Valerie Plame, Judith Miller, Lewis "Scooter" Libby, Karl Rove

[Neil D]

Quote:

---

No, Bush choose to believe the Brittish intellegence instead of Joe Wilson. The Brittish said one thing, which they still stand by and Wilson said another, which he still stands by.

---

Not true. The British Intel, as told to the American people, never existed. It was a lie as Wilson went to confirm that intel. He reported back with evidence contrary to that report, well before the State of the Union address.. The adminstration lied to the American people about that intel.

You might want to read this

As I have said, Bush sold the American people a faux bill of goods, Shane. And it's out there for you to see.

Here is the Presidents reference in the 2003 SOU address-

[:"green"]The International Atomic Energy Agency confirmed in the 1990s that Saddam Hussein had an advanced nuclear weapons development program, had a design for a nuclear weapon, and was working on five different methods of enriching uranium for a bomb. [:"red"] The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa.[/] [shown to be not true by Wilson] Our intelligence sources tell us that he has attempted to purchase high strength aluminum tubes suitable for nuclear weapons production. Saddam Hussein has not credibly explained these activities. He clearly has much to hide. [/]

:dead-horse:

[Neil D]

[:"green"] July 22 Two former C.I.A. officers Larry C. Johnson[16] and James Marcinkowski[17] present their testimony to a joint session of Congressional Democrats.

"I wouldn't be here this morning if President Bush had done the one thing required of him as commander in chief — protect and defend the Constitution," Johnson said. "The minute that Valerie Plame's identity was outed, he should have delivered a strict and strong message to his employees."

"This says to them that if you decide to cooperate, someone will give you up, so you don't do it," Larry said. "They are not going to trust you in any way."

Johnson, who said he is a registered Republican, said he wished a GOP lawmaker would have the courage to stand up and "call the ugly dog the ugly dog." He asked, "Where are these men and women with any integrity to speak out against this?" "I expect better behavior out of Republicans."

Marcinkowski, a former CIA case officer and a former prosecutor testified that, "...The exposure of Valerie Plame's cover by the White House is the same as the local chief of police announcing to the media the identity of its undercover drug officers. In both cases, the ability of the officer to operate is destroyed, but there is also an added dimension. An informant in a major sophisticated crime network, or a CIA asset working in a foreign government, if exposed, has a rather good chance of losing more than just their ability to operate..."

[/]

[Dr. Shane]

It isn't so black and white.

Timeline: 'Niger uranium' row

[Neil D]

Quote:

---

Shane said:

It isn't so black and white.

Timeline: 'Niger uranium' row

---

From your source, Shane...PLEASE READ-

[:"blue"] 7 March 2003

"Based on thorough analysis, the IAEA has concluded, with the concurrence of outside experts, that these documents - which formed the basis for the reports of recent uranium transactions between Iraq and Niger - are in fact not authentic.

We have therefore concluded that these specific allegations are unfounded."

UN nuclear inspector Mohamed ElBaradei's report to the UN Security Council [/]

And for a more complete look at the "Yellowcake forgery", you might want to read this although it is rather long and you might get bored with it...

[Jeannieb43]

http://by103fd.bay103.

hotmail.msn.com/cg...9cea05fa9d55006

Sorry. I tried to copy and paste the url for an article by Joseph Wilson I received on my hotmail. But it doesn't seem to work.

The article was also printed in the L.A.Times yesterday's edition. It gives a good resume of the facts. I'll try again to post it here.

[Jeannieb43]

latimes.com

http://www.latimes.com/services/site/premium/interceptlogin.register

Our 27 months of hell

By Joseph C. Wilson IV

JOSEPH C. WILSON IV was acting ambassador in Baghdad when Iraq invaded Kuwait in 1990. He is the author of "The Politics of Truth" (Carroll & Graff, 2004). He was a diplomat for 23 years.

October 29, 2005

AFTER THE two-year smear campaign orchestrated by senior officials in the Bush White House against my wife and me, it is tempting to feel vindicated by Friday's indictment of the vice president's chief of staff, I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby.

