Memeorandum


Powered by TypePad

« The Manchurian Reporter | Main | We Are Moving Now! »

October 31, 2005

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d83451b2aa69e200d83493bd8169e2

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Intel Agency Messes Up, Covers Up:

Comments

clarice

Dynamite, post--absolutely dynamite..I forgot that tidbit from the amicus brief..

topsecretk9

Yikes...someone very, very, very close to me (not naming names) was a NSA spook in 1964!

Patrick R. Sullivan

In 1964 we jumped to conclusions almost immediately. 4 decades later we allowed Saddam, at his leisure, to talk us out of invading, but he couldn't sell us on his innocence.

And mark well the prescient:

'While there is no suggestion that the Special Counsel is proceeding in bad faith, there should be abundant concern that the CIA may have initiated this investigation out of embarrassment over revelations of its own shortcomings.'

We'll be hearing about it again through Scooter's attorneys.

Sue

Isn't it funny how when we read this in 2003 we really didn't know who the 'official' was? I watched a CNN special Friday night, I now know the 'official' is Larry Wilkerson. I should say suspect highly, since he repeated this allegation in the special.

"However, during the time between the `almost no good' report from the agency and the `unbelievable' footnote from INR, various people tried time and again to resurrect it and use it," the official said.

The Heretik

Tom, the link on Senate Intel Committee is bad.

Secrecy so often most serves itself, amoral and insidious to the national interest.

More on this at All Knowing, All Seeing

j.foster

I suggest mr. wilson and friends veiw godfather II once again. you get one chance to bring it down . ask fredo.

topsecretk9

Well, well, well...the Vanity Fair spread was just a little attempt at humor, did nothing...I repeat NOTHING to harm a covert agents career......highlights ( the whole thing is insane)

WILSON: Well, I think we pretty much are at the bottom. We now know, both from Mr. Cooper's testimony, the Time reporter testimony, that Mr. Rove gave him Valerie's name; and we know from the indictment that Mr. Libby was going around giving.
WILSON: The testimony that has been made public indicates that Mr. Libby and Mr. Rove leaked Valerie's name to the members of the press. There's nothing in any of the testimony to suggest that Joe Wilson did -- unlike what Mr. diGenova said on this program last week.

this one's rich, we have no Senate Report in this reality

BLITZER: Why you tell Nicholas Kristof about your trip to Africa?

WILSON: I had attempted to talk directly to the State Department and to a number of Democratic senators and to get the record corrected. I felt that after it was clear that what the president was referring to in the State of the Union address was Niger and that the trip that I went on was based upon a transcription of these documents that later were shown to be forgeries.

It was important for the administration to correct the record.
BLITZER: Because, as you know, this was two months before the Robert Novak column appeared.

WILSON: It is an act of civic duty, it is what citizens across this country do every day in our democracy -- you hold your government to account for what your government says and does in the name of the American people.

This happened to be an area where I had certain expertise and experience.

====TESTY DRUMROLL PLEASE

WILSON: Her contacts and her network was endangered the minute that Bob Novak wrote the article. The photograph of her did not identify her in any way anybody could identify.

Now you asked me this question -- you've asked me this question three or four times...

BLITZER: About the photograph?

WILSON: About the photograph.

Now, I have never heard you ask the president about the layout in the Oval Office when they did the war layout. I've never heard you ask Mr. Wolfowitz about the layout in Vanity Fair. But you ask me all the time.

So let me just get this very clear: When one is faced with adversity, one of the ways one acts in the face of adversity is to try and bring a certain amount of humor to the situation. It's called irony.

And if people have no sense of humor or no sense of perspective on that, my response is: It's about time to get a life.

