Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: JohnM who wrote (55034)	7/19/2004 1:39:12 PM
From: JohnM	Respond to of 793568

My mistake. I forgot to include the url for the Senate Intelligence Committee report. It's here. But if you decide to bring it up on your computer to check some of this, be prepared to wait a bit. It takes a while. Even on a DSL line. web.mit.edu

To: JohnM who wrote (55034)	7/19/2004 2:33:37 PM
From: LindyBill	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 793568

Here is the text from the Senate report, from page 442. Despite our hard and successful work to deliver a unanimous report, however, there were two issues on which the Republicans and Democrats could not agree: 1) whether the Committee should conclude that former Ambassador Joseph Wilson's public statements were not based on knowledge he actually possessed, and 2) whether the Committee should conclude that it was the former ambassador's wife who recommended him for his trip to Niger. Josh didn't include that it goes on to say, following the above paragraph, on page 443 "While there was no dispute with the underlying facts, my democratic colleagues refused to allow the following conclusions to appear in the report:" It then lists the "Conclusions" in Black, and the "underlying facts" in normal type. I will do the same. Here they are. Remember, they don't deny the underlying facts. I am extracting only because I have to type this from the PDF file. check the page yourself. The searchable version is at web.mit.edu "Conclusion: The plan to send the former ambassador to Niger was suggested by the former ambassador's wife, a CIA employee. (facts)...the former ambassador's wife sent a memorandum to the Deputy Chief...... my husband has good relations with both the PM and the former minister of mines, both of whom could shed light on this activity. " The Dems refused to sign off on the conclusion, but they didn't dispute the facts. Here is the Niger paragraph on page 73 of the report that ALL signed off on. "Conclusion 13. The report on the the former ambassador's trip to Niger, disseminated in March 2002, did not change any analysts' assessments of the Iraq-Niger uranium deal. For most analysts, the information in the report lent more credibility to the original Central Intelligence agency (CIA) reports on the uranium deal, but State Department Bureau of Intelligence and Research, (INR) analysts believed that the report supported their assessment that Niger was unlikely to be willing or able to sell uranium to Iraq." So the facts show that his wife did recommend him for the job, and his report back was positive, not negative, as he later claimed. There is nothing new on Wilson/Plame to come. All the "Further word" form Josh won't change those facts. Give it up, John.