Wilson/Plame/CIA: Something's Rotten

self

[kedshouse]

Something is very rotten, and mostly unreported in the Wilson/Plame leak case. Stephen Hayes has written three very fine articles about Joe Wilson, his lack of credibility and the CIA's hypocrisy and what would seem obvious role in the leak investigation. http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/006/281pokap.asp http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/006/266weygj.asp http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/006/244chpdw.asp

Now, to what's rotten: Before we all move on or get too narrowly focused, and I know it's not part of the indictment, however, two aspects of the whole affair (which I think are critically important) that have gotten short shrift by all reporters are these:

1. Why was there no written report from Wilson upon his return from Niger, only an oral debriefing? Is this (can this be) standard operating procedure? Only the debriefers notes evidently were somewhat passed up the chain.

Reporters should have been asking or at least reporting: 1. Is this CIA standard practice on what was apparently a serious matter? 2. How often does the CIA send someone on a fact finding mission and not require written observations? This type of sloppy procedure should have set off alarm bells that something was afoot!

2. Why and how often does the CIA send anyone on a "fact-finding" mission and not require some sort of written non-disclosure agreement? Wouldn't this type of trip have been classified? Per the narrative in the Senate Intelligence Committee report, although the matters themselves were classified (the whole Iraq/Niger potential relationship), the CIA assured Wilson it would keep his role (working for it) secret, yet the CIA did not require that Wilson sign non-disclosure, confidentiality agreements. How does this make any sense!: The area of interest is classified, we will keep your involvement with us secret, but you are free, evidently, to talk and write about the classified issues and your involvement with us! And nobody in the oh so vaunted media picks up on this? In whose world does this make any sense!

Are we to assume that the lead foreign intelligence agency, the CIA, requires no written documentation of its agents and representatives, when dealing with foreign nations? In a town like DC where it appears every little meeting and phone conversation is written down, how is this possible? How can anyone else independently verify an oral report?

Or does that give the game away? A written report can't be used against someone, so his verbal statements can fluctuate depending on circumstances at his choosing.

These questions get to the heart of the Wilson trip and its intent and suggest that from the CIA's perspective the Wilson trip and his willingness to talk about it and lie about it fit the CIA's bill: point the fingers away from the CIA (where they most definitely were in 2001 and 2002) and at anyone else ... the WH was as good as anyone else.

This is the real story, because if this shoddiness and rogue behavior is the rule and not the exception for the CIA, it should be disbanded! Every thing else is a deliberate political misdirection!

[saleman]

Just another example of the disinformation put out by the MSM. Not even Wilson said anything close to that. Wonder where they got that info? Or did they just make it up. I guess these days you don't have to have correct info to publish a story.

[Steve_Seattle]

I should clarify: no one is disputing that Wilson was dispatched to Niger in 2002 to investigate the Niger/Iraq uranium connection. The dispute (a minor one) is whether he was sent by the CIA or the White House. The answer is "both"; he was sent by the CIA in response to a request from the WH, but the WH did not know that he had been sent or what he found out in his investigation. And there is the side issue of whether his investigation was an add-on to a pre-planned business trip that just happened to coincide with the WH request for info about Niger.

[Hop A Long Cassidy]

>>>"About the lack of a non-disclosure agreement, I have heard the argument that it was not required because Wilson was not paid for taking the trip (he received only reimbursement for his travel expenses)."

His not receiving a payment was probably thought about BEFORE HAND. It looks like Wilson was chosen to be the mouthpiece for a department out to embarass the President.

[ravingnutter]

I have been doing research on this whole fiasco:

My theory (#42)is that this was a collaborative effort by the French and CIA coordinated by Wilson and his second wife, the French "Diplomat". Wilson did not lie when he said he saw the documents.

Also, Rocco Martino only "procured" the documents, he did not forge them. Fitzgerald went to Italy to investigate the Niger Embassy (in Rome) burglary...where the letterhead and seals for the forgeries were stolen. Ex-CIA agent (and coincidentally, an advisor to the Vatican in Rome),Vincent Cannistraro has stated that Alan Wolf and Duane Clarridge were the actual forgers, but his account is the only one available that I can find on the subject. He has also pointed the finger at Michael Ledeen, but Ledeen has publicly made a statement that he had nothing to do with it and demanded an apology from Cannistraro.