But in no way did that picture endanger anybody. What endangered people was the outing of her name --her maiden name -- and, subsequently, the outing of the corporation that she worked for.

transcript here:
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0510/31/sitroom.02.html

topsecretk9

Well, well, well...the Vanity Fair spread was just a little attempt at humor, did nothing...I repeat NOTHING to harm a covert agents career......highlights ( the whole thing is insane)

WILSON: Well, I think we pretty much are at the bottom. We now know, both from Mr. Cooper's testimony, the Time reporter testimony, that Mr. Rove gave him Valerie's name; and we know from the indictment that Mr. Libby was going around giving.
WILSON: The testimony that has been made public indicates that Mr. Libby and Mr. Rove leaked Valerie's name to the members of the press. There's nothing in any of the testimony to suggest that Joe Wilson did -- unlike what Mr. diGenova said on this program last week.

this one's rich, we have no Senate Report in this reality

BLITZER: Why you tell Nicholas Kristof about your trip to Africa?

WILSON: I had attempted to talk directly to the State Department and to a number of Democratic senators and to get the record corrected. I felt that after it was clear that what the president was referring to in the State of the Union address was Niger and that the trip that I went on was based upon a transcription of these documents that later were shown to be forgeries.

It was important for the administration to correct the record.
BLITZER: Because, as you know, this was two months before the Robert Novak column appeared.

WILSON: It is an act of civic duty, it is what citizens across this country do every day in our democracy -- you hold your government to account for what your government says and does in the name of the American people.

This happened to be an area where I had certain expertise and experience.

====TESTY DRUMROLL PLEASE

WILSON: Her contacts and her network was endangered the minute that Bob Novak wrote the article. The photograph of her did not identify her in any way anybody could identify.

Now you asked me this question -- you've asked me this question three or four times...

BLITZER: About the photograph?

WILSON: About the photograph.

Now, I have never heard you ask the president about the layout in the Oval Office when they did the war layout. I've never heard you ask Mr. Wolfowitz about the layout in Vanity Fair. But you ask me all the time.

So let me just get this very clear: When one is faced with adversity, one of the ways one acts in the face of adversity is to try and bring a certain amount of humor to the situation. It's called irony.

And if people have no sense of humor or no sense of perspective on that, my response is: It's about time to get a life.

But in no way did that picture endanger anybody. What endangered people was the outing of her name --her maiden name -- and, subsequently, the outing of the corporation that she worked for.

transcript here:
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0510/31/sitroom.02.html

topsecretk9

BLITZER: Why you tell Nicholas Kristof about your trip to Africa?

I had attempted to talk directly to the State Department and to a number of Democratic senators and to get the record corrected.

attempted to talk to state??? I thought he did talk to state? Democratic Senator?? Good thing it's Halloween, my head spins with this guy, how many versions are there???

and that is just part of the transcript.

cathyf
What endangered people was the outing of her name --her maiden name -- and, subsequently, the outing of the corporation that she worked for.
Joe Wilson is the person who first outed Brewster-Jennings, to David Corn.

Amazing, simply amazing.

cathy :-)

Rick Ballard

TSK9,

He was only an Ambassador - why should State give him a hearing?

I wonder who got his website hitched to the Kedwards campaign - I mean since contacting Dem Senators is so tough?

BumperStickerist

What's most impressive about Wilson's trip is his belief, and by extension, the belief of inmates at DU, the habitues at dKos, and the wankertariet at Eschaton, that One Man could Go to Niger and Glean The Truth about Iraq's Actions ... in One Week.

That's a talent.

It'd be like Jimmy Carter coming back after a long weekend in Nicaragua, by himself, and declaring their election okey-dokey.

The wonder isn't that he did it; the wonder is that anybody believes him.

.

TM

SO Joe Wilson told Wolf Blitzer that We now know, both from Mr. Cooper's testimony, the Time reporter testimony, that Mr. Rove gave him Valerie's name;?

That's amazing. Here is a Meet The Press excerpt of Cooper's story:

"So did [Karl] Rove leak Plame's name to me, or tell me she was covert? No. Was it through my conversation with Rove that I learned for the first time that [Joe] Wilson's wife worked at the CIA and may have been responsible for sending him?"--to Niger. "Yes.

I almost wish one of Wilson's acolytes were here to explain why this is not yet another lie.

