Either way, it bodes very ill for our future.
Frankly, no, I wasn't thinking it was shady, I was thinking it was protecting their sources. Obviously Blair must have told Bush they were very certain of their information.
Now, since the Straw letter that I posted a link to keeps getting ignored, and you post a link to a Guardian story that misrepresents that letter, I'm going to post the article and letter here. And btw, the Guardian article is the second I've seen say this is straining U.S. and British ties. That is wrong. I perceive Blair and Straw are supporting the U.S. by, for example, the release to the public of this letter:
Straw defends UK dossier uranium claims
Foreign Secretary Jack Straw has defended the Government's decision to include in its first Iraqi dossier claims that Saddam Hussein tried to get uranium from Africa.
CIA director George Tenet has apologised for allowing President George Bush to refer to the alleged trade between Iraq and Niger in his most recent state of the union address, after it emerged that evidence for the claim was based on forged documentation. (my comment here about the forged document. U.S. has said they have other information aside from that document--fragments they call it)
Mr Straw acknowledged that the CIA did express reservations about the use of the claim in the British Government's September dossier. But he insisted that it was based on what British officials regarded as reliable intelligence that had not been shared with the US.
In a letter to Donald Anderson, chairman of the Commons foreign affairs select committee, Mr Straw said: "I am writing to deal with two points relating to the statement in the Government's September Iraq dossier that 'Iraq has sought the supply of significant quantities of uranium from Africa'.
"First, press reporting has claimed that this statement is contradicted by the report of a US envoy, Ambassador Joseph Wilson, who visited Niger in early 2002 to investigate the subject on behalf of the CIA. I want to make clear that neither I nor, to the best of my knowledge, any UK officials were aware of Ambassador Wilson's visit until reference first appeared in the press, shortly before your hearings last month. In response to our questions, the US authorities have confirmed that Ambassador Wilson's report was not shared with the UK.
"We have now seen a detailed account of Ambassador Wilson's report. It does indeed describe the denials of Niger government officials in early 2002 that a contract had been concluded for the sale of yellowcake to Iraq. But, as CNN have reported, Ambassador Wilson's report also noted that in 1999 an Iraqi delegation sought the expansion of trade links with Niger - and that former Niger government officials believed that this was in connection with the procurement of yellowcake.
"Uranium is Niger's main export. In other words, this element of Ambassador Wilson's report supports the statement in the Government's dossier.
"Second, the media have reported that the CIA expressed reservations to us about this element of the September dossier. This is correct.
"However, the US comment was unsupported by explanation and UK officials were confident that the dossier's statement was based on reliable intelligence, which we had not shared with the US (for good reasons, which I have given your committee in private session). A judgment was therefore made to retain it.
"Finally, may I underline that the JIC's (Joint Intelligence Committee) assessment of Iraq's efforts to reconstitute its nuclear programme did not rest on the attempted acquisition of yellowcake alone. The Government's dossier catalogued a range of other procurement activities, and referred to intelligence that scientists had been recalled to the programme in 1998. You will be aware of the recent discovery of technical documentation and centrifuge parts - necessary for the enrichment of uranium - buried at the home of an Iraqi nuclear scientist in Baghdad."