
David Corn had a doozy of a revelation yesterday — on his blog and in an article in The Nation — regarding Valerie Plame Wilson and her CIA role.
She was operations chief of the Joint Task Force on Iraq, a unit of the Counterproliferation Division of the clandestine Directorate of Operations. For the two years prior to her outing, Valerie Wilson worked to gather intelligence that would support the Bush White House’s assertion that Saddam Hussein’s Iraq was loaded with WMDs. This means that Armitage–as well as Karl Rove and Scooter Libby–leaked classified information about a CIA officer whose job it had been to look for evidence of Saddam’s WMD programs. During this part of her career, Valerie Wilson traveled overseas to monitor operations she and her staff at JTFI were mounting. She was no analyst, no desk-jockey, no paper-pusher. She was an undercover officer in charge of running critical covert operations.
I’ve taken some time to sift through the particulars a bit, and contemplate the angles and implications. But I keep coming back to a segment of the Corn article in The Nation that needs to be highlighted:
But that summer–before 9/11–word came down from the brass: We’re ramping up on Iraq. Her unit was expanded and renamed the Joint Task Force on Iraq. Within months of 9/11, the JTFI grew to fifty or so employees. Valerie Wilson was placed in charge of its operations group.There was great pressure on the JTFI to deliver. Its primary target was Iraqi scientists. JTFI officers, under Wilson’s supervision, tracked down relatives, students and associates of Iraqi scientists–in America and abroad–looking for potential sources. They encouraged Iraqi émigrés to visit Iraq and put questions to relatives of interest to the CIA. The JTFI was also handling walk-ins around the world. Increasingly, Iraqi defectors were showing up at Western embassies claiming they had information on Saddam’s WMDs. JTFI officers traveled throughout the world to debrief them. Often it would take a JTFI officer only a few minutes to conclude someone was pulling a con. Yet every lead had to be checked.
"We knew nothing about what was going on in Iraq," a CIA official recalled. "We were way behind the eight ball. We had to look under every rock." Wilson, too, occasionally flew overseas to monitor operations. She also went to Jordan to work with Jordanian intelligence officials who had intercepted a shipment of aluminum tubes heading to Iraq that CIA analysts were claiming–wrongly–were for a nuclear weapons program. (The analysts rolled over the government’s top nuclear experts, who had concluded the tubes were not destined for a nuclear program.)
The JTFI found nothing. The few scientists it managed to reach insisted Saddam had no WMD programs. Task force officers sent reports detailing the denials into the CIA bureaucracy. The defectors were duds–fabricators and embellishers. (JTFI officials came to suspect that some had been sent their way by Ahmad Chalabi’s Iraqi National Congress, an exile group that desired a US invasion of Iraq.) The results were frustrating for the officers. Were they not doing their job well enough–or did Saddam not have an arsenal of unconventional weapons? Valerie Wilson and other JTFI officers were almost too overwhelmed to consider the possibility that their small number of operations was, in a way, coming up with the correct answer: There was no intelligence to find on Saddam’s WMDs because the weapons did not exist. Still, she and her colleagues kept looking. (She also assisted operations involving Iran and WMDs.)
Did you catch it? The JTFI was ramped up several months before 9/11 even occurred. Well, THAT is new, isn’t it? I do not recall that ever being discussed in any of the Senate Intel reports or the 9/11 Commission report or anywhere else for that matter. Does anyone else? I spent a little time yesterday going back through my notes and some of the documents, and I cannot find a reference to this pre-9/11 ramp up on Iraq at the CIA anywhere. Anyone find a reference to that anywhere that I may have missed — if so, please share it.
Just how many trips to the CIA did Dick Cheney, Scooter Libby and David Addington make prior to 9/11 asking about Iraq, pushing analysts toward conclusions that they wanted? How much of that information that Judy Miller was gleefully printing up in the NYTimes during this period came from Chalabi and the Cheney cabal in an effort to push the JTFI to back them up? Why is Pat Roberts still sitting on Phase II of the Intel Report — reportedly at Dick Cheney’s urging — and how complicit has Pat Roberts been in all of this? What don’t they want us to know?
When the Novak column ran, Valerie Wilson was in the process of changing her clandestine status from NOC to official cover, as she prepared for a new job in personnel management. Her aim, she told colleagues, was to put in time as an administrator–to rise up a notch or two–and then return to secret operations. But with her cover blown, she could never be undercover again. Moreover, she would now be pulled into the partisan warfare of Washington. As a CIA employee still sworn to secrecy, she wasn’t able to explain publicly that she had spent nearly two years searching for evidence to support the Administration’s justification for war and had come up empty.
Ginning up a war, before the 9/11 attacks had even occurred, before the Twin Towers fell, but because they simply wanted war with Iraq…but they never wanted any of us to find out about their rush to Baghdad starting in that summer of 2001. At least, not until we were already there.
Digby had some thoughts on this yesterday well worth considering:
Armitage may have just been a gossipy little busybody from way back, but that doesn’t explain LIbby and Judy and Rove and Cooper or the "two senior administration officials" who tried to get the Washington Post to print that Wilson’s CIA "wife" had sent Wilson on a "boondoggle." Rove said she was "fair game." You simply cannot persuade me that every last person involved in this did not know that the head of the Joint Task Force on Iraq’s WMD at the CIA in 2003 was the person they were busy making sure was publicly outed.
Wilson scared the hell out of them because they knew who his wife was and knew what she knew. This is about Cheney and the CIA, whom he and all the neocons have thought were a bunch of liberal appeasers for decades because they have so often failed to back up the wingnuts’ most fanciful, paranoid wet dreams about the boogeyman of the day — wet dreams, by the way, which were always, everytime, proven false in the end.
In the end, this has always been about shutting up every critic of the Bush Administration, through whatever means were necessary, so that they could continue to do whatever they damn well pleased, and the hell with the consequences and the petty little laws and regulations.
How many other Washington power couples know things that they are now keeping to themselves about the Bush Administration’s illegal, immoral, or otherwise indefensible actions because of the payback exacted on Joe Wilson for calling the President on his public lie in the State of the Union? The President stood before Congress and spoke those sixteen words that he had been told well beforehand were false and unsubstantiated – and he and his cronies and surrogate mouthpieces have spent years now trying to keep the genie in the bottle on the facts surrounding those words and all the other lies.
It’s funny that the facts keep dribbling out anyway.
Emptywheel has done an amazing dissection of this news over at Next Hurrah, and I encourage everyone to go and read it, if you haven’t done so already. But I still keep going back in my mind, over and over again — they ramped up the JTFI the summer BEFORE 9/11, just a few months (5? 6?) after George Bush took office in January of 2001.
