----- Original Message ----- From: "John D. Giorgis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Killer Bs Discussion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, July 29, 2003 9:57 PM Subject: Re: Seth Finkelstein on 16 words
> At 09:41 PM 7/28/2003 -0400 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > You (e) ask the British to provide documenation of their claim. If they do > > so you can include it in the SOU. > > Actually, Bush *did* do that, and Britain said that they completely stand > by their intelligence with the highest degree of confidence. Which British? The worker bees, or top management. That seems like an issue that the boys and girls in the trenches should work out together and then put forth a joint understanding to both Blair and Bush. If there is uncertainty, then the statement doesn't belong in the State of the Union message. There are many advantages to being as strong minded and focused on one's goal as Bush is. One disadvantage is that one tends to discard data that is inconsistant with one's certainty and highlight that which agrees. We do know that there was also conflict between the certainty at the top and the understanding in the trenches in GB. My view is that Bush and Blair had an understanding of Hussein through which they filtered all the information that they had. I think part of their understanding, his willingness to kill and torture countless thousands, was spot on. But, it definately appears that their assessment of the WMD was wrong. It is hard to imagine hundreds of tons of deliverables, 45 minutes away from delivery that were quickly hidden or taken into Syria without us being able to trace them. Again, it looks like a classic case of management overruling the experts in the trenches. My suggestion for the proper action for Bush seems clear to me. Dan M. _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
