John D. Giorgis wrote: > At 08:07 PM 7/24/2003 -0400 Robert J. Chassell wrote: > >The phrase "The British have learned...." suggests to a listening > >public that the US President had US intelligence agencies investigate > >the matter. > > It does not suggest this to me. Indeed the mere fact that British > intelligence is being mentioned in the State of the Union > suggests exactly > the opposite to me.
Umm, and since when have the Presidents of the USA been in the habit of basing their policy statements on intelligence reports from other countries without having their own agencies verify the same? > If the US had verified this claim with our > intelligence, I would hardly anticipate that the President > would credit the > British in the SotU. If the British had first passed on the information, then why wouldn't the US Prez. credit them with it? > If your criticism is that Bush said "learned" instead of > "informed us that > they believe", then who is being pedantic and mincing words here? I think his criticism is that when Bush said 'learnt', he should have said 'they so claim but we haven't been able to verify it'. When the President of the USA addresses the Congress, in the SotU address, the unstated implication is that the veracity of his every word has been checked by all the resources at his command. Ritu GCU Innit? _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
