Question per the Senate WMDs report

[salin]

the coverage on the report was quick and over... in part because of the 911 report, then the convention, etc.

There was a very interesting item - but I don't know where to find it, and am not sure of a specific detail - yet it feels VERY important.

The committee wrote that the original NIE had been much more cautious in its documentation with caveats in footnotes that explained that x point or y point wasn't clear, or wasn't verified with any other source, or was openly questioned by another intelligence agency. However the report that went to Congress had been stripped of the caveats. (We knew this). The bombshell (still unexploded in the media) was that when key CIA folks with responsibility for the report were asked... none could say WHEN or WHO changed the form of the report.

Question - did the original report go to the NSC or anyone in the administration? (I thought that it did but am not sure.)

Does anyone remember the story about the CIA not being able to state WHO OR WHEN (or why) the report was changed before it went to Congress?

[shraby]

1. Don't forget that the

White House refuses to release the one page document that Bush used to take us to war on..the synopsis of the NIE report.

[salin]

2. That is part of my question... did the WH get the FULL version of the NIE?

and back to your point... bush didn't even read it.. the whole cover for the 16 words thing was that CONDI... in briefing him... had missed the caveats (oh yea, there were caveats, perhaps that answers my first question)... and thus hadn't been clear in her briefing to him. As if these folks can't be bothered to read these briefs and reports carefully.

[salin]

3. kick for feedback

[salin]

4. Does ANYONE remember this little episode?