In addition, despite what the MSM is reporting, the Italians released a press report yesterday saying they had nothing to do with the forgeries:

Italy denies role in fake documents on Iraq

This was also backed up by Rocco here

Cannistraro's "theory" falls apart when you consider that he:

1) blamed SISME (the Italians), which has proven to be wrong

2) bases his assumptions on a Dec 2001 Ledeen meeting, when Cannistraro himself was in Rome in Nov 2001, which would make him just as suspect.

I also discovered that Cannistraro worked directly with Clarridge during Iran Contra, so he has alot of nerve bringing that up in connection to Ledeen. Another interesting tidbit (#47) that I discovered is that Wolf and Clarridge worked with Aldrich Ames, who outed Plame to the Russians in the 90's. Coincidence? I think not. Cannistraro trying to kill two birds with one stone to cover his own carcass seems to be the more likely answer. Equally suspicious is the Hersch article, where Cannistraro and another unnamed agent state the exact route the documents took and Cannistraro actually admits that he called the CIA about the documents before they were proven to be false. This begs the question...just how did Cannistraro know about the documents before they were vetted? Sounds a whole lot like Wilson's slip-up about seeing the documents.

Two other names just crept into this...Niger Ambassador Adamou Chekou, who was in charge at the Embassy when the break-in and forgeries occurred and Wissam al-Zahawiah, Iraqi Ambassador to the Holy See. Seems Italian Intelligence was eavesdropping on these two and discovered their "hotline".

Did you read that carefully. Holy See? As in Vatican? Where Vincent Cannistraro is the security advisor?

Also take into consideration:

Wilson (as Ambassador to Gabon) had/has connections to the Gabon Chief of State, Omar Bongo, who was the chief African ally of the French oil company TotalFinaElf, a major beneficiary of the Oil-for-Food bribes. Prior to the Iraq War, they had a contract with Saddam's regime worth an estimated 12.5 to 27.0 billion barrels of oil reserves. Also he had connections via the Middle East Institute and Rock Creek, both of which are Saudi controlled.

Wilson's wife Jacqueline was also apparently a lobbyist for Bongo and it seems Wilson was pretty chummy with Saddam's weapons buyer, having dinner with him on the eve that Kuwait was invaded in 1990. That makes it very clear that there are connections to oil-for-food. No wonder Wilson can afford his lifestyle.

Source: Posts 21 and 22

[ravingnutter]

The French Connection:

Jacqueline, (Joe's his second wife), was a French diplomat and may have provided the connections for Wilson to see the forged documents that were supplied by the French through the Italians. In other words it is possible that Wilson knew that the docs were forged because he was privy to the information that French wanted to discredit the British info on Saddam shopping for yellowcake and that Wilson's objective was the same. The French just happen to manage the yellowcake production in Niger.

Therefore, Wilson did not lie when he said he saw the documents.

Per a thread by Fedora:

French intelligence soon began a campaign to discredit the US case for war against Iraq. In 1999, French intelligence had begun investigating the security of uranium supplies in Niger, where uranium production was controlled by a consortium led by the French mining company COGEMA, a division of the French state-owned nuclear energy firm AREVA. At that time, Italian businessman Rocco Martino provided French intelligence with genuine documents revealing that Iraq was planning to expand trade with Niger. French intelligence took an interest in the documents and asked Martino to provide more information. In 2000 he used a contact in the Niger embassy in Rome to provide French intelligence with documents purporting that Iraq had purchased uranium from Niger. These documents were later exposed as forgeries;

< snip >

Since it is now also known that French intelligence was trying to push Martino’s forgeries on US and British intelligence, as simultaneously the Democratic National Committee was planning to discredit President Bush’s Iraq policy by accusing his administration of manufacturing evidence against Hussein’s regime, heightened suspicion is cast on Wilson’s use of the Niger investigation to discredit the Bush administration’s case for war.

What Wilson Didn’t Say About Africa

[BARLF]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A39834-2004Jul9.html

My info found here as to 1999 Niger trip by Wilson.

Thanks Steve, I don't know about the second trip.

