- Top Features:
- War Room
- Glenn Greenwald
- Broadsheet
- Joan Walsh
- Camille Paglia
- Since You Asked
- Follow Salon:
Read other letters about this article
The whole bit about 'credible'... absolutely unfathomable. It never happened like that. Two wings of the CIA having different definitions for specific terms as frequently used for business purpose, is not true by the very specific fact that such terminology is set out in numerous operations mauels given to incoming employees. All these people do all day long is discuss whether people and their horseshit stories are 'credible' and he expects us to buy this cacamamy story of his?
If you don't wanna take my word for it: Don't neverind the fact that a dozen intelligent people, irrespective of topic, sitting in a room for hours would pretty quickly come to the realization that their terminology was crossed. I think anyone who has ever gone to a job where meetings happen has managed to navigate this divide.
So: The author is a duper, duped, or just plain making things up. One and Three seem 'credible' since he claims the White House had no input after it has been cited by numerous individuals, that they essentially told Tenet they wanted data that would support their desire to go to war.