How long had this war with Iraq been on the planning table for George Bush and Dick Cheney? Before Bush was ever elected President? How far were they willing to go to get it — was there some triggering event that caused them to be more concerned about Iraq that led to this ramp up, or was this put in motion from the moment Bush took the oath of office as President as some personal payback for Saddam Hussein or as a means for Junior to prove he was more of a man than his dad because he’d go all the way to Baghdad? What was the motivation behind ramping up for war with Iraq during the summer of 2001?
And why haven’t the press and the Congress been asking these questions all along?
Related posts:





Spotlight







Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About Firedoglake
Advanced search

Christy!
Christy!
Valerie!
Whoa! The coveted ). Now I go read the article. Fresh Plame and coffee, yeah!
Hola!
How far were they willing to go to get it…?
Far enough to ignore warnings of planes hitting towers and killing Americans.
But its all Bill Clinton’s fault.
-GFO
Kind of makes all the right wing talking heads that called her a desk jockey and said she wasn’t even undercover look stupid doesn’t it. Hannity, Limpballs, Savage, I’m talking about you.
But thanks to shrub, Bin-Laden is a free man:
http://allspinzone.com/blog/index.php?itemid=3306
ckerst @ 7
It would if reality meant anything to them. 65% of rethugs(claim to) believe Saddam was involved in 9/11. Shows you how little they care about facts.
“A New Pearl Harbor”
Two years ago a project set up by the men who now surround George W Bush said what America needed was “a new Pearl Harbor.” Its published aims have, alarmingly, come true.
By John Pilger
New Statesman
December 16, 2002
The threat posed by US terrorism to the security of nations and individuals was outlined in prophetic detail in a document written more than two years ago and disclosed only recently. What was needed for America to dominate much of humanity and the world’s resources, it said, was “some catastrophic and catalysing event – like a new Pearl Harbor”. The attacks of 11 September 2001 provided the “new Pearl Harbor”, described as “the opportunity of ages”. The extremists who have since exploited 11 September come from the era of Ronald Reagan, when far-right groups and “think-tanks” were established to avenge the American “defeat” in Vietnam. In the 1990s, there was an added agenda: to justify the denial of a “peace dividend” following the cold war. The Project for the New American Century was formed, along with the American Enterprise Institute, the Hudson Institute and others that have since merged the ambitions of the Reagan administration with those of the current Bush regime.
One of George W Bush’s “thinkers” is Richard Perle. I interviewed Perle when he was advising Reagan; and when he spoke about “total war”, I mistakenly dismissed him as mad. He recently used the term again in describing America’s “war on terror”. “No stages,” he said. “This is total war. We are fighting a variety of enemies. There are lots of them out there. All this talk about first we are going to do Afghanistan, then we will do Iraq… this is entirely the wrong way to go about it. If we just let our vision of the world go forth, and we embrace it entirely and we don’t try to piece together clever diplomacy, but just wage a total war… our children will sing great songs about us years from now.”
Perle is one of the founders of the Project for the New American Century, the PNAC. Other founders include Dick Cheney, now vice-president, Donald Rumsfeld, defence secretary, Paul Wolfowitz, deputy defence secretary, I Lewis Libby, Cheney’s chief of staff, William J Bennett, Reagan’s education secretary, and Zalmay Khalilzad, Bush’s ambassador to Afghanistan. These are the modern chartists of American terrorism. The PNAC’s seminal report, Rebuilding America’s Defences: strategy, forces and resources for a new century, was a blueprint of American aims in all but name. Two years ago it recommended an increase in arms-spending by $48bn so that Washington could “fight and win multiple, simultaneous major theatre wars”. This has happened. It said the United States should develop “bunker-buster” nuclear weapons and make “star wars” a national priority. This is happening. It said that, in the event of Bush taking power, Iraq should be a target. And so it is.
rest of the article is online here
http://www.ifamericansknew.org…..ilger.html
Dadhusker @
8
ABC – Pakistan Denies Bin Laden Gets a Pass
“If he is in Pakistan, today or any time later, he will be taken into custody and brought to justice,” the Pakistani ambassador to the United States, Mahmud Ali Durrani, said in a statement.
Thanks Redd. I read the whole Nation article yesterday and did not catch the significance of what you pointed out. (I must read more carefully!)
Breathtaking!
No wonder they are trying to re-write history and have financed (my guess) the Disney network to present it for them.
We’ve known all along from Paul O’Neil’s book and Richard Clarke that they had Iraq in their sights before 9/11.
The only way we’ll ever know the whole story on the Plame affair is for CIA insiders to talk. May never happen.
NY Times editorial today (want Fitz to put up or shut down):
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/09…..6wed2.html
It seems like the real story is the silencing of the WMD investigators like Valerie Plame who had found no evidence of WMDs in Iraq. This was far more embarrassing to the administration and potentially more explosive than the question of when they actually began their investigation.
Christy, do you have any idea how Corn got this information? I’m wondering who his sources are and whether all this information has been declassified. Anyone know?
I read emptywheel and I didn’t pick up any hint there. But perhaps I’ve just missed something because I’ve been trying to keep up with so many different stories these nut cases are creating.
so I/m a little lost, before I cna go with this I have to find out how her work in Iran coordinates with the work in Iraq
it doesn’t seem likely, more likely, one story or the other is an exageration
HotFlash You still here?
OT w apologies
nervousmommyhere
nosleeplastnight
sonny made it to finals yestidie
crossedfingerstime today
(last time, 70 were “allowed” just to show up in person, & only one is chosen in these things)
nofingernailshere…..
lina at 14 — I agree that we knew that they were looking at Iraq. But this was the first that I can recall hearing that the JTFI was staffed up from a handful to 50 personnel in the summer of 2001. That’s a huge step, not just with staffing but with intent. Does anyone know of any other mention of this prior to Corn’s article yesterday?
This is fucking huge. Too bad the crocodile hunter had to die and hog all the traditional media coverage. Oh, that’s right: they don’t give a shit.
I’m still convinced that Valerie Plame was just a desk jockey, and that she wasn’t covert, and that her husband outed her, and that if she was covert why was her name in Who’s Who? And everybody knew Joe Wilson had a wife, so what’s the big deal?
We have known for quite some time that the first order of business for the Bush/Cheney administration was to figure out a way to justify invading Iraq. We’ve known that, from 9/11 itself, Rumsfeld wanted to attack Iraq.
“It’s funny that the facts keep dribbling out anyway.”
