Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The CIA Disinformation Campaign
American Spectator ^ | 11-08-05 | Jed Babbin - Commentary & Analysis

Posted on 11/07/2005 9:49:30 PM PST by smoothsailing

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-76 last
To: the_Watchman
I'd like to hear when Fitzgerald figured out that Plame wasn't covert. Why didn't he stop?

Once a vampire smells blood, he doesn't stop until he gets some.

61 posted on 11/08/2005 12:12:05 PM PST by TChris ("The central issue is America's credibility and will to prevail" - Goh Chok Tong)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: aceintx
"No abuse here but a couple of rhetorical questions."

"1) Why would Bush order the CIA to falsify intelligence claiming that WMD exist and launch a war with the full knowledge that the lie would be exposed after Saddam was overthrown?"

Leaders often initiate actions, thinking that the secret will not be discovered or disclosed. Think of all the technological and military information Clinton gave to the Chinese. The transfer was discovered; however, Clinton was not held accountable...only embarrassed (if he is ever truly is).

"2) Why should we assume that Bush and the CIA knew Saddam had no WMD when every politician in the US (Republican and Democrat) as well as every single intelligence service around the world as well as the UN Politicos believed Saddam had WMD?"

I did not, in my speculation, state "no" evidence. I stated "not enough" evidence. In terms of war, it isn't enough that you think someone has something.

Question: Is it legal for the government to launch an offensive against a person in which the person's home is invaded, the person is removed and detained without representation, the agents have unfettered access to all of the person's personal information and property based only on "we think so"?

"3) Isn't is more likely that the CIA probably had such bad intelligence that they decided to throw the blame on Bush and all their machinations are nothing more that a hard core case of Bureaucratic CYA?"

It could be that the president made a request of the CIA presented information to the president suggesting a possibility that Saddam had WMD. The president could have ordered the CIA to investigate further, while gearing up the military machine just in case. Then the CIA reports to the president that the intelligence is questionable at best. The president decides, that because Saddam is a murderous dictator that didn't learn his lesson the first time, to launch an offensive anyway.

After all, North Korea has nuclear weapons and has threatened to launch a strike against the United States (a Chinese general did the same). North Korea is ruled by a brutal dictator who does as all communist dictators do...starves, tortures, and murders the people. China is no different. Why did we not launch a preemptive strike against either of those countries? Not only that North Korea and China are known to supply Middle Eastern tin-pots with military technology and weaponry. Why not cut the head of the snake off?
62 posted on 11/08/2005 1:54:50 PM PST by Seizure (More medication, please...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: Seizure
Your response to 1)

Leaders often initiate actions, thinking that the secret will not be discovered or disclosed. Think of all the technological and military information Clinton gave to the Chinese. The transfer was discovered; however, Clinton was not held accountable...only embarrassed (if he is ever truly is).
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Talk about empty rhetoric! You did not answer my question at all. Why would he begin a War based on WMDs knowing that they would find none? To speculate that the truth wouldn't be found out is silly and your speculation that that's what Bush did is preposterous to the point of being pathetic!
___________________________________________________________

Your response to 2)

I did not, in my speculation, state "no" evidence. I stated "not enough" evidence. In terms of war, it isn't enough that you think someone has something.

Question: Is it legal for the government to launch an offensive against a person in which the person's home is invaded, the person is removed and detained without representation, the agents have unfettered access to all of the person's personal information and property based only on "we think so"?

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
The evidence was apparently strong enough when Saint Willy bombed Saddam on the eve of his Impeachment trials.

If by persons you mean countries is it ok for one country to invade another to prevent possible a future catastrophic attack upon it's citizens I would say yes. Obviously other nations thought so as well or those on the UN Security counsel would not have passed an actionable resolution demanding that Saddam give up all WMDs or WMD programs or face the consequences.

What drives me nuts about you and your ilk seizure is that you all stood up and criticized the Bush Administration for not dealing with Mohamed Atta when it turned out that they were on a Terrorist Watch list and the FBI had numerous reports that Bin Laden had planned on flying planes into buildings when your arguments now prove that had bush acted and arrested the 19 hijackers you all would have howled at the moon about the lack of evidence and the damage to their civil liberties.

Hypocrite
____________________________________________________________

your response to 3

It could be that the president made a request of the CIA presented information to the president suggesting a possibility that Saddam had WMD. The president could have ordered the CIA to investigate further, while gearing up the military machine just in case. Then the CIA reports to the president that the intelligence is questionable at best. The president decides, that because Saddam is a murderous dictator that didn't learn his lesson the first time, to launch an offensive anyway.

