Posted on 05/08/2006 11:01:01 AM PDT by shield
Folks, this post began as a look back on Wilson’s antics in 2003 based on his comments at the EPIC conference in June and a UVA speech in October 2003. It turned quickly into wild speculation about the Niger Forgeries and a plausible CIA role. As I was reviewing this material a year later with a much greater understanding of the players and events things Wilson said took on new meanings and hint at a scenario that weaves all we know into a cogent explanation. The post began here with the retrospective:
A good read out today on Plame from Clarice Feldman over at American Thinker. Clarice notes the comments of Wilson at the EPIC conference where he blew his own cover. To add to Clarice’s piece, I point folks to three posts I did on the EPIC gathering (McGovern’s talk, Wilson’s talk and their joint Q&A session) from the available audio(here, here and here).
It is interesting to see is Wilson’s dire predictions for Iraq three years later. The easy ones he got right were things like saying the Shia will rule southern Iraq. He had a lot if Duh! moments that day. The most pathetic one is his prediction the US would cut and run from Iraq and Israel.
What is interesting in the last audio tape is Wilson’s verbal repetition of the Rockefeller plan (from my earlier post):
Starting just around 12:30 into this 15 minute segment Wilson points out the administration was careful to only talk about uranium with respect to Africa initially. he says that until the story turned to Niger, and then the Niger angle was denied by state, it was difficult to make the case that the march to war was built on lies. Wilson admits, in his own words, that to attack Bush’s policies required the story to be about Niger and not Africa. Why? Well, because the forgery angle only applies to Niger, and the broader Africa angle has more substantiating intel and history.
Wilson also clearly states that people on the inside (CIA and others against the war in Iraq) could easily make the case if they could have been given voice. Which is what Joe Wilson would be doing in a few short days in the NY Times Op-Ed pages.
…
He goes on to say the story will have legs only if the press can make a profit, and to do that they need to make a scandal out of this issue. The guy is apparently telegraphing exactly what his little band of rogue agents planned. He is trying to lead the press and media to follow him in order to make a splash. He says “it would be great” if the press did make a scandal of this issue and he notes people are talking about the “I” word (impeachment).
Got that? Go listen to the audio and here Wilson expose the plan he and McGovern had cooked up. And realize this is before he outed himself in his Op-Ed. Back then he was all giddy about smearing the Bushies and winning the 2004 election.
Another interesting retrospective can be found here - Wilson in his own words from October 2003 at University of VA. Note that this is about the time Fitzg-Magoo was taking over the investigation. Wilson also could have been in Niger when the Iraqi delegation arrived. My original post on Wilson’s trips during this time is here.
Want some fun with this one? Note how Wilson puts himself at the scene of the crime about the forgeries. Recall that this was prior to the Senate investigation when Wilson was still pushing the idea he debunked the forgeries:
I was asked to go because I have a unique set of experiences to bring to the table on this issue. I had served there in the mid 1970’s. I had retained many ties and friendships including with the Niger Ambassador to the United States for the subsequent twenty-five years. When I was senior director for Africa at the National Security Council in the mid 1990’s, the government that was in place at the time of these purported documents covering the memorandum of agreement for the sale of Uranium from Niger to Iraq, that was the government that was in place when I was in the White House. I had worked very closely with them to try and move what was at the time a military’s dictatorship back to the Democratic side of the ledger. So, I knew these guys intimately. They were in Washington all of the time. I was out there both in government and in African government helping them.
It is sometimes forgotten Wilson worked for Niger and/or other African nations when he first went to Niger for Valerie and the CIA in 1999. He had access to the materials to make the forgeries. Another item to note re the forgeries:
I looked at the [Niger] bureaucracy and I found that because of the nature of the agreement and participation, nothing could happen that did not have the signatures of some key ministers in the government.
Emphasis mine. So, were the forgeries to fool Bush who had not even formally announced his run at the Presidency at this time? Of course not. Were the forgeries to set up Al Gore - the nominal winner of the 2000 elections? Possibly. Or were the forgeries meant for the Iraqi delegation to give them the idea they were entering into an agreement? That would make a lot of sense to a CIA effort trying to keep Saddam in the box. The source of those forgeries could still be Valerie’s CIA unit then.
Note Joe’s ‘miss speaking’ in detail about the Niger documents. Somehow he recalls with perfect clarity all sorts of known details, yet he keeps adding in details about documents that the CIA supposedly did not have at the time:
There were two other reports that were done at the same time as mine. One was the Ambassadors on the scene report and one was a report made by a fourth star marine corps general who made his way down to Niger and had taken a look at it. All three of us had concluded the same thing. It did not happen. We have information to the contrary. It cannot be authentic unless it contains three signatures. None of which were on those documents.