It sure is, yesterday while reading Glenn Greenwald I almost fell off the chair when Cuba was named to the list of terrorist nations. But after I had a moment to digest that fact, I realized that it explained the so called need for wireless taps at the same time. There must be intelligence out there for a Cuba-middle east connection otherwise why would they need to listen in on literally millions of Cubans conversations? Who else but Bush would worry about a nuke coming in on a raft?
Nice spotting the nugget, Christy. Now segue to the FBI supervisor, subsequently promoted, who blocked several efforts to connect the dots on Near Eastern guys learning to fly, and W’s preoccupation with brush-clearing despite the famous August PDB whose title (can’t ask the Chimp to listen to more than titles can we?) BenVeniste had to pry out of Condi, and … well, hmm.
Keep pulling on that thread. Who knows, the whole garment could come apart.
Cheers and thanks to you, Jane and the rest.
meta at 16 — I don’t know who Corn’s sources were on this. He mentions “former CIA officer” in the Nation article at least once, as I recall. But that could be any number of people, either on the JTFI or related areas, or beyond.
Oh, and the Times knows diddly about what Fitz is up to, so they should stop pretending that they do.
Christy, I would bet dollars to donuts that if you go back and do a Lexus-Nexus search, you will find the number of articles in the news retlated to Iraq increased significantly between the end of the Clinton Administration and 9/11. Then there was a hiatus during the 9/11 aftermath and the Afghanistan War. Then Iraq pops back up. I remember that summer well. The Wurlitzer was getting primed for Iraq and got interrupted. Go ahead, get some data and graph it by week from January 2000 to March 2003. You will see that the Clintonistas were not all that worried about Iraq. It wasn’t until the Bushies came into office that it suddenly became a hot topic AND it started well before 9/11. Go ahead, I’ll wait. I don’t have access to those databases but I know I’m right about this. It was one of the reasons I never believed a word they said about Iraq. I knew they wanted to go in before 9/11 and they were just looking for an excuse.
Gives a whole new meaning to Snakes on a Plame.
This regime is the most criminally corrupt bunch beings ever known.
I cant label them human.
lina @ 14
sad to say, I think fitz has drank the kool aid, I have lost faith
his information is VITAL to our national security, and HE KNOWS IT, the longer he keeps his findings under secret, the longer people that are in the administration get untethered access to vital information and put this nation at peril
fits KNOWS THIS.
it DOES NOT make any kind of sense he is withholding this information for the sake of his investigation.
he needs to tell us what’s been going on, he needs to bring the people responsible to justice, he needs to go public and he needs to do it IMMEDIATELY
he needs to go on record, under oath, if necessary in front of the secrets committee, but he MUST get the American public this information and HE HAS TO DO IT NOW
lina @
14
Thanks for this link, lina. I just read this puff piece. They’re still defending St Jude, and they think the investigation has gone on too long. How would they know? Sounds like they’ve joined the chorus.
FYI everyone — I hear that Sen. Chris Dodd will be speaking on the floor of the Senate in opposition to the Bolton nomination to the UN around 10:15 am this morning.
Christy Hardin Smith @ 19
I’m with Meta. How did Corn get this info?
I’ve never read anywhere about Valerie’s job other than she was in D. of O. (which, btw, RichD, was a clue to anyone in government that she was clandestine).
Christy,
Think they’re gonna block The Moustache?
please don’t pick on snakes, folks.
“subhuman” should be sufficient *g*
disclaimer: I’m not a moderator. just play one occasionally with limited expectations & success.
Golly gee, why would the Bush Administration want to poke out the eye on Iraq giving them solid HUMINT prior to committing the country to a war of choice?
‘This is my thesis — the public has a short memory and, like– How many people remember, a couple of years ago, when the Earth blew up? How many people? See? So few people remember. And you would think that something like that, people would remember. But NOOO! You don’t remember that? The Earth blew up and was completely destroyed? And we escaped to this planet on the giant Space Ark? Where have you people been? And the government decided not to tell the stupider people ’cause they thought that it might affect-…Ohhhh!‘
;>)
Oh, boy…could this plot get any thicker?
So…anyone else thinking that it was this planning for “regime change” in Iraq that diverted their attention away from the growing threat from bin Laden…or – tinfoil hat time – is there any thought that by deliberately downplaying the stuff that had Tenet’s hair on fire, they could possibly have been hoping for something to happen that would give them all the cover and excuse they needed to implement their plans?
Now we find out that while we always knew Valerie Plame Wilson wasn’t just the desk jockey she’s been portrayed as being, her real role and expertise were in directing the operations to gather intelligence that would be used to support an action against Iraq. Intelligence that she knew very well did not support the agenda that was being pushed. I guess we will never know what might have happened if Joe Wilson had never been tasked with looking into the yellowcake story, but Cheney and the boys must have been ecstatic when they realized they might be able to neutralize two problems – Joe’s debunking of the yellowcake story, and Valerie’s knowledge on non-existent Iraqi WMD.
An administration that would go to these lengths to advance an agenda, an administration that has learned no lessons from the terrible decisions it has made (hard to learn any lessons when no one holds you accountable and the price you pay is to keep winning elections), is not going to stop marching forward toward Iran. These speeches and the constant invocation of Hitler and Stalin and others make the hair on my arms stand up. I pray that the majority of Americans have made up their minds that this is nothing but propaganda, and have tuned out on this constant attempt to re-frame a disastrous policy.
These people have to be stopped, and the only way to do it is to take control of both houses of Congress – to start.
I would say within 24 hours of Cheney naming himself as the VP candidate. It is making more and more sense now — W’s way of trumping his father, and the neocons were right there because they knew Bush was such an easy mark.
NYTimes – what are you trying to stop Fitzgerald from discovering?
I suspect this may have to do with Miller and the Times’ reputation.
me to me @ 17
BUMP
anyone have any input please?
Oh, and tommy yum – let’s not forget that we are finally, at long last, getting to see pictures of Suri Cruise (who I have to admit is a beautiful baby)…
AMEN!!!
Christy Hardin Smith @
24
Thanks, Christy. These days I’m always trying to figure out who wants this or that story out because you never know.
I also have a basic question about classification. I’m wondering about the details of going from NOC to official cover. I thought I knew what NOC meant, but now I”m not so sure. In other words, going from not covered to covered – what does that mean for Valerie in terms of capability to “spy” since she would need to have her identity protected under either classification, no? Would she only be able to do her best work as a NOC? Maybe I’m not even asking the right questions, but I’m a bit confused on this.
I don’t understand why Corn didn’t lead with this nugget as the book teaser.
Anne @ 39
I’m sorry. What came over me? I guess I just lost my head a little. Mmmm…this soylent green is delicious!