Almost.

narciso

Question, how did someone like Mark Grossman, a former ambassador and
State Dept Near East undersecretary;
find out Plame's name, was he on the
eponymous WHIG memo? he reportedly
told Cheney, who then told Libby, who
contacted Russert, Miller & co

Chuck Ames

"he reportedly
told Cheney, who then told Libby, who
contacted Russert, Miller & co"

I told Ma. Ma told Pa. Scooter got a licking; ha, ha, ha!!!!

SteveMG

It's interesting that Vietnam celebrates (I believe) August 2 as a national holiday commemorating the great victory over the capitalist imperialists.

I've always found the debate over the Gulf of Tonkin somewhat odd. Everyone recognizes that the first attack (August 2) did indeed occur; although it's noted that the US navy was engaged in hit-and-run attacks along the coast in an attempt to bring the NVC out.

But whether it was August 2 or 4 or some other day, it was inevitable that the two sides would collide. The communists were determined to capture and subjugate the people in the South. And we were determined, at least for awhile, to prevent that subjugation from happening.

SMG

Toby Petzold

You know, Tom, I remember reading that brief when it first came out, but it's just amazing how a thing like that can just get lost in the enormous shuffle of information that marks this case. I had simply forgotten about it.

Thanks.

topsecretk9

BOO!

....and that folks is only PART of the transcript!

topsecretk9

To read the entirety is something to BEHOLD

P.S. I going as polly for e-halloween!

Wilson CNN today!

lucklucky

The first attack happened so what's the relevance of an existing or not second attack?

clarice

Mac and Burbank Eddie have found 6 public appearance by Wilson in which he was discussing Iraq. In not a single one of those appearance, did he mention his trip to Niger, deny that Iraq had WMDs, question the 16 words in the SOTU address. Not once. The appareances began in October 2002 and his last statement was in an online WaPo chat where he says if we don't find WMDs it won't be a big issue, conceding we have other justifications for the war.

One month later he tells Kristof a total cock and bull story completely at odds with what he's been saying for the prior 7 months.

clarice

Rick, My suspicion is that Clarke and Beers left the Administration and enlisted him to join them. They left in March and almost immediately afterward signed on with Kerry.

Clarke left because no one trusted him ay more and he was pissed Rice got the job he thought should be his. I read an article when Beers left where he admits Clarke played a role in his decision to leave.

clarice

Maybe he did talk to a Senator, JFK, and that Senator thought that was a neat thing to bail him out of voting for the war--I was for it before I was against it because we went to war on a lie..but Kerry felt constrained to go so far..so he held back a bit on the latter. He voted against the War appropriations on a stupid pretext and let Wilson carry the story to see where it's go--Remember that MoveoN film,"Uncovered"..You think that wasn't coordinated by the same man who was saluting all over the place and riding to the Convention on a boat with his old vet friends..Two snakes-- a natural affinity..

clarice

Beers and Clarke were Clinton holdovers and Wilson had had a Clinton appointment as well.

topsecretk9

completely at odds with what he's been saying for the prior 7 months.

and everything he has said since, fits this pattern...It makes me wish someone would put together a site devoted solely to a compare and contrast of Wilson's public statements complete with his smarmy photos...they could call it "Destroy Honesty" or "Joe's Political Dis-Honesty" or some such...there is only so much TM or Mac can do.

topsecretk9

Actually Clarice...I am a graphic designer...I could do that part if you put together more of the written content?---the best part would be to literally link to only the bloggers like TM

clarice

TS--even on the same day he's so shifty, it gives me a headache to read it.

Don't you suppose a reporter somewhere down the line would have hit google and asked him about the changes..Oops, I forgot the reporters who talked with him were part of the gig..Can there be any other explanation ?

clarice

I'll post the cites to the first 2 cites. And post them. Run over to macs and get his four. that takes us to the Kristof and Pincus and Corn pieces which should be in Mac's timeline.

clarice

At an Oct. 9, 2002 Middle East Policy Council Forum http://www.mepc.org/public_asp/forums_chcs/30.asp he says he prefers other options than war, but concedes:
[quote]My feeling on this.... is that we really do need to do something against the threat of proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and I would concede to this administration the possibility that one of these days these weapons might move from the tight control of the Iraqi regime into the hands of organized terrorist groups who would, in fact, want to act against United States interests either abroad or in our homeland.[/quote]



On Feb. 6, 2003 Wilson was on PBS's Newshour W/Jim Lehrer. http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/middle_east/jan-june03/options_2-6.html Here is part of that exchange:


JIM LEHRER: You agree Ambassador Wilson? From his (Sadaam's) point of view, what's the point of being there if you don't have your weapons of mass destruction?