After all, North Korea has nuclear weapons and has threatened to launch a strike against the United States (a Chinese general did the same). North Korea is ruled by a brutal dictator who does as all communist dictators do...starves, tortures, and murders the people. China is no different. Why did we not launch a preemptive strike against either of those countries? Not only that North Korea and China are known to supply Middle Eastern tin-pots with military technology and weaponry. Why not cut the head of the snake off?

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Shoulda, coulda woulda. This is irrelevant. I state again, EVERY major intelligence service in the entire world believed that Saddam had WMDs and was well on his way to developing a nuclear weapon including Saint Willy himself thus the 1998 bombing mentioned earlier.

I might also add that there is some evidence that Saddam sent his nuclear program to Libya and this is the program that Ghadafi released to us. He knew after we invaded that we had the goods on him. He new he'd be next so he gave it up.

The North Korea and China arguments to me are the most asinine argument that you simpletons make. WE HAVEN'T ATTACKED THEM BECAUSE THEY HAVE NUKES! We attacked Saddam before he was able to acquire them.

BTW

This argument also makes it sound like you'd favor attacking China and North Korea....

Wellllll????
63 posted on 11/08/2005 3:25:11 PM PST by aceintx (Extremism in defense of liberty is no vice!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: stylin19a
"In the court documents, Fitzgerald said that by October 2004, "the factual investigation -- other than the testimony of Miller and Cooper . . . was for all practical purposes complete.""

What happened was that the Intelligence Committee Report came out and Fitz realized that things were not exactly like Wilson had portrayed them. So he had to go back and requestion a bunch of witnesses based on reality, not Wilsonisms. It wasn't til recently that miller got the deal she wanted from Fitz which wouldn't incriminate her. Nobody was left but Rove and Libby to pin it on and Rove put up the stronger fight.

64 posted on 11/08/2005 3:40:34 PM PST by MilleniumBug
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Protect the Bill of Rights

Where can I find the "explosive signed report concerning the underlying facts of the assassination of President John Kennedy" mentioned in your post? I don't see it at any of the links in your post.


65 posted on 11/08/2005 5:26:41 PM PST by Renfield (If Gene Tracy was the entertainment at your senior prom, YOU might be a redneck...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: smoothsailing

Jo-Lyin Wilson "George Washington is small potatoes next to us".

Al-Not Franken"We are sooo patriotic and sooo much smarter than those right wing Christians".

Jo-Lyin "Did you know I'm an expert on nuclear terrorism?- shh, you didn't hear that from my wife.

66 posted on 11/08/2005 5:30:17 PM PST by Rome2000 (Peace is not an option)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MilleniumBug
GOP.COM

"It's disappointing that once again, so many Democrat leaders are taking their political cues from the far-left, Moveon wing of the party. The bottom line is Karl Rove was discouraging a reporter from writing a false story based on a false premise and the Democrats are engaging in blatant partisan political attacks."

-RNC Chairman Ken Mehlman

Cooper’s Own Email Claims Rove Warned Of Potential Inaccuracies In Wilson Information:

“[Time Reporter Matt] Cooper Wrote That Rove Offered Him A ‘Big Warning’ Not To ‘Get Too Far Out On Wilson.’ Rove Told Cooper That Wilson’s Trip Had Not Been Authorized By ‘DCIA’ - CIA Director George Tenet - Or Vice President Dick Cheney.” (Michael Isikoff, "Matt Cooper’s Source," Newsweek, 7/18/05)

Wilson Falsely Claimed That It Was Vice President Cheney Who Sent Him To Niger, But The Vice President Has Said He Never Met Him And Didn’t Know Who Sent Him:

Wilson Says He Traveled To Niger At CIA Request To Help Provide Response To Vice President’s Office. “In February 2002, I was informed by officials at the Central Intelligence Agency that Vice President Dick Cheney’s office had questions about a particular intelligence report. … The agency officials asked if I would travel to Niger to check out the story so they could provide a response to the vice president’s office.” (Joseph C. Wilson, Op-Ed, “What I Didn’t Find In Africa,” The New York Times, 7/6/03)

