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

Skip to comments.

Mission to Niger
TownHall.com ^ | 7/14/03 | Robert Novak

Posted on 07/14/2003 1:23:09 AM PDT by kattracks

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.

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.

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, finger-pointing between Bush administration agencies continued. Messages between Washington and the presidential entourage traveling in Africa hashed over the mission to Niger.

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.

That's where Joe Wilson came in. His first public notice had come in 1991 after 15 years as a Foreign Service officer when, as U.S. charge in Baghdad, he risked his life to shelter in the embassy some 800 Americans from Saddam Hussein's wrath. My partner Rowland Evans reported from the Iraqi capital in our column that Wilson showed "the stuff of heroism." President George H.W. Bush the next year named him ambassador to Gabon, and President Bill Clinton put him in charge of African affairs at the National Security Council until his retirement in 1998.

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.

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 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. 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. Not until Wilson went public on July 6, however, did his finding ignite the firestorm.

During the run-up to the invasion of Iraq, Wilson had taken a measured public position -- viewing weapons of mass destruction as a danger but considering military action as a last resort. He has seemed much more critical of the administration since revealing his role in Niger. In the Washington Post July 6, he talked about the Bush team "misrepresenting the facts," asking: "What else are they lying about?"

After the White House admitted error, Wilson declined all television and radio interviews. "The story was never me," he told me, "it was always the statement in (Bush's) speech." 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.

©2003 Creators Syndicate, Inc.

Contact Robert Novak | Read Novak's biography



TOPICS: Front Page News; News/Current Events; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: 16words; alanfoley; cia; cialeak; josephwilson; niger; plame; robertnovak; sotu; uranium; valerieplame; valerieplamewilson; wilson; wmd
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-56 next last
To: kattracks
What is the time line? I don't know about Wilson. I know that very dubious info was put into the SOTU speech and that it is alleged that members of Bush's staff were made aware that this info was dubious by the CIA. Meanwhile British intel was assuring us that their intel was hard on the Niger story. I now know that a Clinton hold over- Tenent has taken the fall but hasn't really since it is still quite murkey who knew what when. Bush gets a pass on this I guess.
21 posted on 07/14/2003 2:11:42 AM PDT by Burkeman1 (If you see ten troubles comin down the road, Nine will run into the ditch before they reach you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: kattracks
he was the acting Ambassador and was responsible for the negotiations that resulted in the release of several hundred American hostages. He was the last official American to meet with Saddam Hussein before the launching of ''Desert Storm.''

From one of his handy little bios...

One of the biggest reasons the hostages were released is because of the political backlash after Mr. Hussein had his picture taken while patting terrified hostage kids on the head... the scene didn't play any better in Paris than it did in Peoria.

Not to mention the guy the press originally credited with gaining their release was Jessie Jackson. People have been padding his resume with that too.

22 posted on 07/14/2003 2:11:58 AM PDT by piasa (Attitude adjustments offered here free of charge.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Mo1
Yes- I will agree to that.
23 posted on 07/14/2003 2:12:10 AM PDT by Burkeman1 (If you see ten troubles comin down the road, Nine will run into the ditch before they reach you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Burkeman1
Good .. now read the text and read what the media prints .. they like to change words that make it not sound the same

Maureen Dowd would be proud at how many in the media are handling this .. it's right up her ally

24 posted on 07/14/2003 2:15:21 AM PDT by Mo1 (Please help Free Republic and Donate Now !!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Burkeman1
What is the time line? I don't know about Wilson.

But you are more than willing to blast President Bush while admitting not knowing about the timeline or Wilson.

I know that very dubious info was put into the SOTU speech and that it is alleged that members of Bush's staff were made aware that this info was dubious by the CIA.

Alleged by the very same man you admit you don't know about. Claims made by the Dems, who are basing their claims on what Wilson has said.

25 posted on 07/14/2003 2:41:09 AM PDT by kattracks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Burkeman1
What part of this was incorrect?

"The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa."

Bear in mind that the Brits have intel other than the documentation about Niger that was proven false after the SOTU address.

How many countries in Africa have uranium besides Niger?

Would the government or the mining company officials tell Joe Wilson, a known employee of the US Government, that they had sold uranium to Saddam?