JOSEPH WILSON: Well, again I think he also sees them as necessary to defending himself against what he believes will be an American assault on his government and his life. There is no incentive for him even to give up a little bit of them.

JIM LEHRER: But, all three of you agree if anyone is sitting around expecting at the last minute Saddam Hussein is going to have some kind of revelation and pull back and say, okay, here are my weapons of mass destruction, let's have no war, forget it, right?

JOSEPH WILSON: Yeah. I think the chances are pretty good you'll get something of semblance of cooperation, but the core stuff we'll have to go find it.

(I don't know what you mean to link only to bloggers--but these to were dug up by Burbank and on the comments page at Macs.)

I'll run to Macs and get the other sites.

clarice

Then--

http://www.pbs.org/now/transcript/transcript_wilson.html

WILSON: One should never believe Saddam Hussein. We certainly have enough experience with his deception and his lies not to be too trusting with him. With respect to the United Nations, it seems to me that the United Nations has far more often acted in a way that is-- that is consistent with our interests. And it has a obstacle to our interests. And it is our interests who have a broad international support for an objective.

And in order to get that broad international support, you have to frame your goals in such a way that you can get the allies as we did in the Gulf War.

MOYERS: So you're saying that it is important to enforce United Nations resolutions.

WILSON: Absolutely.

MOYERS: You think war is inevitable?

WILSON: I think war is inevitable. Essentially, the speech that the President gave at the American Enterprise Institute was so much on the overthrow of the regime and the liberation of the Iraqi people that I suspect that Saddam understands that this is not about disarmament.

(snip)
WILSON: But I think disarmament is only one of the objectives. And the President has touched repeatedly and more openly on the other objectives in recent speeches including this idea of liberating Iraq and liberating its people from a brutal dictator. And I agree that Saddam Hussein is a brutal dictator.

And I agree along with everybody else that the Iraqi people could — would well be far better off without Saddam Hussein. The problem really is a war which has us invading, conquering and then subsequently occupying Iraq may not achieve that liberation that we're talking about.

MOYERS: So this is not just about weapons of mass destruction.

WILSON: Oh, no, I think it's far more about re-growing the political map of the Middle East
(snip)


http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/library/news/iraq/2003/iraq-030325-2818df49.htm

[quote]My feeling on this, and I share Tony's -- I think -- conclusions on this, is that we really do need to do something against the threat of proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and I would concede to this administration the possibility that one of these days these weapons might move from the tight control of the Iraqi regime into the hands of organized terrorist groups who would, in fact, want to act against United States interests either abroad or in our homeland.[/quote]

clarice

Then--http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/library/news/iraq/2003/iraq-030323-2918d7d2.htm(general drivel--but no mention of the mission, the 16 words, nothing in his sensational claims)

And finally,http://discuss.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/zforum/03/sp_iraq_wilson040303.htm From this online Wash Po chat:

Boston, Mass.: Mr. Wilson

Thank you for taking our questions. What happens if we do not find weapons of mass destruction in Iraq?

Joseph C. Wilson: Whether we find them or not is now immaterial. The liberation is now the rationale. If we don't find them, discussion about them will cease and we will focus on the other reasons the administration has articulated. If we do find them, world public opinion will only change on the margins."

clarice

Now, you tell me how the media could have missed this?

Why Moyers didn't notice that he'd changed his song and dance?

