Another similar case was CIA's denial, repeated several times that Atta had met with Iraqi intel in Prague. Three times the Czechs said it was so, and three times CIA denied it within minutes of the Czech statement.
But when you dug into it closely, all CIA was saying was that they were unable to confirm such a meeting took place. And so on the basis of their "unable to confirm" the official story became that Czech intel had made it up.
I take the opposite view. If Czech intel made the claim and reiterated again and again that they were certain, even if CIA did not view the meeting themselves, it nevertheless stands confirmed by Czech intel. In other words, it happened. They knew who Atta was. And shortly thereafter they expelled the Iraqi contact.
I agree with your analysis.
I still believe that the CIA has dangerous rogue elements within it that threaten us all.
They functionally betray us when rogue leftist ideologues choose to gang up and release these kinds of “corrections.”
It is a serious problem.
I just got done reading Bush’s 2002 speech describing the threat. I still dont’ see what is wrong with a single word of it and yet we are now supposed to believe that the whole thing was a lie.