Between us, Valerie and I have served the United States for nearly 43 years. I was President George H.W. Bush's acting ambassador to Iraq in the run-up to the Persian Gulf War, and I served as ambassador to two African nations for him and President Clinton. Valerie worked undercover for the CIA in several overseas assignments and in areas related to terrorism and weapons of mass destruction.

But on July 14, 2003, our lives were irrevocably changed. That was the day columnist Robert Novak identified Valerie as an operative, divulging a secret that had been known only to me, her parents and her brother.

Valerie told me later that it was like being hit in the stomach. Twenty years of service had gone down the drain. She immediately started jotting down a checklist of things she needed to do to limit the damage to people she knew and to projects she was working on. She wondered how her friends would feel when they learned that what they thought they knew about her was a lie.

It was payback — cheap political payback by the administration for an article I had written contradicting an assertion President Bush made in his 2003 State of the Union address. Payback not just to punish me but to intimidate other critics as well.

Why did I write the article? Because I believe that citizens in a democracy are responsible for what government does and says in their name. I knew that the statement in Bush's speech — that Iraq had attempted to purchase significant quantities of uranium in Africa — was not true. I knew it was false from my own investigative trip to Africa (at the request of the CIA) and from two other similar intelligence reports. And I knew that the White House knew it.

Going public was what was required to make them come clean. The day after I shared my conclusions in a New York Times opinion piece, the White House finally acknowledged that the now-infamous 16 words "did not rise to the level of inclusion in the State of the Union address."

That should have been the end. But instead, the president's men — allegedly including Libby and at least one other (known only as "Official A") — were determined to defame and discredit Valerie and me.

They used eager allies in Congress and the conservative media, beginning with Novak. Perhaps the most egregious of the attacks was New York GOP Rep. Peter King's odious suggestion that Valerie "got what she deserved."

Valerie was an innocent in this whole affair. Although there were suggestions that she was behind the decision to send me to Niger, the CIA told Newsday just a week after the Novak article appeared that "she did not recommend her husband to undertake the Niger assignment." The CIA repeated the same statement to every reporter thereafter.

The grand jury has now concluded that at least one of the president's men committed crimes. We are heartened that our system of justice is working and appreciative of the work done by our fellow citizens who devoted two years of their lives to grand jury duty.

The attacks on Valerie and me were upsetting, disruptive and vicious. They amounted to character assassination. Senior administration officials used the power of the White House to make our lives hell for the last 27 months.

But more important, they did it as part of a clear effort to cover up the lies and disinformation used to justify the invasion of Iraq. That is the ultimate crime.

The war in Iraq has claimed more than 17,000 dead and wounded American soldiers, many times more Iraqi casualties and close to $200 billion.

It has left our international reputation in tatters and our military broken. It has weakened the United States, increased hatred of us and made terrorist attacks against our interests more likely in the future.

It has been, as Gen. William Odom suggested, the greatest strategic blunder in the history of our country.

We anticipate no mea culpa from the president for what his senior aides have done to us. But he owes the nation both an explanation and an apology.

[Neil D]

Thanks Jeanne...Nice to know that justice is still working inour country. Too bad that the president doesn't come clean...Oh well...

[Dr. Shane]

You have to look at the entire timeline to see the issue isn't black and white.

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />

"The evidence that we had that the Iraqi Government had gone back to try to purchase further amounts of uranium from Niger did not come from these so-called "forged" documents, they came from separate intelligence."

British Prime Minister Tony Blair testimony to the House of Commons Liaison Committee.

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

The British intelligence still stands by their claim although the US CIA does not. It certainly isn't a crystal clear issue.

[Dr. Shane]

Thank you for the article to give us one side's perspective.

The LA Times is a liberal publication like the Boston Globe and NY Times. And of course, Joe Wilson, is way to close to the issue to have an objective view of what is actually taking place.