Impossible to have simply overlooked this.

topsecretk9

(I don't know what you mean to link only to bloggers--but these to were dug up by Burbank and on the comments page at Macs.)===

In retro. I don't even know what I meant (scratch), and in thinking about web architecture I just don't know how I would go about keeping it all straight...I was thinking of just "quote" one, contrasted with quote 2, 3, 4 5 and 6...

convoluted seems to be his "tactic"...could make it a "helpful / or Helen Keller-ish when it comes to the past, SSI vs, present

clarice

Well--I find timelines the most valuable way to track back and see what happened.
We all know the sensational claims he made beginning in May 2003. But in October 2002 (was this before or after the Mission which occurred sometime in that month??) he sisn't make a single one of those claims--and he didn't in his 5 following public appearance. The first time he makes them,he makes them very dramatically and he does that to Kristof in May 2003.

And Moyers knew of the shift even if no other reporter googled. And oddly, his most clear refutation of the notion that the war was being justified only on WMD's is on an online chat in the Wash Po , Pincus' home turf..the home turf of the second paper to carry those astonishing, newly invented charges.

topsecretk9

Clarice

didn't' finish there
"could make it a helpful "media reference guide to Joe Wilson" for the illiterate and/or Helen Keller-ish when it comes to the past, SSI vs, present

It is amazing that the media would let this guy---whose specialty is "two sides of the mouth' compounded by factual dishonesty (SSI) compounded by new versions of dishonesty ----run roughshod all over their credibility.

clarice

Kurtz has some half-assed article about the case in which he says the WaPo and NYT conceded they were credulous in the pre war period about the wmd charges, I sent him a note reminding him they were more credulous about this Sack of doo doo and noted how quickly he changes without them apparently notiving or asking him about it.

Do you have to be a dumb asshole to be employed by the msm?

clarice

I submitted a short blog to The American Thinker. on it citing mac..I won't know until tomorrow if they're running it..

What do they say about "in plain sight"?

Syl

top and clarice

A timeline, yes, but in a column format.

Date/Time Where Statement Encapsulation

Not sure 'encapsulation' is the right word (still having my first cup o java) but it would be 'Iraq about more than WMD'. Or 'Saddam has WMD'.

Something simple to give the thrust of the statement.

The reader can judge for himself because the entire quote will be there as well.

Gawd, I'm rambling.

topsecretk9

Alright

I will start a site solely devoted to JOES timeline---

here are some reserved...

Restore Wilson's Honesty
JoeTheForth
DestroyHonesty
Media Reference Guide to Joe Wilson
Joe's Political DIS-Honesty

people vote...or add

Syl

BTW, is the indictment in searchable text format anywhere? I have an eye going bad and reading that thing is hard.

topsecretk9

(still having my first cup o java)

WhAT FIRST? Yickles...I'm just over the party!

Syl---I need you to tell me mo-betta what you think about the structure...I am thinking blogger, and will get team "adders"

Syl

I like:

Media Reference Guide to Joe Wilson

It looks non-partisan. Anything else and people won't even look at it.

Syl

Ah, Blogger. Just started bloggin a couple weeks ago and use Blogger so I'm no expert.

I'm not sure it would allow the html for tables.

Hmmmmm.

(I keep strange hours. East Coast. Fell asleep about 7pm)

Syl

off to check something re blogger...

topsecretk9

yes, me too and it also make media people look stupid (which they are) and so that make me delighted as well

clarice

Syl, SMoking gun has the indictment in html format..

Gotta get some sleep..But I am all for this timeline..

topsecretk9

syl

I have media reference guide (via blogger) but I think you are right about the tables

topsecretk9

Clarice
nite nite
Syl
find and example of what you think it should be

clarice

Important correction--he went to Niger in Feb 2002(Not October)--the SSCI report says he arrived there on Feb 26,2002--so all but the first statement were made AFTER his trip/

Syl

Well, it's possible but hinky with Blogger to do tables.

You have to write the whole thing separately (like in Dreamweaver) then paste it.

Then you have to be sure there are no spaces between html code lines, run everything together. Otherwise your posting will be full of blank lines.

The text in tables only shows up in html and preview. You cannot edit it.