I must not think bad thoughts.
Christy, I just did a Google search and then a Google News search for these words:
and in my quick read-through I also saw nothing.
But I also wonder whether David Corn has the correct name for the body inside the CIA, when he writes
JTFI appears to have been a name applied before the invasion of Iraq for the military structure. It was also used in Italy (Joint Task Force Italy).
But what would be “joint” about a group of analysts in the Director of Operations? And why would the term “task force” be used? It’s a small point, but I am just wondering.
me to me @ 28
I’m not so sure he’s a kool aid consumer, but I do think he has a very narrow view of his purpose in life, i.e., law enforcement.
Saving the country from a corrupt regime is not in his job description. He feels no obligation to inform anyone of anything beyond his jurisdiction. He works for DOJ. If they want to publicly explain this case, they should have at it.
OT
I posted yesterday that abc was accepting comments againg on their 9/11 blog
I also posted my response, cut and paste, as everyone could see, completely civil.
so it says posts are moderated and it might take a few minutes to get posted
anyway, that was yesterday and my post is still not on the blog
liars
Not to mention “the will of the people.”
Christy, Thanks for all of your hard work keeping this story alive at Firedog. As a fiction writer, I’m obsessed with motive, and that is exactly what David Corn has nailed. I fear there is little doubt left that the administration, at the very least, allowed 9/11 to happen. Having watched Fahrenheit 9/11 many times, I have come to the conclusion that what Bush was conveying while sitting mute in that Florida classroom, was guilt. He is the very picture of a young child squirming under the gaze of parental scrutiny… hiding his secret.
*xyz @ 37
Miller and the Times’ rep have been in the sewer for some time now. That’d be like reviving a corpse.
me to me
post again, and so on, and so on, and so on *g*
Prof @ 44
I’m guessing that at least a couple of the 50 people involved were from other agencies, like the DOD’s Defense Intelligence Agency, the State Department’s Bureaue of Intelligence and Research, and possibly the Energy Department (for evaluating things like the aluminum tubes). CIA ran the show, but if you’ve got people from multiple agencies, it’s a “joint” task force.
Peterr @ 51
Point taken.
emptywheel has an opinion about Judy Miller’s role. The NYT still trying to salvage that last shred of their reputation. Please, hand me a kleenex.
OT- Yesterday Brian Lehrer of WNYC in NY asked folks to send in ideas for his 30 Issues in 30 Days segment he does before elections. I emailed him and suggested a story on voter suppression and the so called helping America Vote Act.
If anyone else in NY/NJ/CT would like to do the same his email is: brianlehrershow@wnyc.org
Cheers
IIRC, one of the points that Paul O’Neill made in The Price Of Loyalty was that the prospect of invading Iraq was discussed at the Cabinet level in the earliest weeks of the administration.
Recall that Paul O’Neill said in his book that Iraq was on the agenda at the first cabinet meeting he attended, in January of ‘01. (I don’t have the book in front of me; it may have been an NSC meeting.)
meta at 41 — Larry Johnson tells me that people switch back and forth quite frequently, depending on their status as administrators and then as operatives, because of career shifts, promotions, etc. It’s apparently fairly common practice within the CIA. I know that DIA agents do the same, just from my own work as a prosecutor — they just switch areas of operation on occasion if they are shifted into undercover work so that they are an unfamiliar face in the new area. I suspect the CIA has some history of shifting people’s base of operations as well.
And it is worth a reminder that Valerie’s name, her marriage, her family, all of that would not be secret at all. What was secret was that she worked for the CIA. All that would have been known was that Valerie worked for an energy company, a job that occasionally required a business trip, and that her husband Joe had been a US Ambassador, etc. The NOC status was the secret — the fact that Joe Wilson had a wife? I suspect everyone at the kids’ school’s PTA knew that. ;-) Which is kind of the whole point of being a NOC — you live your life, people know you, are comfortable with you, etc., which makes you even more effective at recruiting for the agency because your cover is who you are…it’s the CIA part that is the secret. (I just don’t get why this is so difficult to understand for some people. It’s like an undercover cop, but on a global scale.)
Thanks, Peterr. I was wondering the exact some thing.
I still think Corn is dealing with classified information. This is an important point because someone is STILL leaking!! Because Valerie got outed, does that mean that everything she was doing is now declassified? Of course not!
Mornin’ Christy,
am probably gonna fumble this but alarms were going off in my gut as I read Korn’s account -
keeping in mind the mountainous egos involved, AND Cheney’s standing MO to create an outside means to get at whatever he wants, I’m thinking this (her outing)wasn’t even about weapons – this was about having their Shakes the Informer line of humint exposed – how dare anyone mess with Dick’s personal set up ?!?!?
it would be right in line with these beasts – am not saying it wasn’t a crime, but weapons be damned, they’d spin that crap later, Plame was meddling with the forces of nature and had t/b stopped – this tragedy was nothng more than a fit of OVP pique
Reading Corn’s piece, along with emptywheel and Larry Johnson, I kept going back in my head to John Dean’s observation about Rumsfeld from the Book Salon thread:
With all the (appropriate) focus on Rove, Cheney, Addington, Armitage, and company, I keep seeing Rumsfeld’s fingerprints all over this mess, and Dean’s remarks only reinforce that. If Nixon and Halderman though Rummy was bad news, but he’s the cat’s whiskers in the Dubya White House . . . wow.
My understanding of being “non-official cover” is that if you are operating as an agent and are detained or arrested in a foreign country, the US government will not come to your rescue – you are totally on your own. That’s why being NOC is the most dangerous and secretive of the classifications.
Christy Hardin Smith @ 57
My uncle was a NOC – a fact no one beyond his wife knew until after his death – which was 25 years after his retirement. It is the trickiest and most expensive cover for the CIA to maintain.
meta @
41
NOC = nonofficial cover, with the same covert status as someone with offical cover.
Christy,
Any thoughts on todays NYT editorial on Fitz?
I would looove to hear them…
Thanx
Christy, I know that there have been people here linking things like PNAC and other “conspiracy” evidence pointing to Iraq invasion plans prior to the 2000 usurpation. This stuff has been floating around out there since the days immediately after 9-11. Rather than look into it with a critical mindset it was ignored and some of the commenters here even laughed and called it “conspiracy theories”. Well now that you have this snipet of evidence which you seem to give some weight to, why not google “project for a new American century” and see how deep the deception goes. It really is staggering – the brazen nature of this thing I mean. If ever something has been hidden in plain sight this is it. And after you read this macabre document, after you regain your composure, please come back and give a little credit to people who have been ridiculed for talking about this well known reality.
cbl @ 59
But Cheney knew Plame would never talk. He manipulated lots of people in the agency. I still believe Plame was collateral damage.
