Replies

In pursuit of tracing the "Evolution of a Confused Story", specifically the British Intel v. Fake memo & Niger v. Africa angles (I was not addressing the leak of Plame's name) I skipped a very widely read article - Novak's "Mission to Niger" story itself - the one where Plame's name was mentioned. Beyond mentioning Plame's name, Novak makes some assumptions, or relates wrong info, which certainly could have framed the debate I address above. Reading it gives me more understanding why Tenet's apologia might have contained so much specific information.

In short, remember that Wilson's piece carefully, or coyly as some might think, only danced around the issue of the forged documents. Novak himself, though, directly mentions them. Here's the story:

Mission to Niger (Novak/Wilson July 14, 2003)

WASHINGTON -- The CIA's decision to send retired diplomat Joseph C. Wilson to Africa in February 2002 to investigate possible Iraqi purchases of uranium was made routinely at a low level without Director George Tenet's knowledge. Remarkably, this produced a political firestorm that has not yet subsided.

I don't think it's just "purchases." contrary to what I might have said before, the Novak statement about "low level" was nothing special, Tenet's apologia was released before this article.

Wilson's report that an Iraqi purchase of uranium yellowcake from Niger was highly unlikely was regarded by the CIA as less than definitive, and it is doubtful Tenet ever saw it. Certainly, President Bush did not, prior to his 2003 State of the Union address, when he attributed reports of attempted uranium purchases to the British government. That the British relied on forged documents made Wilson's mission, nearly a year earlier, the basis of furious Democratic accusations of burying intelligence though the report was forgotten by the time the president spoke.

But the British intel was not based on the forged documents, and those, reportedly, only came to light months after Wilson went to Niger...and Wilson always avoids saying those were the documents that compelled his visit. Which raises the question, just what other "Memorandum of Sale" was Wilson talking about in his TalkingPointsMemo interview?

Reluctance at the White House to admit a mistake has led Democrats ever closer to saying the president lied the country into war. Even after a belated admission of error last Monday, (Condi Rice's confused apology?) finger-pointing between Bush administration agencies continued. Messages between Washington and the presidential entourage traveling in Africa hashed over the mission to Niger.

I suppose the "finger-pointing" includes leaking stuff to Novak in CYA, maybe frame job-engendering factional fighting. Notice the "traveling in Africa". That recalls the supenas for ARi Fleischer's comments and such. Did the investigators get this angle of pursuit via Novak??? BTW, did the factions themselves not understand very well the whole British intel issue, and perhaps like reporters, confused the whole thing too?

Wilson's mission was created after an early 2002 report by the Italian intelligence service about attempted uranium purchases from Niger, derived from forged documents prepared by what the CIA calls a "con man." This misinformation, peddled by Italian journalists, spread through the U.S. government. The White House, State Department and Pentagon, and not just Vice President Dick Cheney, asked the CIA to look into it.

I'm stumped. I thought the forged documents came to light only in late 2002. Perhaps it wasn't the forged documents themselves, but an Italian report addressing them, passed to CIA in early 2002?

And Wilson said to Talking Points Memo:

“...TPM: And, just to be clear, at this time (--when he traveled to Niger in 2002--), you hadn't seen these documents that turned out to be forgeries?
WILSON: No, I hadn't. I had just been briefed on a memorandum of agreement covering the sale....

Was there another "memorandum of agreement?" Or maybe the Italian report was received, and related to Wilson in part?

Back to Novak. Maybe the White house asked the CIA to look into the forged documents/Italian issue. But, if true, we know via Tenet the White House had nothing to do with the sending of Wilson to Niger. So perhaps later, when these documents showed up (and in the press), the White house asked - in late 2002. Namely, such actions had nothing to do with the earlier intelligence that sent Wilson to Niger. Novak is mixing up the issue...or even his leakers didn't understand it. Why not? Condi didn't too.

That's where Joe Wilson came in. ... Wilson never worked for the CIA, but his wife, Valerie Plame, is an Agency operative on weapons of mass destruction. Two senior administration officials told me Wilson's wife suggested sending him to Niger to investigate the Italian report. The CIA says its counter-proliferation officials selected Wilson and asked his wife to contact him. "I will not answer any question about my wife," Wilson told me.

Well, maybe it was the "report" from Italy, specifically documents aren't mentioned,...and those documents apparently were only turned over in later 2002 to the US. Or the "senior administration officials" didn't completely understand all the details, and were reacting to the same mistakes published in the press. (For one, I determined that after Tenet's July 11, 2003 apologia, the weekend's press was full of reports saying "Niger" was "debunked" and such...overlooking Tenet's other statements about African countries.) (Also, I saw in other earlier Novak reports he use the term "White house officials"- intrestingly, he does not here-so maybe they're not White House.)

After eight days in the Niger capital of Niamey (where he once served), Wilson made an oral report in Langley that an Iraqi uranium purchase was "highly unlikely," though he also mentioned in passing that a 1988 (sic,, 1998) Iraqi delegation tried to establish commercial contacts. CIA officials did not regard Wilson's intelligence as definitive, being based primarily on what the Niger officials told him and probably would have claimed under any circumstances.

Yes, the "purchase" was unlikely, but did they seek it? As for the observation that the Nigeriens would have denied it anyway, I'm happy we have some common sense-thinking people in our govt!

The CIA report of Wilson's briefing remains classified. All this was forgotten until reporter Walter Pincus revealed in the Washington Post June 12 that an unnamed retired diplomat had given the CIA a negative report. Yada, yada, yada... The story, actually, is whether the administration deliberately ignored Wilson's advice, and that requires scrutinizing the CIA summary of what their envoy reported. The Agency never before has declassified that kind of information, but the White House would like it to do just that now -- in its and in the public's interest.

So, maybe the "White House" did tell Novak something...like they wanted the info released? Other things? Or is Novak just embellishing, adding, opiniong?

Anyway, Novak's article, and lesser known articles between it's publication and Tenet's earlier statement added to the confusion between Niger and Africa, Italian intelligence and British INtelligence, all reminiscent of the "dodgy dossier" scandal with the BBC and David Kelly. David Kelly, remember, was portrayed as the insider showing that Blair lied about the "45 minute" loading of weapons, which was portrayed as a utter disavowal of Blair's position. Turns out, Kelly only thought the "loading" would take longer. Not that there were no weapons.