You may use it, but I will offer a caveat, which I hope you will also include. In an Internet thread, things are condensed a great deal. I take the time to look at lots of evidence, but it takes a ling time to record and digest, and of course replying with the 10 year fiancial reports from Haliburton (for example) is very time consuming and difficult to do with limited bandwidth. This means that you may dismiss my views as being "contrary to the norm", while if peole took the time to do the origional reserch, they might be coming to rather different conclusions then "George Bush is a War Criminal", or "BMD is weaponizing space" to use two rather notorious examples.
Your proposed paper could also include the rather interesting observation about how information can be made to dissapear on the left: During the 1990's all the world's intelligence agencies were convinced about the reality of the WMD program in Iraq, and past evidence of Iraqi use in the Iran Iraq war, and against Kurdish civillians in Iraq were a good predictor of how Saddam Hussein would behave with new stocks of WMD. IF you peruse the records of the US Senate, you will even see speeches by Senator John Edwards warning of the immanent danger to the United States that Saddam's weapns programs posed. Somehow this has all gone down the memory hole and all we hear now is "George Bush lied".