Friday, March 12, 2004

We're back to calling it "Freedom Bacon" 

In the days running up to the war in Iraq, the evidence proving Bush's case was less than convincing. Sure, they couldn't just whip out everything they had--there are security steps in place for very good reasons, and some things will never reach the public's scrutiny. In effect, they said, "Trust us." Some of us knew better; others did not.

There had to be proof that could only be seen by intelligence agencies, and that would have had to have been shared between other countries' agencies, too, if Bush wanted to convince THEM to go along for the ride. Other allies. Like France. And Germany. And Canada.

Story here, via atrios:

Proposed Iraq briefing had Canada skeptical

Ottawa — Canadian officials say they challenged the U.S. to share secret intelligence showing that the Baghdad regime had dangerous weapons of mass destruction in the run-up to the Iraq war, but Washington failed to deliver, thus cementing the Chrétien government's resolve to stay out of the conflict.

Washington's refusal to share raw intelligence with its close ally seemed puzzling at the time, one senior official said. But a year later, the reason now seems clear: "They didn't have any evidence."

The Americans were trying hard to draw Canada into the military coalition poised to attack Iraq, or at least win the political support of then-prime-minister Jean Chrétien and the Liberal government.

At least twice President George W. Bush's advisers said they would come to Ottawa "to present the case" for war, says this Ottawa official, who worked with Mr. Chrétien on the Iraq file in the Prime Minister's Office.

"We weren't interested in 'the case.' We were looking for the evidence," the PMO official said, dismissing the U.S. offer as nothing more than a "PowerPoint slide show."


This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?

Weblog Commenting by HaloScan.com