The question of Wilson and his knowledge of the Niger document forgeries:

[Gabi Hayes]

They keep saying he's lying about the significance of the forgeries in his explanation of his trip to Niger.

this is the only point about which I'm uncertain, regarding his credibility

can somebody clear this up?

did he say something about the forgeries when referring to his trip, or his report that makes the timing not work?

What I've heard is that he couldn't have known about the forgeries, yet referred to them in bolstering his assessment that there was little possibility of yellowcake sales from Niger to Iraq.

I know I'm going to get into an argument at work over this tomorrow, and would like to be well-girded

thanks

[Emit]

1. I highly recommend reading

the 'Niger'(section II) section of the Senate Intelligence Committee report, esp. pp.44-45, and then Wilson's response/follow-up to their report. It explains why they keep saying Wilson 'lied.' As I noted in another thread on a related subject, that report is, IMO, purposefully circuitous and only helps with all of the fanatical right wing talking points, thanks much to Pat Roberts.

The report, in PDF docs can be found here:

http://news.findlaw.com/legalnews/lit/iraq/documents.html

Wilson's letter to the Senate Intelligence Committee is here:

http://www.buzzflash.com/contributors/05/07/con05233.html

Good luck.

[Gabi Hayes]

2. thanks....I have both those items in the thread I started here

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=5215940&mesg_id=5215940

I've read so much stuff the last few days I can't remember anything about the documents

I'll reread those sections, though