[Steve_Seattle]

Thanks. I printed that article and will show it to my son as backup for what I've been telling him about Wilson's [lack of] credibility.

[saleman]

"Therefore, Wilson did not lie when he said he saw the documents"

There ya go. I think Wilson was provided the docs on his briefing before to trip by CIA as part of "evidence" that Iraq was trying to by uranium. He saw them as forgeries, drank some mint tea in Niger, came home and was debriefed. The CIA never thought the docs would come to light again but when they resurfaced that put a kink in things.

Remember, Wilson said he saw the docs and Kristof in his story says another source at CIA confirmed he did.

[ravingnutter]

Here's the catch:

London, England, Jun. 28 (UPI)—Iraq and four other countries were attempting to purchase uranium from Niger as far back as 1999, European intelligence officials told the Financial Times.

The unidentified sources told the newspaper illicit sales were being negotiated at least three years before last year's U.S.-led invasion.

They said between 1999 and 2001, uranium smugglers planned to sell the ore or refined ore called yellow cake, to Iran, Libya, China, North Korea and Iraq.

An official said meetings between Niger officials and would-be buyers from the five countries were held in several European countries. Intelligence officers were convinced that the uranium would be smuggled from abandoned mines in Niger, circumventing official export controls.

Washington Times

In Wilson's defense, unless he was drinking tea with smugglers, he would not have known about this. But the fact remains.

[ravingnutter]

Wow...just found something interesting:

Consider Libya and consider the State of the Union speech of this past week.

Last month, the leader of Libya voluntarily pledged to disclose and dismantle all of his regime's weapons of mass destruction programs, including a uranium enrichment project for nuclear weapons.

Answer these questions:

What continent is Libya on? Africa.

What was the goal of Saddam in relationship to uranium? Enrichment.

And who was it that helped Libya's dictator "see the light"? The British.

Hmmm ... British, uranium, Africa – and no mint julep mentioned.

Source

It would make sense...

[ravingnutter]

Posted by piasa (#5):

1999 early : (VALERIE AND JOE WILSON ATTEND AFRICAN STATE DINNER) Ha! Wilson and his wife showed up at a big African State dinner in 1999, as shown on this guest list published in "Africa Today." Click here and scroll down...guest list is alphabetical, and wife is listed as "Valerie Wilson" Wilson is listed as the President of Wilson International Ventures, and this dinner took place in early 1999. 40 posted on 08/04/2003 5:43 AM PDT by Miss Marple

But the link to Africa Today no longer works...someone must have purged it. That post also answered another question of mine... about Al Zahawie:

FEBRUARY 1999 : (NIGER : IRAQ'S FORMER AMBASSADOR TO THE VATICAN AL-ZAHAWIE VISITS NIAMEY, NIGER'S CAPITOL, WHILE ON A TOUR OF WEST AFRICAN NATIONS, TO INVITE PRESIDENT MAINASSARA TO BAGHDAD) a February 1999 visit to Niamey, Niger's capital, by Wissam al-Zahawie, Iraq's former ambassador to the Vatican. [He later claimed that his] trip had nothing to do with uranium. He was touring four West African nations, he said, and came here to invite Niger's then-President Ibrahim Bare Mainassara to Baghdad. Mainassara was assassinated two months later, and al-Zahawie could not be reached for comment about their talks. - "A look at the U.S.-British claims that Iraq tried to acquire uranium in Africa," AP, SEPT 21, 2003

We'll connect all the dots eventually!

[saleman]

Wilson is an idiot. Or course Iraq was trying to purchase uranium from Africa. And I know what the President said in his state of the union speech. And it wasn't about Niger. Someone in the MSM needs to get a clue or at least get honest (fat chance).

What I'm wondering is when Wilson saw the forged documents. I know he saw them because he described them as only someone had seen them could. And Kristof verified this in his story, that he had the docs when he went on the Niger trip.