Joe Wilson: “What They Did, What The Office Of The Vice President Did, And, In Fact, I Believe Now From Mr. Libby’s Statement, It Was Probably The Vice President Himself ...” (CNN’s “Late Edition,” 8/3/03)

Vice President Cheney: “I Don’t Know Joe Wilson. I’ve Never Met Joe Wilson. … And Joe Wilson - I Don’t [Know] Who Sent Joe Wilson. He Never Submitted A Report That I Ever Saw When He Came Back.” (NBC’s “Meet The Press,” 9/14/03)

CIA Director George Tenet: “In An Effort To Inquire About Certain Reports Involving Niger, CIA’s Counter-Proliferation Experts, On Their Own Initiative, Asked An Individual With Ties To The Region To Make A Visit To See What He Could Learn.” (Central Intelligence Agency, “Statement By George J. Tenet, Director Of Central Intelligence,” Press Release, 7/11/03)

Tenet: “Because This Report, In Our View, Did Not Resolve Whether Iraq Was Or Was Not Seeking Uranium From Abroad, It Was Given A Normal And Wide Distribution, But We Did Not Brief It To The President, Vice-President Or Other Senior Administration Officials.” (Central Intelligence Agency, “Statement By George J. Tenet, Director Of Central Intelligence,” Press Release, 7/11/03)

Wilson Denied His Wife Suggested He Travel To Niger, But Documentation Showed She Proposed His Name:

Wilson Claims His Wife Did Not Suggest He Travel To Niger To Investigate Reports Of Uranium Deal; Instead, Wilson Claims It Came Out Of Meeting With CIA To Discuss Report. CNN’S WOLF BLITZER: “Among other things, you had always said, always maintained, still maintain your wife, Valerie Plame, a CIA officer, had nothing to do with the decision to send to you Niger to inspect reports that uranium might be sold from Niger to Iraq. … Did Valerie Plame, your wife, come up with the idea to send you to Niger?” JOE WILSON: “No. My wife served as a conduit, as I put in my book. When her supervisors asked her to contact me for the purposes of coming into the CIA to discuss all the issues surrounding this allegation of Niger selling uranium to Iraq.” (CNN’s “Lade Edition,” 7/18/04)

But Senate Select Committee On Intelligence Received Not Only Testimony But Actual Documentation Indicating Wilson’s Wife Proposed Him For Trip. “Some [CIA Counterproliferation Division, or CPD,] officials could not recall how the office decided to contact the former ambassador, however, interviews and documents provided to the Committee indicate that his wife, a CPD employee, suggested his name for the trip. The CPD reports officer told Committee staff that the former ambassador’s wife ‘offered up his name’ and a memorandum to the Deputy Chief of the CPD on February 12, 2002, from the former ambassador’s wife says, ‘my husband has good relations with both the PM [prime minister] and the former Minister of Mines (not to mention lots of French contacts), both of whom could possibly shed light on this sort of activity.’” (Select Committee On Intelligence, “Report On The U.S. Intelligence Community’s Prewar Intelligence Assessments On Iraq,” U.S. Senate, 7/7/04)

Wilson’s Report On Niger Had “Thin” Evidence And Did Not Change Conclusions Of Analysts And Other Reports:

Officials Said Evidence Was “Thin” And His “Homework Was Shoddy.” “In the days after Wilson’s essay appeared, government officials began to steer reporters away from Wilson’s conclusions, raising questions about his veracity and the agency’s reasons for sending him in the first place. They told reporters that Wilson’s evidence was thin, said his homework was shoddy and suggested that he had been sent to Niger by the CIA only because his wife had nominated him for the job.” (Michael Duffy, “Leaking With A Vengeance,” Time, 10/13/03)

Senate Select Committee On Intelligence Unanimous Report: “Conclusion 13. The Report On The Former Ambassador’s Trip To Niger, Disseminated In March 2002, Did Not Change Any Analysts’ Assessments Of The Iraq-Niger Uranium Deal.” (Senate Select Committee On Intelligence, “Report On The U.S. Intelligence Community’s Prewar Assessments On Iraq, 7/7/04)

“For Most Analysts, The Information In The Report Lent More Credibility To The Original Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) Report On The Uranium Deal, But State Department Bureau Of Intelligence And Research (IN) Analysts Believed That The Report Supported Their Assessments That Niger Was Unlikely To Be Willing Or Able To Sell Uranium.” (Senate Select Committee On Intelligence, “Report On The U.S. Intelligence Community’s Prewar Assessments On Iraq, 7/7/04)