However it is always useful to see such a personal opinion, bias as it is.

[Neil D]

Shane,

The following is the conclusion to the Butler Review, the review of that 'British intelligence' that Bush mentioned in the State of the Union speach...

[:"green"] The review was published on 14 July 2004. Its main conclusion was that key intelligence used to justify the war with Iraq has been shown to be unreliable. It claims that the Secret Intelligence Service did not check its sources well enough and sometimes relied on third hand reports. It criticises the use of the 45 minute claim in the 2002 dossier as "unsubstantiated", and says that there was an over-reliance on Iraqi dissident sources. It also comments that warnings from the Joint Intelligence Committee on the limitations of the intelligence were not made clear. Overall it said that "more weight was placed on the intelligence than it could bear", and that judgements had stretched available intelligence "to the outer limits".

[/]

I have come to my conclusion...

[Dr. Shane]

The intelligence that lead to the war in Iraq was obviously flawed. I don't know anyone saying otherwise. That said, the intelligence was from various sources, including various countries. Behind it all was Saddam Hussien trying to lead the world to believe he had WMDs while publically denying it. His own intelligence agency thought he had them.

However if we hadn't gone in. Saddam would have succeded in bribing the Security Council members to lift sanctions. He would have then resumed his WMD programs. The world is safer with him out of power. While not for the original stated reasons - the war was and is justified.

[jasd]

QR Window:

Umm, Western Europe? Eastern Europe to the Pacific? the seven tigers of Asia? China? India? Emerging Iran/Islamic nations? Turkey and the Balkans? Umm, picture the geographical disposition of those nations. It’s a helluva poker game that has just gotten started -- and we’re sitting thousands of miles and continents away! with an imploding legal tender, dumbing-down of our next generation, rise of a morally depraved culture… you know, the stuff of Decline of Empires; so’s what’s a responsible POTUS to do? take up tiddlywinks and strawberry daiquiris or pull up a chair at the ONLY game on the face of the globe, pull a couple of slugs of 110 proof whisky -- and ante up? ‘cuz if we don’t have a seat at the game -- we’re chopped liver… and will be the ones picking up the cigarette butts off the floor and doing all the other goofy go-fer stuff. Literally.

As it is, we’ve almost positioned ourselves in Zbigniew Brzezinski’s geographical catbird seat. Now, all we need are a few good cards and brass testaments. And a la

Abe Lincoln, put the new yellow rags out of business and throw a few of their pundits, stringers, and by-liners in jail [/kidding ]

The 2000 Americans who’ve already given their lives are just the ante -- and though we owe them more than perhaps any other soldiers since the Revolutionary War -- they are, as said, just the ante; the betting will be getting much, much more costly.

I read Writ as prophesying that all nations will be against us and our national status will be likened to a bird that peepeth out of the dust of the earth.

Rotsaruck, and happy landing…

[jasd]

“The famous “16 words” in President Bush’s Jan. 28, 2003 State of the Union address turn out to have a basis in fact after all, according to two recently released investigations in the US and Britain.

Bush said then, “The British Government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa .” Some of his critics called that a lie, but the new evidence shows Bush had reason to say what he did.

 A British intelligence review released July 14 calls Bush’s 16 words “well founded.”

 A separate report by the US Senate Intelligence Committee said July 7 that the US also had similar information from “a number of intelligence reports,” a fact that was classified at the time Bush spoke.

 Ironically, former Ambassador Joseph Wilson, who later called Bush’s 16 words a “lie”, supplied information that the Central Intelligence Agency took as confirmation that Iraq may indeed have been seeking uranium from Niger .

 Both the US and British investigations make clear that some forged Italian documents, exposed as fakes soon after Bush spoke, were not the basis for the British intelligence Bush cited, or the CIA's conclusion that Iraq was trying to get uranium.

