"...In effect, the commission report endorsed the views of officials at the C.I.A. and F.B.I., who have long been dismissive of a supposed Prague meeting and of the administration's broader assertions concerning an Iraq-Qaeda alliance. ""In effect"...that's editorializing. But its the NYTimes, it will become the common knowledge
Here's one for you from Epstein's site (I can't find it elsewhere)
Tenet summed up the true status of the case in his appearance before the Senate Intelligence Committee on Feb 24, 2004:That's a fair statement by Tenet. But this doesn't comport with Risen's "officials." So, who are Risen's officials? I'll take Tenet on the record.SEN. LEVIN: Was the intelligence Committee's assessment -- what is the Intelligence Committee's assessment of whether or not 9/11 hijacker Mohamed Atta met with Ahmed al-Ani, an alleged Iraq intelligence officer in Iraq in April of 2001. What is your assessment?
MR. TENET: Sir, I know you have a paper up here that outlines all that for you. It's a classified paper. My recollection is we can't prove that one way or another.
So I have the 11 PM news on in the background in the other room.
They just said something to the effect of;
--
The commission released evidence that Atta was captured on video at an ATM on the 4th, province that he could not have met with an agent of the Iraqi government *on that same day* as some have claimed.
--
Of course the meeting is alleged to have occured on the 9th, not the 4th, but why let such facts get in the way of reading DNC talking points???
Unbelievable.