Are you saying that the following doesn't say the US saw it first?

"The U.S. government has made copies of the Iraqi weapons declaration and
distributed them to the five permanent members of the U.N. Security Council and
other council members with expertise to assess the declaration for
proliferation-sensitive information, State Department deputy spokesman Philip
Reeker said at the daily media briefing in Washington December 10.

" Reeker said once such information has been deleted, a working document will be
made available to other members of the council as soon as possible."

And again, in the Q&A session:

"Question: There have been some grumblings on the sideline about Washington
taking the first set of documents and whisking them down here to copy them off.
Have  you received any messages like that from Permanent 5 members or other
Security Council members?

" Mr. Reeker: No. And, in fact, all Permanent 5 members have their copies, as I
think  we talked about yesterday. As I mentioned, based on the Council president's
decision -- which was an appropriate one and consistent with the resolution -- we
assisted in ensuring the safeguards against release, transmission of
proliferation-sensitive  information, making sure that that was not jeopardized.

" So we did the copying of this. We got the copies to all of those members with
that  expertise and all together we will be assessing the full document to see
about  proliferation-sensitive information so that then we can make available to
other members of the Council a working document as soon as possible."

Now tell me: how is it possible to do copying for others when you don't have the
document yourself to begin with?


> Marc Schindler:
> This just isn't true, I'm afraid. They were *delivered* to the
> Security Council, but the US still managed to get first crack
> at them. An excerpt from the US State Dept. briefing:  ...
> _______________
> This just is true, I'm afraid.  And your excerpt begins by
> saying just what I said.
> That you wish to ascribe special motives to the person
> running the copy center is your prerogative.  That you feel
> the spokesman was not appropriate because the US
> didn't do it the way you think it would have been done in
> Canada is also your prerogative.

That was not my point at all. Please reread it. It was referring to an earlier
thread where some people on this list assumed that Francie Ducros was a
"politician" because they were used to seeing presidential and cabinet
spokespeople making statements, which doesn't happen in parliamentary systems.

> Enjoy your prerogative.

It's not my prerogative you're criticizing, it's a straw man you're criticizing.
You are not criticizing what I wrote, but how you *read* it.

Marc A. Schindler
Spruce Grove, Alberta, Canada -- Gateway to the Boreal Parkland

“Knowledge may give weight, but accomplishments give lustre, and many more people
see than weigh.” – Lord Chesterfield

Note: This communication represents the informal personal views of the author
solely; its contents do not necessarily reflect those of the author’s employer,
nor those of any organization with which the author may be associated.

///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///      ///

This email was sent to:

Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!

Reply via email to