If you have to make a change, or add anything, you must do it outside blogger, paste it, and get rid of spacing again. Or in html mode, with no spacing to help you see where you are and where you're changing/adding something.

So, it's possible, but I wouldn't recommend it for more than something simple in a blog posting.

So my columnar idea is out.

topsecretk9

and to that Clarice, I think he would respond that it is "immaterial"

topsecretk9

type-pad? I'll pay.

Syl

nite nite Clarice!

clarice

Actually, on my way to bed--I'm in DC and way overtired, I realize that everyone of these statements was made AFTER his trip.The first was about 7 months after the trip, the last over a year after his trip and that should be in any timeline.

Syl

Top

I don't know nuthink about how to use typepad.

topsecretk9

how about, if you come accross an example of what you are thinkin', let me know...so at least I can see it (are you using dreamweaver?-- I have the new adobe one, can't think right now)...I'll host the f'er...I would just like it to be where multiple people could contribute remotely (conveniently)

topsecretk9

Check type-pad...they have a trial....I am right now

maybee

That WP chat is a treasure trove!

He obviously believed in the existence of wmds, and that the admin made several arguments for war in Iraq. Certainly felt free to disagree with the admin, yet he didn't bring up Niger.
---
Arlington, Va.: You say that Saddam will go underground to stage a comeback, which is a very interesting and likely theory, but the one I had previously held was that he might align himself with more radical forces to exact revenge against the United States with unconventional means where he could not succeed with conventional ones. Osama has denounced Saddam has an infidel, but do you think they might band together to fight a common enemy?

Joseph C. Wilson: I would not be surprised that the dreaded transfer of WMD might have occurred if S. thinks he is toast or that they might make common cause. It might be real tough though given that both are on the run. More likely would be a nationlistic campaign led by the rump of the Baath party-
----

he was right about a lot of his post-war predictions.
Also talked a lot about PNAC and Jinpac
also:
---

Fairfax, Va.: (At the risk of sounding anti-Semitic, which I don't intend), if Saddam didn't support Palestinian suicide bombers, do you think we'd be in a war to liberate Iraq?

Joseph C. Wilson: The literature is clear. His closest advisers have argued for years that the way to peace in the middle east is to crush the palestinian resistance and it supporters. I profoundly disagree with that analysis, but it is not anti semitic or semitic. It is secular and tied to the Likud party
--
Alexandria, Va.: In response to the reader who said s/he wasn't trying to be anti-semitic, you said that "his advisors" have argued for years that the way to peace in the Middle East is to crush the Palestinian resistance, etc. ... Whose advisors and can you elaborate on the history of this argument? It's not something I've heard of before, but then I imagine we don't hear to much about the arguments that go on in our government behind the scenes.

Also, could you tell us a little bit about your company JC Wilson International? Thank you.

Joseph C. Wilson: WE do political risk assessment for companies wanting to do business in Africa Europe and the Middle East.
As to advisers: Richard Perle, Paul Wolfowitz, Bill Kristol et al.
Perle's study group produced a report for Bibi netnayahu in the mid 90s called A Clean Break, A new strategy for the realm
Read also the Project for a new American Century
Michael Ledeen from the American Enterprise INstitue is another leading figure. He is Mr. Total War, go to Iran after this.

----
He is a fascinating man, that Joseph Wilson.

topsecretk9

syl
?
https://www.godaddy.com/gdshop/hosting/shared.asp?ci=260

Maybee

fascinating, but really bewildering.

topsecretk9

Clarice caught a goodie (maybe)

Looks like May 2003 Wilson teams up with the Kerry Campaign. In this Boston.com article, they lay out a pretty good timeline. But here is a curious statement:

"Kerry's advisers acknowledged yesterday [Oct. 03) that Wilson, who has also donated $2,000 to Kerry this year, told them about his allegations against the White House involving his wife before going public with them this summer. But Rand Beers, Kerry's top adviser on foreign affairs, said the campaign has not played a role in coordinating Wilson's charges."

which corresponds with Wilson's first admission (?--that I know of) today on CNN

WILSON: I had attempted to talk directly to the State Department and to a number of Democratic senators and to get the record corrected. I felt that after it was clear that what the president was referring to in the State of the Union address was Niger and that the trip that I went on was based upon a transcription of these documents that later were shown to be forgeries.

