears to be a more basic arrogance, or perhaps ignorance, at work. Of course, nobody here (well, I think, nobody, at least) has enough information to know for sure.
I have no problem with a CIA/Saddam connection, what I do have a problem with is Mr. Manafizzles endless tirades about how evil America is...or haven't you noticed that modus operandi. 
