"Get your facts first, and then you can distort them as much as you please." (Mark Twain)
Tuesday, July 19, 2005
Asked to comment on the document, a senior British official, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said, "We do not discuss intelligence assessments."
I'm sorry, but does one really need to go on background to say, essentially, "no comment?" And may we assume that the Times policy announced to such fanfare just a bit more than a year ago - "an anonymous source should be used only in situations where the story could not otherwise be reported, and that the reporter should reveal what might motivate that source to speak" - is no longer operative? Inquiring minds want to know.