Who's shucking and jiving whom here? The Associated Press has sent out this item with the following noted within:

Also in August 2001USS. intelligence officials received two uncorroborated reports suggesting that terrorists might use airplanes, including one that suggested al-Qaida operatives were considering flying a plane into a U.S. embassy, current and former government officials said.

As every reporter knows, one statement made by one person and no one else is an uncorroborated message.

Two messages from separate sources saying the same thing is a corroborated message, not a second uncorroborated message.

The *quality* of the individual messengers increases or decreases the likely veracity of the message.

The *quantity* of the messengers can also serve to strengthen the likelihood of the veracity of the message.

A message from the officer in charge ordinarily needs no corroboration. He's "The Man."

A message from one private is an uncorroborated message.

The same or similar message obtained from two privates is a corroborated message, but still weak.

The same or closely similar message coming from five privates, two corporals and a buck sergeant without confirmation from the top is still theoretically an *uncorroborated* message, but the prospect of truth is getting pretty damn likely.

Also, if 714 civilians with absolutely neither personal expertise nor authority to speak for the military should independently rush to the microphone to say they were bombed and many people were killed, that, too, greatly points to the likelihood of truth -- even if they don't personally have wounds and bomb fragment to show the reporter. And if the crunching sound of exploding bombs can be heard in the near distance, so much the better.

It sounds like AP is playing games here, or is being gamed.