None of the new information suggests Iraq ever nailed down a deal to buy uranium, and the Senate report makes clear that US intelligence analysts have come to doubt whether Iraq was even trying to buy the stuff. In fact, both the White House and the CIA long ago conceded that the 16 words shouldn’t have been part of Bush’s speech

But what he said – that Iraq sought uranium – is just what both British and US intelligence were telling him at the time.” [ed.]

[Neil D]

Quote:

---

Both the US and British investigations make clear that some forged Italian documents, exposed as fakes soon after Bush spoke, were not the basis for the British intelligence Bush cited, or the CIA's conclusion that Iraq was trying to get uranium.

---

It was at the time that he spoke those words....Check your timeline...

[jasd]

>>A separate report by the US Senate Intelligence Committee said July 7 that the US also had similar information from “a number of intelligence reports,” a fact that was classified at the time Bush spoke.<<

That same Senate, availed of the same 'intel' that POTUS had -- twice gave Dubya carte blanche to prosecute the war.

So, which is it on the part of certain of the House and the Senate who on two separate occasions gave POTUS the go-ahead... and then turned skinside-out? feckless perfidy? treachery? whiplash? head in the armpit?

If I recall, on one vote there was only Barbara Lee of Oakland, CA that cast a nay vote!

[jasd]

The Butler Report

After nearly a six-month investigation, a special panel reported to the British Parliament July 14 that British intelligence had indeed concluded back in 2002 that Saddam Hussein was seeking to buy uranium. The review panel was headed by Lord Butler of Brockwell, who had been a cabinet secretary under five different Prime Ministers and who is currently master of University College, Oxford.

The Butler report said British intelligence had "credible" information -- from several sources -- that a 1999 visit by Iraqi officials to Niger was for the purpose of buying uranium:

Butler Report: It is accepted by all parties that Iraqi officials visited Niger in 1999. The British Government had intelligence from several different sources indicating that this visit was for the purpose of acquiring uranium. Since uranium constitutes almost three-quarters of Niger’s exports, the intelligence was credible.

The Butler Report affirmed what the British government had said about the Niger uranium story back in 2003, and specifically endorsed what Bush said as well.

Butler Report: By extension, we conclude also that the statement in President Bush’s State of the Union Address of 28 January 2003 that “The British Government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa” was well-founded.

[Neil D]

Again, you are not checking your timeline...

At the time of the State of the UNion address , There were 3 different varied sources that checked out the situation. All three agreed that there was NO evidence of a purchase of the Yellowcake. All three contradicted this origional forged report, that btw, was traced back to the whitehouse via Italian sources. At that time, the situation was being sold to the American public and those little known reports were damaging to the sell. If Wilson had not gone public, things would have been ok, not great, but ok, in the administrations eyes.

It is of interest to me, that the SSCI was able, from the 3 reports that said NO purchase was made, to establishing a credible threat. Especially since the President of Niger was quoted as saying that they are aware of the sanctions to Iraq and made no arrangements for sale.

What makes this whole "Iraq was purchasing yellowcake" so rediculous is this....George Bush the first left approximately 1 million pounds [500 metric tons] in Iraq already. If Iraq had enough yellowcake to make atom bombs, [and it was stored properly according to Weapons Inspectors and can be refined into enrich uranium currently], why does Iraq need to go get some more???? espeically since they have not the know how nor the equipment to manufacture weapons grade uranium????

So, stepping back from the whole picture, you have a poorly forged document saying Iraq, not needing to purchase yellowcake, suddenly feeling the need to purchase yellowcake...and 3 independent sources saying it didn't happen....And a Select Senate committee saying those reports only verify that 'Iraq is seeking to restore it's nuclear weapons program'. Something is not right in the SSCI...

Ladies and gentlement, I submit to you that the Administrations part in this whole affair is bogus. A way to sell war to the American public. Joe Wilson did this country a favor by blowing the whistle and the adminstration cavilar attitude was "Let's frighten him. Out his CIA wife."

But definately, at the time that Bush said those 16 words in his SOTU address, they WERE BOGUS.

[Jeannieb43]

"Let's frighten him. Out his CIA wife."

