A furor has erupted here over Bush's charge in the State of the Union address that Iraq had tried to buy uranium for nuclear weapons in Africa, a charge Bush attributed to the British. But the administration now says evidence shows the claim should not have been in the speech. The British stand by their claim, but Blair says he will not reveal the source of the information to his American friends.
("The information" being that "not beyond the bounds of possibility" information.)
Still, perhaps Blair could be persuaded to reveal this information—perhaps when he collects his gold medal from Congress?—by some Iraqi contracts, or some legality in the treatment of UK prisoners at Gitmo. Or a pat on the head.... I only hope, for poor Bush's sake, that this British intelligence doesn't come from a grad student's paper lifted off the Internet. After all, Blair was just as determined to have his war as Bush.
Yes, Bush and Blair's dinner together should be interesting. Which one owns the other, I wonder?
UPDATE: Although Blair will address a Joint Session of Congress, his hold medal has been quietly postponed
(thanks to alert reader nick sweeney)
There is speculation that Mr Bush has postponed a ceremony to award Mr Blair a Congressional gold medal until a less sensitive moment: the bill authorising it praises Mr Blair for his efforts to "disarm Saddam Hussein of weapons of mass destruction".
Of course, getting that gold medal after all would be an incentive for any poodle...