BBC still telling porkies about Wilson/Niger
Now, I don't want to beat a dead horse, but it is both astonishing and galling that, even after BBC Online's Paul Reynolds managed to do a commendable job setting out the details of the affair (after much prompting from TAE), the wider BBC still refuses to tell the true story. The very first entry in the timeline has three sentences, each of which is, in a word, false.
Joseph C Wilson IV, a retired career diplomat, is asked by the CIA to go to Niger, in west Africa, to investigate reports that Iraq had tried to buy uranium there. On his return, Mr Wilson reports back that he does not believe this. Nevertheless, President Bush refers to the reports in his State of the Union address in January 2003.First, Wilson was not sent to investigate reports that Iraq had tried to buy uranium in Niger. He was sent to investigate reports that Iraq had purchased uranium there.
Second, Wilson did not report back that he did not believe that Iraq had tried to buy uranium in Niger. He reported back that he believed no purchase had taken place.
Third, Bush did not refer in his SOTU address to the reports which Wilson was sent to investigate. He referred to a British intelligence claim which, significantly, British intelligence stands by to this very day.
Three sentences; three falsehoods. The BBC at its best.
Also notable is the complete absence in the timeline of any reference at all to the Senate Intelligence Committee investigation that looked into the matter, much less any reference to the fact that the investigation totally discredited Wilson. The BBC is shameless.
(Review of the Miller interview hopefully to come later this weekend.)