The folks making the claim about "forgery" were not commenting on the nature of the copies, which were always described as "copies". The originals were left behind in the hands of the targets of the espionage that resulted in the holographic "copies" falling into the hands of various intelligence services.
My comment refers to the initial story that starts this thread ~ it's not the documents themselves that are forgeries, but the contents of the "copies" ~ because the intelligence agencies do not have the originals!
The Guardian via TheAge.com.au, of http://www.theage.com.au/cgi-bin/common/popupPrintArticle.pl?path=/articles/2003/07/17/1058035132835.html-- "Iraq uranium forgeries crudely done, newspaper reveals," By Sophie Arie, Rome, July 18 2003
Forged documents on which the US, Britain and Australia allegedly based their case that Iraq was seeking uranium from Niger were so crudely drafted that it is unlikely they would have survived more than a few hours' - or minutes' - scrutiny by any specialist, it has emerged.
The letters and paperwork, which surfaced in Italy's left-of-centre daily La Repubblica on Wednesday, reveal how amateurish the forgeries were.
Although they run to only eight pages, they contain more than a dozen easily checkable errors. A logo, supposedly the national symbol of Niger, is badly drawn and missing much of the detail normally used in government documents.
US President George Bush used the forged documents to build the case for war with Iraq. The US has since accepted they were bogus and blamed British intelligence for supplying the information.
At prime minister's questions in the House of Commons on Tuesday, Mr Blair insisted the British claim was based not on the forged documents but on independent intelligence.
He said the link between Niger and Iraq was not an invention of the the CIA or Britain.
The International Atomic Energy Agency, the United Nations body responsible for non-proliferation, reminded Britain on Wednesday that it had a duty to hand over any new intelligence for verification.
The forged documents were passed in February this year by the US to the IAEA, which a month later declared them to be forgeries. The IAEA has not released the documents. But it is understood the documents are the same as those leaked to La Repubblica.
The paper claimed the forged documents were passed to British intelligence in Rome and their contents given to the CIA.
The documents, apparently from senior Niger authorities in Niamey to the country's ambassador in Rome, and a telex, from Niger's embassy in Rome, all relate to alleged negotiations for Iraq to buy 500 tonnes of uranium from Niger. The letters, in French and stamped with the Niger Government seal, are scattered with spelling mistakes and contain several glaring inconsistencies.
One letter is dated July 30, 1999, although it talks of negotiations between Niger and Iraq after that date, on June 29, 2000.
Italy has repeatedly denied formally handing the documents to other countries, but the head of a parliamentary commission on intelligence and security, Enzo Bianco, said on Wednesday he could not deny that Italy may have passed on the documents in an informal way.
- Guardian
This story was found at: http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2003/07/17/1058035132835.html