Per Christy:
This certainly goes back to PNAC (The Project to Establish a Fourth Reich). Also, it is consistent with the books by Richard Clark and by Paul O’Neil.
So, was the outing of Plame was only about Joe? Cheney was no doubt furious at Plame for her team’s inability to find corroborating evidence to support his hypothesis that Saddam was developing WMDs. Also for her unwillingness to support his theories in the absence of evidence. But at least he could sleep secure in the knowledge that she couldn’t spill the beans on lack of evidence for his theories. Cheney must have shit, when he found out that Joe Wilson was Plame’s husband and was going public with what she knew, i.e., that the administration was playing fast and loose with the available intelligence. And, because of his Africa trip, Joe had plausible deniability about spilling state secrets.
Recall that in his NYT op-ed, Wilson made a logical leap from ruling out a particular alledged uranium purchase to thinly veiled accusations of “selective use of intelligence”:
No doubt Cheney saw this as mutiny by Plame and her team.
cbl @ 59
How many (ex)employees of Halliburton do you think Cheney stepped on when they didn’t come up with the right answer? He didn’t give a second thought to destroying those who didn’t come up with the right answer. Plame was no more than another annoying gnat, but her husband was more like an aggravated hornet.
The tone of an organization is set at the top, and the organization over a relatively short period of time will reflect the attitudes of the leaders.
Stephen Parrish, CPA @ 63
NOCs don’t travel with diplomatic passports. If they get caught spying in other countries, they get executed.
As Sidney Blumenthal put it “In the Cheney administration, the president is volatile but passive, firm but malleable, presiding but absent”
I don’t think the personal vindictiveness of George W. Bush is expressed in foreign policy. It is more likely Cheney and the gang had had enough of Saddam Hussein and his disrespect for the global superpower. So they decided to do house cleaning and put an end to the regime after dallying for a decade. But there were a number of disrespectful regimes in the region so they put them all on the schedule and decided to take care of them one by one.
A grand scheme to pacify the region.
All the rest is marketing. So they needed a narrative to sell the pacification scheme. 9/11 gave them the story of terrorism and they made up WMDs from speculation and the most anemic evidence. But it isn’t really lying because the Taliban, Saddam, the Syrians, Iranians and Palestinians are not our friends, if we have to suspect they are up to no good than they are already guilt. Anyway the media love a horror thriller.
citizensue @
48
This is so incredibly bonechilling. I’m ordinarily a person who is obsessed with logic, but when I read your post, it just had the ring of truth on the face of it. But to believe this means so many other horrid things that makes me feel ill.
Christy Hardin Smith @ 57
although the covert status is usually thought of in terms of “either covert or not”, that’s not the case, not even close
there are very distinct categories of covert that CIA operatives use, and not so distinct as well, there are layers and dynamics that most people don’t appreciate of covert opps and operatives…there’s an almost endless list of components.
Some cover is real thin and disposable, meaning a person could be enlisted for a particular opp, then once the opp is complete, their life continues as though they were never involved. Other forms of cover are so layered and deep that they even anticipate probing into the operative from every facet of a person’s life.
there are also somethings as thin as “works for the CIA but not undercover” while in fact that is their cover…this is something that EVERYONE misses
once one of these opps are exposed as being under cover, that’s the end of their effectiveness in that capacity and that cover is blown, this is apparently what happens when you switch from noc to official cover
Plame’s cover…she posed as a private energy consultant for Brewster Jennings & Associates.
I STILL want this brass plate company looked into by the blogospere
I would LOVE to find out just how much we lost in that asset alone, and I am VERY surprised there hasn’t been investigative research into this company
D. Mason @ 65
D,
PNAC is well known here at the Lake. I’ve never heard it described here (or any other blog I frequent) as being a conspiracy theory.
What does meet that requirement, however, are the various ideas that the administration knew about, or even participated in, the 9/11 attacks. These will only be conspiracies until there is sufficient evidence to confirm or deny them, which may never happen.
In my mind, it doesn’t matter whether the administration orchestrated the attacks or allowed them to happen out of total incompetence. The outcome is the same: they used the atrocity as a political cudgel, and made politcal hay by sowing fear.
Citizensue (48), I will no longer automatically dismiss the idea that this Administration allowed 9/11 to happen. When Bush received the news in the classroom, he may have been digesting the horror of what that evil plan had wrought. Then, quickly, on to Iraq….
me to me @
17
my last bump on this, I could use some help here please
Just heard on the news that today Bush will announce his plan to deal with prosecuting those held at Gitmo. Eh. This should be another can of worms.
Re: The NYT Editorial.
What a lot of people don’t seem to get is that Fitz doesn’t write reports. He prosecutes. And that’s pretty much all he does. He doesn’t leak to the press. He doesn’t report to Congress or the American people. He just prosecutes crimes.
As for the whining that his investigation is going on and on and on without really going anywhere, there’s a five-count felony indictment against the VP’s right-hand man. I’d call that a pretty big piece of progress.
Mornin’ Christy!
“How long had this war with Iraq been on the planning table for George Bush and Dick Cheney?…as a means for Junior to prove he was more of a man than his dad because he’d go all the way to Baghdad? What was the motivation behind ramping up for war with Iraq during the summer of 2001?”
It has been my view for years now that this war has its motivation in restoring the bruised egos and reputations of the Bush 1 Armchair Generals, particularly those egos of Cheney, Wolfowitz, and Perle.
These boys were the principal policy makers at the top of the Bush 1 Defense and State department food chains for the 1991 Gulf War.
All of those PNAC Bad Boys had front-row seats at the 1991 Gulf War table, and never did get to finish off Saddam in 1991 they way they wanted to ’cause Daddy Bush slapped them down at the closing of the Gulf War.
In the rather small and circumscribed aerie of the upper level of the Defense community, the back-biting and scathing innuendo are legendary.
For almost 10 years, those “wounded egos” endured the slights of being less than manly men for their failure to complete the act, a “premature ejaculation” if you will.
I remember reading books published after the close of the 1991 Gulf War where “insiders” eviscerated Cheney, Wolfowitz and Perle because they had vociferously agitated against stopping the 100 hour ground war and instead continuing to march to Baghdad and take down Saddam.
One of the “only” folks who counseled Bush 1 against such a folly was his then Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff – Colin Powell (Note: in doing so, Powell ran afoul of his then boss, Secretary of Defense Dick Cheney and the bad blood has continued ever since).