If you saw 60 Minutes last night, you learned that by "outing" an undercover CIA operative [who incidentally was working on WMDs] the President has jeopardized the lives of ALL undercover CIA operatives. By learning the identity of Plame's ostensible (but bogus) employer [some fake corporation, but having a true, actual business address] -- they have now subjected all OTHER CIA operatives who use that same cover to injury, death, or worse. All the information Valerie Plame was working on has now become fodder for the enemy's use and abuse. The building which housed her employer is now subject to bombing, along with all the other innocent employees of other corporations in that large office building.

Etc., etc., etc.

Outing Valerie Plame in order to punish her husband was like using an atom bomb to catch someone who had merely slapped you.

There was such a lack of wisdom, ethics, or common ordinary intelligence in this act, that I trust and expect further indictments to come out of the investigation. The culprits should go to prison for a long, long time..

Also, Plame's husband, when interviewed on 60 Minutes, seemed to indicate he has plans for a lawsuit against all the persons involved. Valerie now has no job, no career, nothing--after working as an undercover agent for 18 years! A civil lawsuit will not be bound by the grand jury rules, and we'll sooner or later learn all the dirty tricks which have been played by Cheney, Rove, et al.

I only hope Cheney, with all his health problems, lives long enough to be brought to justice.

[there buster]

Your post is such a melange of non-sequiturs it doesn't merit a reply.

The law is clear. Every intelligence service in the world thought that Saddam had WMD. Hindsight is cheap and easy. The perfect hindsight of the Left on this issue is a natural consequence of their viewpoint.

[Derrell M]

Quote:

---

If you saw 60 Minutes last night, you learned that by "outing" an undercover CIA operative [who incidentally was working on WMDs] the President has jeopardized the lives of ALL undercover CIA operatives.

---

Oh come on. I didn't watch 60 Minutes, but are you saying that they said that Bush outed Plame?

[bevin]

Quote:

---

Every intelligence service in the world thought that Saddam had WMD

---

ROFLOL

The UN Weapons Inspectors said it best. "If the USA knows where they are, why not tell us, so we can find them?"

Instead the Bush administration told them they were incompetent fools.

There were incompetent fools involved - sitting in the West Wing of the White House.

/Bevin

[Dr. Shane]

Hans Blix doubts Iraq has weapons of mass destruction

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />

In the interview, Blix pointed out that almost two weeks into the war, no WMDs have been found. But he added that the US-led coalition has an advantage in looking for banned weapons.

"There is one factor that makes it less difficult for the US to find them… and that is that as the country becomes liberated from the secret police, people may not fear speaking," he said.

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

Doesn't sound like he was that sure there were no WMDs.

[lazarus]

Friend said:

Quote:

---

but are you saying that they said that Bush outed Plame?

---

My guess is that Bush is not that "hands on" to get his hands dirty like that but certainly his people were involved in some kind of retaliation against Wilson. Its interesting and ironic how those who so readily trumpet national security are willing to jepordise national security to persure their political objectives!

Note Fitzgerald made the point that he couldn't get at the truth because there was false statements, obstruction of justice etc. My guess is that Libby decided to take the hit for "higher-ups" in the admin. I hope the truth will come out!

[there buster]

Quote:

---

The UN Weapons Inspectors said it best. "If the USA knows where they are, why not tell us, so we can find them?"

---

No doubt that appears clever to you. Like the rest of the leftist canon, it amounts to an absence of something-- responsibility.

Cheap. easy. meaningless.

[Dr. Shane]

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />

My guess is that Bush is not that "hands on" to get his hands dirty

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

President Bush is a known macro-manager. President Reagon was the same way. President Nixion, on the other hand, was a known micro-manager. I have found that when I have competent people working under me, I prefer to be a macro-manager but when they are incompetent I have to be a micro-manager.

Regardless, with a 40% approval rating, heads should be rolling at the White House. President Bush has 3 years left with a mid-term election coming up next year. This is no time to be circling the wagons.