Let's see, we want to put pressure on North Korea concerning nuclear proliferation, but Pakistan is either complicit in or entirely responsible for the particular incident we want to use for this purpose. Yeah, and Pakistan is our ally. They're doing such an, um, good job helping us find al-Qaeda leaders, we wouldn't want draw attention to the fact that A. Q. Khan is still running around. So we'll lie about it. Lying about intelligence has always worked so well in the past, we'll do that. Hmm, that didn't work very well, did it... Well, isn't what we said a bit like saying that it was really the Nicaraguan Contras selling weapons to Iran back in the 80's? No, of course not. Why would you say that? Why did we use this incident anyway? Don't we have any better intelligence? What difference does it make? We all know Kim Jong Il is evil. Hey, at we least we had our story straight and told China and the press the same thing! Credibility? We don' need no stinkin' credibility! Why do I get the feeling that Musharraf probably has a big poster of Bush up in his office labelled: "SUCKA!!"