CIA Said Wilson’s Findings Did Not Resolve The Issue. “Because [Wilson’s] report, in our view, did not resolve whether Iraq was or was not seeking uranium from abroad, it was given a normal and wide distribution, but we did not brief it to the president, vice president or other senior administration officials. We also had to consider that the former Nigerien officials knew that what they were saying would reach the U.S. government and that this might have influenced what they said.” (Central Intelligence Agency, “Statement By George J. Tenet, Director Of Central Intelligence,” Press Release 7/11/03)

The Butler Report Claimed That The President’s State Of the Union Statement On Uranium From Africa, “Was Well-Founded.” “We conclude that, on the basis of the intelligence assessments at the time, covering both Niger and the Democratic Republic of Congo, the statements on Iraqi attempts to buy uranium from Africa in the Government’s dossier, and by the Prime Minister in the House of Commons, were well-founded. 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.” (The Rt. Hon. The Lord Butler Of Brockwell, “Review Of Intelligence, On Weapons Of Mass Destruction,” 7/14/04)

Sens. Roberts, Bond And Hatch All Dismissed Wilson’s Claims:

Sens. Pat Roberts (R-KS), Kit Bond (R-MO) And Orrin Hatch (R-UT) All Stated, “On At Least Two Occasions [Wilson] Admitted That He Had No Direct Knowledge To Support Some Of His Claims And That He Was Drawing On Either Unrelated Past Experiences Or No Information At All.” (Select Committee On Intelligence, “Additional Views Of Chairman Pat Roberts, Joined By Senator Christopher S. Bond And Senator Orrin G. Hatch; Report On The U.S. Intelligence Community’s Prewar Intelligence Assessments On Iraq,” U.S. Senate, 7/7/04)

“The Former Ambassador, Either By Design Or Through Ignorance, Gave The American People And, For That Matter, The World A Version Of Events That Was Inaccurate, Unsubstantiated, And Misleading.” (Select Committee On Intelligence, “Additional Views Of Chairman Pat Roberts, Joined By Senator Christopher S. Bond And Senator Orrin G. Hatch; Report On The U.S. Intelligence Community’s Prewar Intelligence Assessments On Iraq,” U.S. Senate, 7/7/04)

“[J]oe Wilson Told Anyone Who Would Listen That The President Had Lied To The American People, That The Vice President Had Lied And That He Had ‘Debunked’ The Claim That Iraq Was Seeking Uranium From Africa … Not Only Did He NOT ‘Debunk’ The Claim, He Actually Gave Some Intelligence Analysts Even More Reason To Believe That It May Be True.” (Select Committee On Intelligence, “Additional Views Of Chairman Pat Roberts, Joined By Senator Christopher S. Bond And Senator Orrin G. Hatch; Report On The U.S. Intelligence Community’s Prewar Intelligence Assessments On Iraq,” U.S. Senate, 7/7/04)

Wilson Tied To The 2004 Kerry Campaign For President:

Wilson Endorsed Kerry In October 2003. “Former Ambassador Joseph Wilson, who accused the Bush administration of manipulating intelligence to exaggerate the threat from Iraq, endorsed Democrat John Kerry for president … In a conference call with New Hampshire reporters, Wilson said he and Kerry have shared the experience of challenging their government – Wilson when he questioned the ‘rush to war’ with Iraq, Kerry when he challenged America’s role in Vietnam.” (David Tirrell-Wysocki, “Former Ambassador Wilson Endorses Kerry In Presidential Race,” The Associated Press, 10/23/03)

“Wilson … Said He Has Long Been A Kerry Supporter And Has Contributed $2,000 To The Campaign This Year. He Said He Has Been Advising Kerry On Foreign Policy For About Five Months And Will Campaign For Kerry, Including A Trip To New Hampshire …” (David Tirrell-Wysocki, “Former Ambassador Wilson Endorses Kerry In Presidential Race,” The Associated Press, 10/23/03)

“In Mid-May, [Wilson] Began Talking To Kerry’s Advisers About Helping The Campaign; He Made His First Donation May 23. Kerry Himself Had Not Met Wilson Until Tuesday Night At A Campaign Fund-Raiser In Potomac, Md., A Kerry Aide Said …” (Patrick Healy and Wayne Washington, “In Probe Of CIA Leak, Two Sides See Politics,” The Boston Globe, 10/2/03)

“[Kerry Advisor Rand] Beers Said Wilson Communicates With Campaign Advisers At Least Once A Week.” (Patrick Healy and Wayne Washington, “In Probe Of CIA Leak, Two Sides See Politics,” The Boston Globe, 10/2/03)

67 posted on 11/08/2005 5:31:30 PM PST by Rome2000 (Peace is not an option)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: Renfield

I saw it somewhere...do a web search on Crowley Files, it should show up.