One should never substitute lofty rationale and logic when the basest of things – a man’s ego is involved.
mildly OT:
A commentor at Next Hurrah posted the following this morning:
“Chris Mathews ran a story on hardball, and the quote on there is that Fitz is NOW deciding if he’s going to press charges on Rove, but won’t comment for at least a week.”
Is that true? I have not heard this. If true, what was Mathews’ source?
Mad Dogs @ 78
Cheney was Sec Def during Bush I, and was emphatic that we not go into Baghdad.
me to me @ 72:
I think the damage assessment is pretty clear. Every soldier who dies in Iraq after she was exposed is a casualty of that action. They tried desperately hard to make everyone believe there were WMDs there even when all evidence showed that there was not. After she was exposed, there was no way for her to do her job effectively anymore. Therefore, no way to prove WMDs did not exist. Therefore, we had to continue to look for them. Therefore, we occupied a country that had no WMDs.
You know the rest.
“How many other Washington power couples know things that they are now keeping to themselves about the Bush Administration’s illegal, immoral, or otherwise indefensible actions because of the payback exacted on Joe Wilson for calling the President on his public lie in the State of the Union?”
How many indeed, and why are they still holding back? Has Valerie Plame or Joe Wilson been assassinated by Karl Rove-sponsored death squads? No. Are they or any of the other whistleblowers who have come forward in danger of plummeting into poverty because of it? I doubt it. So what if they lose their positions? They should tell the freaking truth about these people now, not 10 years from now when it will be far too late.
I don’t understand what they’re afraid of.
me to me at 75 — one connection might be the Chalabi/Iran alleged connection — if Valerie were running a string of WMD assets, there may have been some overlap via the INC on Iran and Iraq, if Chalabi was, indeed, playing both sides against the middle. Tribal affiliations and religious sect allegiance can run deeply, beyond the artificial boundaries of the nation-states as set by the British and others in the region. That’s one point of potential intersection. I can think of others — especially if there was an AQ connection with both nations in technology transfer. WMD work would have a lot of potential assets in a lot of nations, but it would require tracking a discrete pool of scientists with the know-how at the top — and, I suspect, with Velerie’s alleged nuclear proliferation knowledge, that would be where her asset string comes into play in both Iraq and Iran. Does that help at all?
sonate
Might help to keep an ear tuned to MSNBC today.
They were trumpeting yesterday that all day today they’d cover politics, politics, politics…
[in reaction to ABC’s planned docu-soapopera?]
Frank Probst @ 77
you and those with this point of view are making fitz out to be a savant
I have considered him a genous, I have loved his personality and his snark.
he is dynamic, and my impression WAS that his country is more important to him then his office
I’m sorry, I can’t believe he’s a savant, I can’t believe he’s that mindless to just go on with his prosecution as if what he was doing meant nothing to this country
untill he shows me otherwise, which I SURELY hoep he will do, I have lost faith in the man
OT from London
Latest: 7 quit government in anti-Blair revolt
tommy yum @ 80
But then a couple hundred thousand Shias got slaughtered in the south after we left and made him look bad.
Christy Hardin Smith @ 83
thanx christy, I needed something to work with…hopefully there will be more made apparent in the near future
Tommy yum, because of the “new pearl harbor” line, the two things are forever linked. They asked for a new pearl harbor and they got one, coincidences like that don’t just grow on trees.
me to me @ 85
Well, you have a least one trial to look forward to…
let’s couple Korn’s news about JTFI’s pre 9/11 work w/ now knowing they were going around FISA before 9/11, shall we – wonder where that goes ?
oh
no boogey-man, no shiny new bases all over the ME
spaghetti happens @ 82
Joe Wilson has already told all he knows. Valerie was trained for 20 years NOT TO TALK. It’s in her DNA.
The person who knows the whole ugly story is George Tenet. And he’s got the same DNA as Valerie.
spaghetti happens @ 82
Joe and Valerie may not have been executed, but I doubt that can be said of all the sources and informants that Valerie has worked with. For most of the couples you refer to, I think they’re afraid, not of Cheney and Bush, but of what would happen to the people that they have cultivated and supported at great risk to those people’s lives.
I don’t know if this was linked before or not:
from the Smirking Chimp – Why the Media Can’t Stop Smearing Joe Wilson
Christy. don’t feed it? (88)
me to me at 85 — the rules require that Fitzgerald (or any prosecutor for that matter) not discuss ongoing proceedings before the grand jury. Period. End of story. And I have not heard from any source that I have reached out to that proceedings before the grand jury have ended. What you are asking is that Patrick Fitzgerald disregard the laws which he is sworn to enforce — which he will not do, and which I would never want him to do.
Whether you have faith in him or not is irrelevent. His job is to prosecute the laws as they are written, and to follow them in the performance of his duties. And to prosecute to the fullest extent that the laws and the evidence allow, but only to that extent, and not beyond, to ensure justice is served. OUR job as citizens is to ensure accountability of the government — it has never been Fitz’s job to do so.
Anyone who expects this political situation to be turned around by someone else doing the work is barking up the wrong tree. WE have to do the work on that score.
All roads lead to Chalabi.
Oh, boy…could this plot get any thicker?
So…anyone else thinking that it was this planning for “regime change” in Iraq that diverted their attention away from the growing threat from bin Laden…
Their attention couldn’t have been diverted because it was continually being brought back to OBL by the CIA… who “they kept ignoring”.
We still don’t have a unified narrative from within the “pro-war with Iraq” Cabal… YOu know, the narrative to shows how a significant part of their planning and strategic effort was in evaluating which attack they would let through. Every day I becomes more and more suspicious that it wasn’t just turning a blind eye but rather they had an info channel feeding them good info about bin lauden and when he would attack… a channel that they kept well away from [most] CIA and FBI eyes.
That’s the narrative that needs to be uncovered.
meta
She would still be covered under official cover–but her “ID” would be that of a government employee. So it’s a matter of pretending she’s an energy exec to pretending she’s an energy analyst in State (or something).
prof
To add to what Peterr said, there were Joint Task Forces in other areas, including Counter-terrorism.
Christy
Paul O’Neill describes Tenet being tasked to “report on improving our current intelligence” on Iraq on January 30, 2001. And I think in each area of the Robb-Silberman it implies the ramping up on Iraqi intell, particularly WRT the BW and Nuke areas. What is new (I think) with Corn’s revelation is the name, JTFI.
Howard Dean on MSNBC
Looks like we have a preview about how the winguts will spin Corn at 88.
Sonata (79), I believe the commenter thought an old Matthews’ statement was new.