26 posted on 07/14/2003 2:49:46 AM PDT by PeaceBeWithYou (De Oppresso Liber!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: No Truce With Kings
ping.
27 posted on 07/14/2003 3:19:29 AM PDT by William McKinley (From you, I get opinions. From you, I get the story.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Burkeman1
Yes, the story is Wilson, as it should be. Contrary to what Novak says here, he did not take a "measured" stance on Iraq- he was a vocal opponent who was hob-nobbing with the radical fringes. He had no qualifications for the mission, being a diplomat not a spook, having no expertise in detecting forged documents, not being a weapons expert, etc. He injected himself into the story by writing an op-ed five months after the SOTU. It is reasonable to want to explore his motivations and how such an unqualified person (why was his wife not tagged for the mission, for example--she was much more qualified for the job) was sent on a job that the Democrats seem to feel was so vital?
28 posted on 07/14/2003 3:44:20 AM PDT by William McKinley (You're so vain, you probably think this tagline's about you)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: William McKinley
Novak has missed some important points in this column, most particularly Wilson's anumus against the administration and his active work against the war.

I also find it interesting that Pincus wrote a story in the Washington Post, apparently from information he gleaned from either Wilson or his wife (my take on what Novak said, anyway). This means someone wanted this story to come out during the African trip.

Now, I ask myself this: how appropriate is it for the husband of one of the CIA's WMD people to be agitating against the war and writing op-ed pieces in the papers?

29 posted on 07/14/2003 4:01:24 AM PDT by Miss Marple
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: kattracks
Why would anyone believe the CIA when it says that the uranium claim was false? The CIA has never been right before.
30 posted on 07/14/2003 4:17:02 AM PDT by Brilliant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Miss Marple
I ask myself how much of Wilson's animus is shared by his wife.
31 posted on 07/14/2003 4:23:55 AM PDT by kattracks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Miss Marple
I'd like to know who in the CIA thought that it was appropriate to send Wilson over there in the first place. That person should be fired.
32 posted on 07/14/2003 4:44:07 AM PDT by alnick (Kakkate Koi!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Miss Marple
Novak has missed some important points in this column, most particularly Wilson's anumus against the administration and his active work against the war.

Novak shared Wilson's views against the war and perhaps that is why he "missed some important points."

33 posted on 07/14/2003 4:51:54 AM PDT by HateBill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: HateBill
I want to know who in the CIA is leaking worse than Janet Reno's depends.
34 posted on 07/14/2003 4:56:43 AM PDT by gov_bean_ counter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: gov_bean_ counter
I believe we can point a suspicious finger at Wilson's wife.
35 posted on 07/14/2003 4:58:03 AM PDT by Miss Marple
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: kattracks
Wilson made an oral report in Langley that an Iraqi uranium purchase was "highly unlikely,

Regardless of timelines, or who knew what about Wilson and his report, there has never been a statement by Bush or any administration source that said Iraq had purchased or obtained in some other fashion uranium, from Niger or any other locale. The record shows that the statement(s) in question all profess the exact same idea: at some point, Iraq sought to obtain uranium. Their success, or lack thereof, in doing so is not pertinent now and it wasn't then.

If a killer is searching for a weapon to murder you, yet is encountering difficulty finding one, it doesn't make him any less dangerous.

36 posted on 07/14/2003 4:59:32 AM PDT by Mr. Bird
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Burkeman1
The story is front page in today's Washington Times. We can't find it posted on FR. It makes you wonder about all the coziness between the Clintons and Chirac. Just another coincidence, no doubt.
37 posted on 07/14/2003 1:04:20 PM PDT by AmericanVictory (Should we be more like them, or they like us?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: nopardons
Where is the thread? We can't find it, and consider it truly important because of the close relationship and substantial communications between Chirac and the Clintons.
38 posted on 07/14/2003 2:34:13 PM PDT by AmericanVictory (Should we be more like them, or they like us?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Miss Marple
Novak has consistently against the Iraq War.
39 posted on 07/14/2003 2:36:54 PM PDT by AmericanVictory (Should we be more like them, or they like us?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: AmericanVictory
It's calleds : The French Secret Service kept the CIA and the USA in the dark about uranium . I'll ping you to it, if you can't find it.
40 posted on 07/14/2003 10:22:12 PM PDT by nopardons
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-56 next 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