Definitely the most intelligent, articulate analysis I have seen yet on the BBC, Dr. Kelly, Andrew Gilligan and the “sexing up” of the Blair dossier. And this paragraph wins a gold star:
It appears that Gilligan used information from a single source that he says he had reason to trust, he tweaked the wording to make it sound a bit more ominous than it was, and in the end it turned out that his specific charges were probably untrue. But regarding the infamous 45-minute claim, Tony Blair’s dossier also used information from a single source that British intelligence says they had reason to trust, they tweaked the wording to make it sound a bit more ominous than it was, and in the end it turned out that their specific charges were untrue. This leads to a pretty obvious question for both sides: why is it OK for your guy to do this but not the other guy?
Read the whole post, and don’t miss the excellent comments.
[Via BONOBO LAND]
1
By greg
bingo!
September 6, 2003 @ 1:03 am | Comment