I found this New York Observer commentary on the Huffington Post: http://www.observer.com/200609…..onason.asp
As we see in the second paragraph of Joe Conason’s comments, he relates that Richard Armitage “was the first official to reveal Valerie Wilson’s covert identity as a C.I.A. operative to columnist Robert Novak in June 2003.” His statement appears to contradict what I have read elsewhere.
What classified information did Richard Armitage divulge to Robert Novak? Did he explicitly reveal Valerie Plame Wilson’s covert status to Robert Novak? If not, did he say just enough without violating the provisions of the Intelligence Information Protection Act to encourage Robert Novak to delve further? Was Armitage really Novak’s first source/
twolf1 at 100 THANKS!
Just a reminder that way back in 1998, PNAC was urging Clinton to invade Iraq.
Here is the link to the letter they sent him.
http://www.newamericancentury……letter.htm
meta 100. thanks. agreed…
OT – Top Bush Counterterrorism Official: ABC’s Path to 9/11 Is ‘Shameful,’ ‘Straight Out of Disney and Fantasyland’
That’s pretty clear, emptywheel. That’s what was confusing me.
Any opinion about whether Corn’s revelations are sourced from classifed or declassified conduits?
lina (92), unfortunaely Tenet did not/does not have the same DNA as Mrs. Wilson. Tenet spoke and it was to lie shamelessly.
OfT from NYT’s 9/11 Miniseries Is Criticized as Inaccurate and Biased
Sally @ 102:
Thanks. I thought that it might have been something like that, given that no one else mentioned it.
Christy, I am absolutely certain I heard in an NPR interview with Tommy Franks roughly about the time that he retired, that Cheney had specifically asked him to prepare an invasion plan for Iraq within the first 1-3 months of the Bush administration; the plan was referred to as a hypothetical, but why Iraq over any other country that had nuclear weapons already? I’ll have to hunt this down and pass it on to Marcy.
I’ll also put money on Lt. Col. Karen Kwiatkowski (USAF-ret.) having knowledge that would confirm the timing of the ramp up. Her commentary about the run-up always made clear that foreign nationals had their way with our military and intelligence planning well in advance of the war.
And I also have to wonder what contracts Bunnatine Greenhouse saw that got her knocked down.
There’s a distinct pattern here.
Hi emptywheel, always great to see you on an FDL thread.
Sally @ 109
Give me a citation other than Bob Woodward’s book.
Christy Hardin Smith @ 19
Good question. I’ll add mine: How many of these forty-odd people with Middle East experience were taken off of tracking possible al qaeda operations to be put on Plame’s team?
Lhp highlighted the before 9/11 aspect too in her post yesterday. EW ties it to the “renegade” operation described in Risen’s book involving family members of Iraqi scientists. I wonder if they were tied – but if so, if VW backed the coordinator of that effort clandestinely (which did pretty much point in the “no wmds” direction) she might have a thorn in their side for some time.
I don’t think the NYT piece is that bad – it points out the fact that the issues are still there on conspiracy, etc. Just says that the public interest is getting a beating while the legal interest is being protected. It is – what can you do?
Lina @ 45
This is the whole problem with how he was appointed IMO. I didn’t like an in-house fro the start, but I have to say the SP has done tremendously more than I ever expected he would. But if you look at Judge Walton’s rulings, it’s not just that the SP may have a narrow view of his purpose – he was given a very limited scope. Scope isn’t the same as power – and I don’t know any of the other appointments of Ind. Counsel or the Nixon Spec. Couns that had such a narrow scope. He may know all kind of things from his investigation – some of which may very well be tie to “law enforcement” that still could not be pursued within his scope. Congress, once again, rolled over on this.
Correction – in my 7:16 am comment, the final sentence should read as follows:
Was Armitage really Novak’s first source?
> My uncle was a NOC – a fact no one beyond
> his wife knew until after his death – which
> was 25 years after his retirement. It is the
> trickiest and most expensive cover for the CIA
> to maintain.
While I am horrified as a Citizen by the deliberate outing of a CIA agent, I am also a bit puzzled by this. If I were the head of counterintelligence for Elbonia I would automatically place all foreign diplomats’ spouses under surveilance and assume that they had some job other than their official bio indicated, whether that offical job be consultant, full-time parent, etc. How deep could such a cover be? Spouses automatically travel around with the kids, meet ordinary people, go to parties, and have an excuse to stop by the embassy every few days without arousing any suspicion. I would assume they were all spies.
Cranky
sonate @ 79
No, it was a mistake–somewhere she had stumbled on a Tweety program from May.
Mornin’ Emptywheel,
Welcome back to the lake
always a bonus to have you join us here
and correction to above -
George Tenet is supposed to have the same DNA as Valerie
starting all the way back to Bill Donovan, CIA Chiefs have done some horrible crap and made mistakes or been incompetent – Tenet’s crimes are something new – knowlingly co opting the Agency, it’s assets, this nation
9/11/73 killing Allende to aid ITT, Endicott Copper, etc. and others fearing nationalization comes close – but even then they were sincere (but wrong) in their fear of communism
but George Tenet knew where the real threats to this Nation existed and went along with these monsters – he wasn’t mistaken or incompetent – he’s a gd replicant and the weight of his Freedom Medal will be like a stone accelerating his descent in to the bowels of hell
better put the broad brush down and get some more coffee
joe’s blog on msnbc
twolf1 107
OT
Heehee.
“Straight Out of Disney and Fantasyland”
That should be repeated ad nauseum all day today and, I betcha, tonight during youknowwhat. nice programming reconfig.
- even if Santorum follows Dean on the roster. David Gregory is busy causing Sen. Santan to break out in a sweat as I type. Now coverage of the JoeLie – Lamont contest, with mucho refs to whitehouse support of joey. heh….
1st time I can remember a major one-topic series of coverage on MSM that wasn’t accompanied by war-like drumbeats. Might even have to compliment them on their music too, at the end of the day. Glad they found that ‘concerned-&-thotful-riff’ tapeloop, even if their series title is “Battleground America”. ;->
I’m gonna keep telly on MSNBC all day, & hope my cableguy counts another interested viewer.
ABC doesn’t seem to have any reception here today. Can’t imagine what’s wrong. But then, I guess I could turn it on. NAH.
D. Mason @ 89
I hear ya, man.
Cranky Observer @ 118
I am the only member of my family who has never worked for the CIA.
I grew up believing anyone who was connected with an embassy, in any capacity, was a spy.
I thought everyone assumed that.
meta @ 107
Some of both, I’m sure. I was pointing out yesterday that it’d probably only be a matter of time until Abu Gonzales announced an investigation into who leaked the classified information about Valerie Plame’s ID that explains why the leaking of her identity is so important.