Well did they attempt to correct the record or instead did they just put you on the payroll?

topsecretk9

oh hector, I am just going to go polly on this

Clarice caught a goodie (for sure)

Looks like May 2003 Wilson teams up with the Kerry Campaign. In this Boston.com article, they lay out a pretty good timeline. But here is a curious statement:

"Kerry's advisers acknowledged yesterday [Oct. 03) that Wilson, who has also donated $2,000 to Kerry this year, told them about his allegations against the White House involving his wife before going public with them this summer. But Rand Beers, Kerry's top adviser on foreign affairs, said the campaign has not played a role in coordinating Wilson's charges."

which corresponds with Wilson's first admission (?--that I know of) today on CNN

WILSON: I had attempted to talk directly to the State Department and to a number of Democratic senators and to get the record corrected. I felt that after it was clear that what the president was referring to in the State of the Union address was Niger and that the trip that I went on was based upon a transcription of these documents that later were shown to be forgeries.

Well did they attempt to correct the record or instead did they just put you on the payroll?

topsecretk9

and for good measure it reads...

involving his wife

Syl

Top

I have no idea about hosting services. I don't have the money for a blog site so I never checked them out. My hubby allows my personal site in the budget because I've had it almost ten years now and it's my artwork, of which he approves. He hates the time I waste reading blogs. LOL

I just reread the indictment where the facts and timeline is laid out. No mention by anybody of Mrs. Wilson's maiden name going around administration circles at all.

It shows up in Judy's notebook but I don't see how it could have come from Libby since there's no indication he ever knew it.

It shows up in Novak's article. But all OfficialA (who had to be Rove) said was 'I heard that too'. And no mention in the WaPo article reporting it that Novak even told Rove Mrs. Wilson's maiden name.

I still think someone in the CIA outed Valery to punish them for Wilson's big mouth and the embarrassment to the Agency he caused.

Fitz either hasn't come across the entry point of 'Valery Plame' into the stream, or he's hiding it for some reason.

Syl

Top

Just a quickie to show what I meant. The top part is 'prettier'. I just don't know.

Jon H


Tom, you'll have to take up an argument with Laurie Mylroie, who insists in her 2003 book that the CIA denied Iraq had WMD.

"Combining important new research with an insider's grasp of Beltway politics, Mylroie describes how the CIA and the State Department have systematically discredited critical intelligence about Saddam's regime, including indisputable evidence of its possession of weapons of mass destruction."

When it's convenient, they say the CIA wrongly claimed Saddam had no WMD. Then, when they need to blame someone for getting us into this mess, they say the CIA wrongly claimed Saddam *had* WMD.

Which is it? Seems to me, they're playing "Heads the CIA loses, Tails Neocons Win".

Which would be mere bullshit if there weren't thousands of people dead on account of the Pentagon's desire to be Iran's tools.

Jon H

"Inexplicably, the national media expressed doubts about the CIA's credibility and impartiality in this amicus brief filed as part of the Plame investigation:"

I love how the right becomes true believers in the media when it suits their rhetoric.

Why, it's the media! They couldn't be spinning, could they? They wouldn't make shit up in an effort to shield their own asses, would they? Nahhh. Your feigned naivete is touching, Tom.

Syl

Jon H

Your reading comprehension is a little lacking. The quoter was surprised that the media said that.

How that equates to 'true believers in the media' is...it doesn't.

kim

Kerry hired him before he fired him.

Why, since the Democratic Party, or at least the Kerry campaign, repudiated Joe in 7/04 does he still have legs. Is this a combination of MSM ineptitude and bewilderment at their own thoroughly shameful involvement, and delusional thinking about Iraq from the anti-war prong of the party?