[ravingnutter]

5.) Wilson Has Claimed His 1999 Trip To Niger Was Not Suggested By His Wife:

Wilson Claims CIA Thought To Ask Him To Make Trip Because He Had Previously Made Trip For Them In 1999, Not Because Of His Wife’s Suggestion. CNN’s Wolf Blitzer: “Who first raised your name, then, based on what you know? Who came up with the idea to send you there?” Joe Wilson: “The CIA knew my name from a trip, and it’s in the report, that I had taken in 1999 related to uranium activities but not related to Iraq. I had served for 23 years in government including as Bill Clinton’s Senior Director for African Affairs at the National Security Council. I had done a lot of work with the Niger government during a period punctuated by a military coup and a subsequent assassination of a president. So I knew all the people there.” (CNN’s “Late Edition,” 7/18/04)

In Fact, His Wife Suggested Him For 1999 Trip, As Well. “The former ambassador had traveled previously to Niger on the CIA’s behalf … The former ambassador was selected for the 1999 trip after his wife mentioned to her supervisors that her husband was planning a business trip to Niger in the near future and might be willing to use his contacts in the region …” (Select Committee On Intelligence, “Report On The U.S. Intelligence Community’s Prewar Intelligence Assessments On Iraq,” U.S. Senate, 7/7/04)

GOP

[Steve_Seattle]

I'm a bit skeptical about his claims that he knew all these people in Niger. In his book, he makes it sound like all he needed to do was show up in Niger and within hours the word would get out that the boys were back in town and all these old buddies of his would be lined up at his door, eager to meet him, hoist a few drinks, and talk about old times, pretty girls, and uranium. But he had only visited there once or twice in 1999, and apart from that hadn't been there in many years. So I'm thinking he's making himself out as more of an old Niger hand than he really was, in order to sell the idea that he was a logical choice for the trip, and possibly also to help explain how he could have pulled off this in-depth investigation in such a short time.

In his book, he talks about how there are only two flights a week to the Niger capital, about 10 hours apart, and that 10 hours was too short for his investigation, but eight days was way more than he needed, but he was forced to stay for the whole eight days. So, again, I am suspicious. He talks about dinner parties and checking out the natural wonders, and he had some business discussions, and I'm thinking there's not enough time even in eight days for a solid investigation, but he's saying the investigation could be done in a couple of days, leaving time for schmoozing and dinner parties and sightseeing. And why should anyone talk to him, or admit illegal activities, in the first place? And did he give the CIA any notes about his investigation, and name the "dozens" of people he interviewed?

[Steve_Seattle]

"I know he saw them because he described them as only someone had seen them could."

I don't know, but hadn't they been publicly debunked and described in the press before he made his claims? I think the senate report implied or suggested that Wilson seemed to be basing some of his claims on press accounts of those documents.

[Wendy44]

Cannistraro is VIPS, of course, but there's another name that came out this week connected to VIPS through Cannistraro that we need to add to VIPS propaganda watch--Philip Giraldi. He's ex-CIA and works with Cannistraro Associates.

The VIPS people usually come out one by one to make it look like it's all sorts of people all over the intelligence community. Looks like it's Giraldi's turn.

http://www.amconmag.com/2005/2005_10_24/cover.html

[SaltyJoe]

"spent only an hour a day surfing reputable blog sights"

I have an idea that where I hope the next presidential election will ignore the public debate floor. I like to compare President "W" to the Prophet Moses. Moses didn't lead the Israelites into the Promise Land, but he did help them out of bondage...and they both have that speech impediment thing too ;-) . Arnold Schwarzenegger avoided debate for as long as possible. Political debates make my skin crawl. There doesn't have to be an ounce of truth told for a politician to be a convincing salesman. Personally, I'd rather was my time buying a used car from a shyster. Perhaps we conservatives can encourage a "blog" debate where a candidate is evaluated by what he can research and reference on the web and what brains he (OR SHE!!!) can staff on their team (or future cabinet). This would mean so much more to me than watching someone like Clinton biting his lip and pumping his fist for an emotional photogenic image.

The old school media will sit up and take notice when they start getting hit in the pocket.

I have a bad feeling that Fox would only look at web surfing blogs if it has a serious (or is that series) conservative competitor. So far, only EWTN can out serve all other networks for dishing out Truth, and Mother Angelica can do that hopping on one leg. Not bad for an old gal, eh?

But EWTN is light years ahead of consumer news and majority of views haven't graduated to that level. If another conservative channel could incorporate the web as it's daily feed to us info junkies, it would edge FOX news to be that much sharper. Thus, it will have to be FOX that pushes itself.