OK, if the Niger forgeries were actually created by the CIA for or around Joe’s 1999 trip to give to the Iraqi’s to make them think they had a uranium deal - that would explain why Joe Wilson kept ‘tainting’ his stories about Niger with these forgeries. We have speculated that the 2003 trip was to tell people to lay low since there were two other efforts underway and the IC felt Joe’s trip was redundant. But what if Joe’s trip was to tell the Niger folks who ran the country during the military coup d’etat from May 1999 to January 2000 to keep mum about the forged uranium sale! Well, this post has taken an interesting turn. I think I now see how all this could make sense seemlessly and without grand conspiracy theories until Joe joins the Kerry campaign. I will leave Wilson to pass sentence on himself and the CIA
If they [the Bush administration] lied about this, what else might they have lied about? For two, who is going to believe the President of the United States next time when he goes before the world and when he goes before the American people and when he goes before the Congress of the United States and says we have a real weapons of mass destruction problem here. Who is going to believe him?
Who is going to believe a former ambassador who hides the fact he is working for the opposing party when he lies about Niger Forgeries? Well, Joe I for one believe you when you said you knew about the forgeries in 2002 and knew they were fake. I believe you. And I believe you helped create those forgeries because they might contain the signatures of your Niger buddies from 1999 - don’t they? The forgeries come from the time period of 1999 possibly, and could have been a trick the CIA played on Iraq. I believe you went to Niger in 2002 to remind your cohorts that the CIA wanted the forgeries kept QUIET from the Bush administration’s investigation. And I think you, Val, Ray McGovern and others thought what a perfect use for these forgeries once Iraq was conquered and the forgeries useless to their original mission! Why not bring down a Presidency?
We know the forgeries were in a safe in Valerie’s CIA unit from October of 2002 onward. Wonder if there was a chance they were in the safe in Oct 2000? Or October 1999? What if those documents were in Valerie’s CIA unit’s safe from BEFORE the 2002 trip to Niger?
All rampant speculation of course and I have no proof. But I would think EPIC audio and UVA transcripts would make wonderful additions to Team Libby’s case. And I would expect some deep searching into the CIA information control documents that cover the contents of safes used by certain people in certain units. I would guess when word broke about the Niger forgeries in 2002, some in the CIA might have had to expose something in a controlled manner internally.
We shall see.
Addendum: Has anyone noticed it is impossible to find news reports on Nigers amazing transition from Military Coup d’Etat to democratic controlled government in less than a year from 1999-2000? I have been trying to find articles on who attended the big celebration after the transition which included many Dignataries - and one Joe Wilson. I find it strange that the new government, seated finally in January 2000, was not in the news?
It begs the question why, if we can sit here at home and find this stuff, they can't.
Or won't?
I check MacRanger, Strata, and Tom MacGuire every day.
It's Deja vu all over again (and again):
Is Bill Burkett a reliable source?
September 12th, 2004
The American Thinker
http://www.americanthinker.com/articles.php?article_id=3837&search=
I have to admit that I've read through this article and its updates several times, and I can't make heads or tails of it.
Can you or somebody give a synopsis of what points it is making?
So do I. However, what if something happens and for some reason those sites disappear or the articles do. I know I've gone back several yrs later and can no longer find an important article.
Geezzz...Wilson & anti-American part of the CIA forged these docs way back in 1999 for a totally different purpose. And were probably in the CIA safe since 1999...they were pulled out in 2002 saying here are some new docs, then identified as forgeries. Wilson was involved in the forged docs from the get go. These docs came out of the clintoon administration NOT W's. Anyway that's my take.
"Wilson & anti-American part of the CIA forged these docs way back in 1999..."
I thought some of the documents had signatures that were dated in October 2000.
I think this is a bit of a reach.
As I mentioned elsewhere, when the "forgeries" were first brought to his attention Wilson downplayed them and said "there's sufficient other evidence to convict Saddam of being involved in the nuclear arms trade."
We'll see want we.
BUMP!
Thanks for the ping.
I hope so. But I wouldn't count on this ever been settled. Certainly our one party media don't want it settled.
One of the reasons I am skeptical is because one of the biggest VIPS, Vincent Cannistaro, has been shouting from the rooftops that these forgeries orginated in the US by former US intel officers who were helping Bush lie us into war:
AlterNet: Who Forged the Niger Documents?
http://www.alternet.org/story/21704
I doubt that he would be pushing this line and demanding an investigation if he knew Wilson and other friends of his were involved.
US intel officers who were helping Bush lie us into war:
DO YOU BELIEVE THIS?
I've got a suggestion. AJ has a place to post comments or whatever for his articles...why not post your reservations to him and see what he has to say.
I have another suggestion. Each of AJ's articles posted at the links I've provided have some very interesting comments at the bottom of each of the articles. Take the time to read them.
This link provided by Starwise, goes to an incredible time line with footnotes.
"won't?"
Is the correct answer.
Or the editors/publishers spike any real news/tidbits that don't meet their agenda matrix.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.