How on God's green earth does Joe still have an audience?
=============================================

Syl

"How on God's green earth does Joe still have an audience?"

If it bleeds, it leads. There is conflict. And that gets eyeballs.

kim

Surely those eyeballs are connected to a visual cortex which is supposed to reflect frontally. Is it their ears when they listen to Joe? Pheromones?

I can smell him from here.
=======================================

Bob

This is so curious, this outburst of anger at Joseph Wilson. And all so irrelevant. He was right. No weapons of mass destruction. No yellowcake purchased from Niger. The Administration faked the war. The Administration leaked his NOC wife's identity.

I don't plan on Joe Wilson doing my taxes, and I don't plan on going out to dinner with him. All this sniping is hilarious. You folks who feed at the Toensing trough are oinking in the wrong direction. It's all irrelevant. Wilson was right. The Administration wanted payback. The only question is whether their hardball snark rises to the level of treason or some other criminal charge.

Kenneth Daves

How about not just assuming that those historians' interpretation of the analysis and reporting of the "second attack" was correct?
"Mid-level" officials in this context could have been anyone from an E-3 to a GS-13 equivalent. Their job would have been to review and resolve conflicts between the initial reports and what went on the transcripts, including re-transcription if necessary. If they decided that the initial reports were correct after re-checking the data, they could and should have changed the transcripts to reflect it. It doesn't mean that their "second look" at the transcripts was correct, only that they believed that the first transcripts were incorrect. I personally saw this kind of thing many times during my Air Force career. "Falsification" would have required that some of these officials would have knowing change the transcripts with no legitimate reason.

I am having a little trouble equating this with CIA officials contention for more than a decade that Saddam had WMD based on multiple sources that went undisputed until President Bush decided to take them seriously.

Kenneth W. Daves,
MSgt., USAF (Retired)

clarice

Remember we're talking about a group of intel geniuses who failed to predict the collapse of the Soviet Union, and missed Pakistan's development of nuclear weapons, the Pak nuke souk, Libya's nuclear program,a group which believed Saddam had complied re WMDs until his son in law defected and told us where they were.

As the self-annointed chosen whose expertise (I dare you to read Wilson's views without laughing at their air headedness)they think should give them final say on US foreign policy, they play a vicious game. If you cross them, they will leak info contrary to the NIE(and there always is SOME) to make you look like a fool or a liar.

Fitz' statement speaks of leaks and the hearm they do to agents. What about agent's leaks and the harm they do to us?

owl

Clarice said "Do you have to be a dumb asshole to be employed by the msm?"

Answer: It helps but the first qualification needs to be a loyal liberal Democrat. ALL of the campaigns against the WH have one thing in common....the msm hiding in the mix somewhere.

kim

Hey, Bob. Do you really believe Joe is an honorable and trustworthy man? How do you square all his contradictions? Do you really believe he he claimed there was no yellow cake sale? Do you really believe he claimed there were no WMD?

Read his 2/6/03 op-ed in the LATimes and explain why he said then that Saddam had WMD.

Do you believe he didn't out his wife?

While we're at it what do you think Berger was concealing among his habits?
================================================

kim

Would you buy a used car from Richard Clarke?
================================================

kim

What I find intriguing is the sea change in Joe from March to May of '03. In March he sounded sort of reasonable about the untrustworthiness of saddam, but seemed to oppose deposing him on the grounds that the status quo was OK(and he liked Saddam's support of the Palestinian cause). In May, he's had further discussions with strategists who've found a political weakness in Bush because Saddam had kept his ambitions covert.

But look at the horses they back: I bet on the Arafat stud, I bet on Saddam mare, but a prancin' and a dancin', came noble Purpleball.
===========================================

clarice

I can't think of where to put this, but Wilson says he went to Niger twice before the 2002 trip--in 1999 and 2000. This is the first time I've seen that, the first time I've seen any explanation for those trips and the first time I've seen anything in his own words about them. http://www.virginia.edu/uvanewsmakers/newsmakers/wilson.html

The comments to this entry are closed.

Amazon





Traffic

Wilson/Plame