Jlallen, re: >>"I am not aware that our intelligence community discredited the uranium purchase issue. In fact, our intelligence community was unable to independently verify that a particualr purchase had been made from Niger. The Brits based their intelligence upon independent informaiton, not all of which was shared with the US and which they still stand behind."<<
It is rarely, if ever, possible to prove a negative. When someone says "prove they didn't (you choose) -beat their wife-molest little children-do cocaine," how do you possibly prove that? Similarly, when we say that our intelligence community could not rule out the Niger uranium story, that's a fact. All they could do was to say that there was no credible evidence to support it. When Bush said that British intelligence supported that allegation, what he was actually saying was that it was, as far as we knew, a credible allegation. It wasn't credible and our intelligence people had investigated the allegation and found it baseless.
It doesn't matter what some other country SAYS it has that it CAN'T SHARE. It's ludicrous to assume that Britain is keeping secrets from the U.S. and it's own citizens on an issue that threatens to result in the defeat of both Tony Blair and George Bush. If there was something there you would see the head of the CIA on national television putting his credibility on the line and saying "I have seen the top secret British information and it is credible." As with the British claim that Bush repeated to the effect that Iraq could mobilize their wmds in less than an hour, we see stonewalling, sleight of hand and no good explanation.
More in next post. |
