Intel Agency Messes Up, Covers Up

File under "Couldn't Happen In This Day and Age" - one our nation's intelligence services made a ghastly intelligence mistake that helped lead us into war.  Then, they covered up the error.

Fortunately, this is ancient history, involving the NSA, the Gulf of Tonkin, and the Vietnam War.

The National Security Agency has kept secret since 2001 a finding by an agency historian that during the Tonkin Gulf episode, which helped precipitate the Vietnam War, N.S.A. officers deliberately distorted critical intelligence to cover up their mistakes, two people familiar with the historian's work say.

The historian's conclusion is the first serious accusation that communications intercepted by the N.S.A., the secretive eavesdropping and code-breaking agency, were falsified so that they made it look as if North Vietnam had attacked American destroyers on Aug. 4, 1964, two days after a previous clash. President Lyndon B. Johnson cited the supposed attack to persuade Congress to authorize broad military action in Vietnam, but most historians have concluded in recent years that there was no second attack.

So why was this kept secret from 2001, and why are we hearing about it now?  Your suspicions are correct:

Mr. Hanyok's findings were published nearly five years ago in a classified in-house journal, and starting in 2002 he and other government historians argued that it should be made public. But their effort was rebuffed by higher-level agency policymakers, who by the next year were fearful that it might prompt uncomfortable comparisons with the flawed intelligence used to justify the war in Iraq, according to an intelligence official familiar with some internal discussions of the matter.

"Uncomfortable comparisons"?  Never.  If the current crop of CIA leakers say that they were right and that the White House pressured them to be wrong, well, that is God's own truth.

By odd coincidence, we will illustrate the CIA's eternal and unquestionable veracity with this old Knight-Ridder story, which can be contrasted with the Senate Intelligence Committee report from a year later.

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

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.

Couldn't happen here, and never did.

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.