I downloaded the report today (link at National Review). It's too large to read in one afternoon, but I just did a search through the document for all occurences of the word "Iraq". I've come to the conclusion that no newspaper will tell you the truth about it, they'll only tell you what they believed before the report was written. So-called "newspapers" like the New York Times only pick and choose the quotations they want their readers to see.
So what does it say? I read that Iraq and Al-Qaeda did approach each other several times, but never made an agreement for a "collaborative operational relationship". I read that while Iraq may not have participated in the planning or support for what happened on 9/11, Richard Clarke was concerned that Osama bin-Laden might attempt to seek refuge in Iraq if his arrangements with the Taliban were disturbed.
What this implies is that there was a lot of uncertainty, not the mendacity that pundits like David Corn claim. Where would bin-Laden go? Is Iraq going to give him sanctuary? Bottom line is there were good reasons to believe Iraq would have been willing to hide him from us.
Unfortunately, the major findings of the report are going to be ignored. Here's something I found, something I bet the editors of The Nation and Mother Jones disagree with:
Recommendation: Just as we did in the Cold War, we need to defend our ideals abroad vigorously. America does stand up for its values. The United States defended, and still defends, Muslims against tyrants and criminals in Somalia, Bosnia, Kosovo, Afghanistan, and Iraq. If the United States does not act aggressively to define itself in the Islamic world, the extremists will gladly do the job for us.
I'll have to read more later, but I don't know if I can read every single page. This report is huge, and it's not easy reading either. Given some of the controversy generated by the commission, I'm not sure if it's worth it, however, based on what I read today, it is a lot less partisan than I expected it to be.
Since I provided a David Corn link, let me provide a link or two to others who disagree with him:
From National Review:
Rich Lowry
Byron York
and The Wall Street Journal.