I've long thought that Murdoc needs two news channels similar to what CNN has. One that's strictly headline (with a media watch that exposes malicious leftists propaganda), and another that does warm and fuzzy morning shows (which I loathe, but someone must watch them because every network has one), and then switches to domestic and world business as soon as the stock market opens. This 2nd channel can have headline news squirted in every 15 minutes). The Internet injection can fit into either one, but it would best serve the headline news channel given the faster speed of delivery.

What works against the mass information gathering is verifying the hype and rumor before broadcasting an alert (to prevent alarmism which is bad enough without the Internet). Perhaps a "trust club" must be erected with solemn affirmations to not exploit or manipulate data, image, sound, facts, and people in general. Otherwise, the mass news gathering reverts back to what the networks are like, and what we had before FOX came around.

Many news agencies are still using satellite feed which is slow, expensive, and quite unreliable when compared to submarine cable--an industry still recovering from the popped tech bubble (Worldcom, 360, Global Crossing, etc.). As the submarine cable industry recovers from its disastrous scandals that made Enron look like a simple "whoopsie" key punch error, reporting will have much better video transfers, conferencing, live feeds, and HUGE bandwidth (or is that "hughe" bandwidth). Given that both satellite and submarine cable both send info at the speed of light, what makes the cable much better for conferencing is that there's such a shorter delay between pauses (satellites are very far away and the distance traveled is doubled considering signals have to return).

What will further revolutionize the available news is that anybody can add information to public awareness from a hand held video camera downloaded right to the Internet. It's only been a matter of bandwidth, submarine cable station shore landings, branching units, and wireless technologies. Knowing this brings to light why so many leftists and EU self-interested socialist have been demanding that the US Military hand over control of the Internet to other nations (which we should NEVER EVER DO!).

[kedshouse]

Based on some of the stories that Brit Hume does, particularly his "two minutes from the political grapevine", I gather he or someone who works for him reads blogs because some of the items are only seen on blogs. Part of the problem with most of the media is laziness. It takes time, effort and legwork to get a story right. Example, when Major Garrett exposed that the Red Cross was stationed 2 miles from the Superdome and was prevented from bringing aid by Louisiana state authorities, he responded to Hume's question about whether this was a hard story to track down that, "(paraphrased)no the information was there for any reporter to find." Good reporting need not be difficult, it takes a willingness to look for facts, even if you don't like where they take you (go against your pre-conceived notions or ideological inclination). The problem with Fox, as it has become so popular, has been worshipping at the altar of "Fair and Balanced" instead of revering "Right vs Wrong".

[SaltyJoe]

"(paraphrased)no the information was there for any reporter to find."

LOL! More reason to have 2 FOX stations to provide itself a little competition.

What I like about Brit is that picture of him giving credit to the FreeRepublic for blowing Rathergate wide open. Perhaps he's got a team of blogger interns staffing his show, and that could be the reason why he's the top hound dog for the info junkies'.



I like that O'Rielly and Shep gives a bulletized point for point break down on liberals and their agenda. What hurts O'Rielly, in my opinion, is that he that he's a bit spiritually stunted when he talked about Pope JP#2 (suggesting that he retire before his time). But I know that O'Rielly realizes that he's at fault, he'd be the first to admit his mistakes.

I like Linda Vester because...uh, well because I'm a raging heterosexual and she's hot. But I saw a big fat ring on her finger, so I'll have to avert my eyes to some other babe...like Ann Coulter maybe.

[McGruff]

Investigate the CIA ^

Posted by KFAT2 On News/Activism ^ 11/03/2005 12:41:08 PM EST · 14 replies · 593+ views Wall Street Journal ^ | November 2 | Toensing In a surprise, closed-door debate, Senate Democrats demanded an investigation of pre-Iraq War intelligence. Here's an issue for them: Assess the validity of the claim that Valerie Plame's status was "covert," or even properly classified, given the wretched tradecraft by the Central Intelligence Agency throughout the entire episode. It was, after all, the CIA that requested the "leak" investigation, alleging that one of its agents had been outed in Bob Novak's July 14, 2003, column. Yet it was the CIA's bizarre conduct that led inexorably to Ms. Plame's unveiling.