As a disclaimer, the page I posted was the first I have ever heard of the Crowley Files. I have no clue as to the authenticity. My post was a request of anyone who is familar with these.

They are intriging, but at the same time, so is fiction.


68 posted on 11/08/2005 5:42:39 PM PST by Protect the Bill of Rights
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: Zon
Even as I type a book(s) is being written.

Sign me a copy.....

Please write:

If I could fly like birds on high........... Then straight to her arms I’d go sailin’.

;-)

69 posted on 11/09/2005 3:06:08 AM PST by beyond the sea (Gloria Borger is Andrea Mitchell on Peyote)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: ovrtaxt
I've been ignoring this whole Plame/Wilson thing up to now, simply because it's so silly and unbelievable. Now I think I'm up to speed after reading this.

OK good, here are a couple of other GREAT ones:

***

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/1508146/posts Is Valerie Plame the new Deep Throat?

****

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1512059/posts

Is this the "French Connection" we were looking for?

70 posted on 11/09/2005 3:09:25 AM PST by beyond the sea (Gloria Borger is Andrea Mitchell on Peyote)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Seizure
"After all, North Korea has nuclear weapons and has threatened to launch a strike against the United States (a Chinese general did the same). North Korea is ruled by a brutal dictator who does as all communist dictators do...starves, tortures, and murders the people. China is no different. Why did we not launch a preemptive strike against either of those countries? Not only that North Korea and China are known to supply Middle Eastern tin-pots with military technology and weaponry. Why not cut the head of the snake off?"


I remember this argument by the liberals, but let us NOT forget that N.Korea was adopted by Clintons, Richardson, and Carter when old Boris was staggering out of power.

Let us also remember that Maddie Albright stated that the Clintons foreign policy was to 'EQUALIZE ALL NATIONS', I would suggest that we have first hand intel as to what that means. Kyoto Treaty was KEY to their equalization program.

Now there is NO way the CIA could have attempted to SAVE Saddam without some powerful cover, meaning liberals in Congress while their "head" old bj was touring the world especially Europe seeking to give aid and comfort to the EUROS about saving Saddam.

JFKerry's campaign appears to have been by design to orchestrate a fraudulent "grass roots" paid for by SOROS and company to win an election with the help of Joe Wilson and by extension the CIA.
71 posted on 11/09/2005 3:20:11 AM PST by Just mythoughts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: Zon
I too would be interested in the "book(s)". The missing link appears to be which elected liberal(s) orchestrated this whole thing. I do not think it possible for the CIA to make this attempt all by themselves. I remember a word that the Clintons loved called "triangulation", and we know two of the three parties required, the media, and the CIA, there is a third and I believe it falls squarely upon elected liberals who gave the green light to the other two players.
72 posted on 11/09/2005 3:28:20 AM PST by Just mythoughts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Just mythoughts

What is Novak waiting for? Who was his source and why has he not disclosed this yet? In addition how is it that Andrea Mitchell know about Plame long before he did?


73 posted on 11/09/2005 3:30:10 AM PST by stocksthatgoup (Polls = Proof that when the MSM want yo"ur opinion they will give it to you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: beyond the sea

THX!


74 posted on 11/09/2005 3:35:43 AM PST by ovrtaxt (Does this suicide belt make my butt look big?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: stocksthatgoup
"What is Novak waiting for? Who was his source and why has he not disclosed this yet? In addition how is it that Andrea Mitchell know about Plame long before he did?"


Novak asked the very very very important question, 'why was Joe Wilson sent to gather this "INTEL"? Now what I have not yet been able to determine is, if the point of asking this question and discussing old Joe and him being sent was done out of genuine interest or a method of pulling that "trigger" for that planned investigation described in Rockey's leaked memo.
75 posted on 11/09/2005 3:48:52 AM PST by Just mythoughts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies]

To: smoothsailing

bump


76 posted on 11/13/2005 8:23:15 PM PST by timestax
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-76 last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson