krispos42 says, “A month after that, the various federal agencies conclude the documents are false, yet they still somehow wind up in the 2003 SOTU speech gave, the famous Sixteen Words.”
You’re lying about the time line.
SSCI Phase I report, page 80:
Conclusion 21. When coordinating the State of the Union, no Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) analysts or officials told the National Security Council (NSC) to remove the “16 words” or that there were concerns about the credibility of the Iraq-Niger uranium reporting. A CIA official’s original testimony to the Committee that he told an NSC official to remove the words “Niger” and “500 tons” from the speech, is incorrect.
Review of Intelligence on Weapons of Mass Destruction (Lord Butler Report)
Paragraph 503:
From our examination of the intelligence and other material on Iraqi attempts to buy uranium from Africa, we have concluded that:
a. It is accepted by all parties that Iraqi officials visited Niger in 1999.
b. The British Government had intelligence from several different sources indicating that this visit was for the purpose of acquiring uranium. Since uranium constitutes almost three-quarters of Niger’s exports, the intelligence was credible.
c. The evidence was not conclusive that Iraq actually purchased, as opposed to having sought, uranium, and the British Government did not claim this.
d. The forged documents were not available to the British Government at the time its assessment was made, and so the fact of the forgery does not undermine it.
__________
As for insults, your entire approach reeks of carefully crafted condescension and über-snarkiness, so for you to congratulate yourself on your patience and forbearance is simply more dishonesty.
You really do have a problem expressing the truth in all its forms, don’t you?
