He didn't plagiarise it, just failed to acknowledge where it originated from.
Just wanted to point out that this is plagiarism. If you pulled a stunt like that at uni and got busted, you'd be out of there quicker than you could say '****, that was stupid'. But like you said, it's beside the point.

You are missing the real issue here, which is whether or not the intelligence itself (which France did not, and does not have access to) was interpreted correctly. There have been suggestions that, for example, the CIA exaggerated some parts to make a more compelling case.
So did they move the weapons? Because you know, they were watching everything going out of the country with satellites, and I haven't heard anything about that. Or did they destroy all the weapons? Because you know, there's always verifiable proof of chemical weapons being destroyed, at least that was what I was led to believe.