Did Capitol Hill Blue Post An Article With Fabrications?

Me ^

[William McKinley]

In this article on Capitol Hill Blue, there are the following lines:

"The report had already been discredited," said Terrance J. Wilkinson, a CIA advisor present at two White House briefings. "This point was clearly made when the President was in the room during at least two of the briefings."

Bush's response was anger, Wilkinson said.

"He said that if the current operatives working for the CIA couldn't prove the story was true, then the agency had better find some who could," Wilkinson said. "He said he knew the story was true and so would the world after American troops secured the country."

Serious allegations. But I notice it is a single source. Being a conservative, I value the lessons of experience, and experience has told me that single sources are to be treated with skeptism. When I see one, I want to know more about the source quoted so as to establish if I should treat that source as credible.

So what about "Terrance J. Wilkinson"?

A Google search for "Terrance J. Wilkinson" found no results (which will change when Google picks up the Capitol Hill Blue article).

Google suggested that the name might be Terrence. But a Google search on "Terrence J. Wilkinson" also produced no hits.

Perhaps the middle initial is the problem. Alas, a Google search on "Terrence Wilkinson" CIA gave no hits, and a Google search on "Terrance Wilkinson" CIA also yielded no hits.

A Google news search on Terrence Wilkinson comes up with nothing relevant. So does a Google news search of Terrance Wilkinson.

A Google search on one of the phrases from one of the quotations comes up empty.

I would anticipate a 'CIA advisor' who attends the same briefings as the President to live somewhere near D.C. But there are no listings according to Anywho for a Terrance or Terrence Wilkinson in D.C., Maryland, or Virginia.

A Google search on "CIA Advisor" Wilkinson also comes up empty.

Perhaps Capitol Hill Blue would be better served by providing some more information about the person quoted so that others can judge his credibility. That is, if he exists.

[trick question]

Which brings back up the other part of my post. It would be very nice to have some way to verify any part of what Terry said. Names, dates, anything

[Doug Thompson]

QUOTE:
______________________________________________________

Which brings back up the other part of my post. It would be very nice to have some way to verify any part of what Terry said. Names, dates, anything
______________________________________________________

When I am able to verify additional information (and I will) , I will write a story on it.

Doug

[Lauratealeaf]

I think you have a big, fat agenda.

I agree.

[trick question]

Good. When you do, make sure there is some way for someone else besides you to verify it.

[Doug Thompson]

QUOTE:
_____________________________________________________

Good. When you do, make sure there is some way for someone else besides you to verify it.
_____________________________________________________

I don't tell others how to run their news operations or do their reporting for them. Ain't my job.

Doug

[deport]

I have edited the headline and the lead of the story to reflect that.

Really now...... seems the lead paragraph is still the same

---

White House admits Bush wrong about Iraqi nukes Jul 8, 2003, 02:29

Email this article  Printer friendly page

  After weeks of denial, the White House Monday finally admitted President Bush lied in his January State of the Union Address when he claimed Iraq had sought significant quantities of uranium in Africa.

[metesky]

Good moves, sir, good moves.

[Doug Thompson]

Folks, I'm off to dinner. Thanks for a stimulating and thought-provoking discussion. Anyone else who needs to contact me can do via Freepmail or by email direct at dougthompson@capitolhillblue.com. BTW, for the guy who tried to call me, you called my office line that, when I'm traveling, is forwarded to Blue Ridge Photography (which is my photo business). The kid there got tired ot answering calls for CH Blue today. I've talked to him about that. Doug

[Doug Thompson]

Try hitting your "refresh" button.

[Alas Babylon!]

I am a Bush supporter, an adamant one in fact, you may even call me a broken-glass Republican. I believe we needed to take out Saddam (long before 9/11, in fact). I am troubled that this intel was wrong in regards to Bush's SOTU speech. However, I don't think he lied.

To me, much of this has to be taken in context of the times. Meaning then, not now. Most of the World was opposed to military action against Iraq. Still, it was necessary. The President had to run an obstacle course of public opinion to lead the World to the correct conclusion: Saddam must go. So it was lathered on. Dubious intel was posted as possible (and, in fact, it often is, that's the intel business). Now the Leftist Bush haters will use this to lather it on that the Preident lied. That is a shame also, but at least Saddam is gone. The talk today is the price Geroge W. Bush had to pay.

I do admire that you corrected your article to reflect this. Those that insist you must always be right from the very beginning are asking the impossible.

[alnick]

For obvious reasons, a current CIA employee who might be called upon for duty in another country would probably use a "work name" rather than his own.

You mean he'd lie? I'm shocked! ;-)

[trick question]

I do. If you want to be credible, present verifyable information. If you want people to increasingly think you are making stuff up, print false headlines and lead ins and have facts that no one can verify in your stories.

With a little practice, you will be ready for the New York Times.

[alnick]

The use of the word "lied" has also sparked some controversy on the Capitol Hill Blue forum as well.

Of course it did because it was a blatant lie by YOU. Sheesh.

[justshe]

Then kudos for your correction. One would hope that you would learn from this....and perhaps avoid, in the future, the penchant for using an editorialized HOOK for your column titles.

[Mo1]

In retrospect, you and others here make a valid point. The headline is technically incorrect because the White House made no such admission. I have edited the headline and the lead of the story to reflect that

Gee are ya going to post a thread and apolize for that also?

I seem to recall a rant of yours that you had to pull .. AFTER it had been picked up here

[Spidey]

I am an irregular reader of your forum although I would never register or post there.

Sometimes I think you write crap like this just to agitate the few conservative members that haven't yet moved on.

[Mo1]

It was an irresponsible thing to do in the first place, not unlike the nasty piece you wrote on President Bush a few months ago and ended up having to apologize for.

Don't forget about his piece after we bought his bogus apology

[AGreatPer]

"Jim Robinson is a friend of mine and I worked to help him with the unjustified lawsuit against FR by the Post and L.A. Times." ..........ie: Doug Thompson

Hmmmm, finally something we can rely on. Jim, will you verify this?

[Jim Robinson]

Yep, Doug is one of the good guys.

[William McKinley]

Thanks for replying. I was under the impression that you had sold CBH and were no longer involved. I updated my blog to reflect your answers, and look forward to seeing your promised followup article, complete with verifiable facts.

Jim, if Doug's word is good enough for you, feel free to remove my thread.