" ::::I have addressed your points. You haven't supported your censorship at all. You are making up standards for Wikipedia that you are selectively enforcing on this article without any reference to Wikipedia's actual rules and standards. If you wish to make up new standards for Wikipedia articles, please seek consensus for those standards. You also have not explained these standards why are these particular experts invalid whereas the experts cited here already are valid? Why is it invalid to include factual information about what Colin Powell reported to the Bush Administration about Feith? Who decides what constitutes a ""professional relationship with Feith"" and why is Gaffney's
" ::::I have addressed your points. You haven't supported your censorship at all. You are making up standards for Wikipedia that you are selectively enforcing on this article without any reference to Wikipedia's actual rules and standards. If you wish to make up new standards for Wikipedia articles, please seek consensus for those standards. You also have not explained these standards why are these particular experts invalid whereas the experts cited here already are valid? Why is it invalid to include factual information about what Colin Powell reported to the Bush Administration about Feith? Who decides what constitutes a ""professional relationship with Feith"" and why is Gaffney's "