“Scope isn’t the same as power”
{{{{applause}}}}
John Casper @ 112
Oh, I’m always lurking. I just don’t always post.
Dodd on C Span 2 now
cbl @ 120
when i say same dna as Valerie, I’m talking about wrt publicly talking about their work.
I’ve said many times I don’t know how Tenet sleeps at night. I know virtually nothing about Valerie, so I can’t judge her actions or motives.
This brings up the possibility that REAL motive for the outing of Plame was to punish and silence HER for finding facts that contradicted the neocon fantasies about WMDs in Iraq. Joe Wilson was just a target of opportunity – two birds with one stone. And Novak et al were unwitting dupes.
SO many fights, so little time.
This bit of knowledge/confirmation sure drives a stake through much of the opposition.
Of course, Disney/ABC will concoct a docudrama that distorts it all.
OT – Bush polling lower than a convicted felon
Tao @ 130
A twofer I can buy, but Novak et al (I assume you include Rove) unwitting dupes? No way.
OT-
http://www.vetojoe.com
http://www.2006joe.com
http://www.joey2006.com
Wilson would be proud. :)
lina, what a remarkable environment you must have been exposed to!
sorry lina,
did not mean to imply you were wrong about Tenet – just seeing what he should have done on the screen set me off
here’s the real phsycology guys;
the administration realized paranoia over valery becuse of her husband
they assumed he published what he did becuase of his wife, they didn’t go after joe through his wife, they deliberately went after his wife becuase they thought they were certain joe went public beucase of what valery knew
that’s what this article makes clear to me..and this is just me, to me.
(I KNEW my handle would come in handy one day)
So it was Valerie all along who was their target. Take down Valerie and chill all other CIA employees. It had been unthinkable that a government would expose and betray their own agent and all her secret links. Now it’s not unthinkable. Now it’s another Cheney warning, Be Afraid.
All they’ve got is fear.
meta @ 135
nope. just a run-of-the-mill government brat inside the beltway.
Boy, the push is on with Blair, isn’t it? First the Craig Murray piece, now the resignations. Makes you wonder what would have happened there with the outing of their top Justice officials being involve in solicitation of torture.
***********
Maybe there is no “bigger picture” set of secrets – if there is, we probably won’t ever get to know what is involved (and with Haynes and Co. on the appellate benches, I’m sure a coverup would be relatively complete). But one thing that has been unusual has been how little real, direct push there has been against the prosecutor from the inner circle. The way they have responded throughout, given their MO, doesn’t pass the smell test.
*********
Just another interesting point –per Risen’s book, a big chunk of our Iran humint has been cratered in the last couple of years too.
*********
If you really want to spin far and wide, you have to wonder if there were already some compromises through Chalabi (he is such a sharer with Iran) that might have needed cover?
mrobinsong @ 138
this was not “their own cia agent” they were exposing, they had no affection for the cia at all, cheney HATED the cia and wanted them operating at his pleasure, for his purpose, he was INSENSED they WERE independant
On October 28, 2005. At his press conference announcing the indictment of Libby, Fitzgerald has this Q&A exchange.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/…..01340.html
Fitz is saying two things: (1) the investigation is ongoing, (2) the investigation if essentially completed.
Now you just have to find a comfort zone somewhere in between the two.
me to me, I agree completely.
am rushing to keep up w/ y’all and get ready for work – but I take this sudden rush to re confirm Bolton as a sign WH knows it wont have votes after Nov.
Mad Dogs @
78
The story that I heard in December 1990 was that the CIA and State Department were literally tearing their hair out trying to figure out what to do about Saddam. If they topple him there were three possible outcomes: long-term U.S. occupation, which would be a drain, keep Iraq as a single country, which would lead to Shiite domination and an alliance with Iran, or split the country into three parts, which would piss off the Turks and would give most of the oil to the Shiites. In any case, there’d be a power vacuum that would be largely filled by Iran.
By the time that the air campaign began in January 1991, it was clear to the people I knew that Bush1 was going to leave Saddam in power. (However, Norman Schwartzkopf has more recently implied that the decision not to slam the gate on Saddam’s elite forces was a last-minute thing.)
I was told that Bush1 put a lot of faith in the CIA’s analyses, which makes some kind of sense, given that he had been their director.
The point is that what has happened in Iraq over the past three years is exactly according to the scenario that the CIA and the State Department forsaw over fifteen year ago.
Since his annointment, the #1 goal of this president was to accomplish something his father failed to do — win re-election (not the toppling of Saddam Hussein). History shows that a country at war traditionally rallies around its current leader, no matter how incompetent the leader is. As such, the Iraq war was a brilliant political strategy for Bush and a few of his friends. Too bad it’s such a disaster for the rest of us.
mrobinsong @ 138
They’ve got more than fear – they’ve got the power – - – to incarcerate you at will by declaring you an enemy combatant, – - – to putting you on a no fly list, – - – to secretly searching your home, listening to your phone calls, looking at your library card, etc and you have no recourse. (See the PATRIOT act – a law that really should be renamed)
“You have enemies? Good. That means you’ve stood up for something, sometime in your life.”
Winston Churchill
portia.vz @
81
Wow!—and I mean this without a trace of attitude—thank you for clearing my head. It’s possible in the welter of detail and profusion of scandals to lose sight of how close the big issues are to any little part. So much death, destruction, and misery because they chose to do this.
As another commenter said, it summons dark thoughts—but I’ve been having them about this crew for so long that seeing some of these things come out in the open is practically a relief.
Thanks for calling the best part –the time frame– to everyone’s attention, Christy.
OT – Lobbying Probe Looks at Payments To DeLay’s Wife
p. 262 of the SSCI report appears to describe the JTFI, which it calls a Joint Task Force within CPD, and it says that DCI established it in September 2001, which may or may not be consistent with the point CHS is making.
Also, it’s worth noting that Digby appears to be wrong to describe Plame as the head of JTFI. Assuming Corn’s report is accurate, Plame was chief of operations for the JTFI, which seems to be different from being the outright head of it.
tommy yum @ 80
2 things:
I did state that Cheney was SecDef.
My memory is that Cheney was indeed supportive of taking Baghdad in 1991, though memories are wont to be inaccurate.
If you know better, please cite your sources.
Before Bush was ever elected President?
yes
me to me @ 141
The difference between these two statements is more than semantic, but I don’t know that I see a substantial disagreement. mrobinsong describes the situation as it “should be,” me to me calls it closer to the way it is.
Either way, David Corn may have just nuked the site from orbit…and yes, I think it may be the only way to be sure.
The Nation article provides a whole new perspective on how to view what we thought we knew. What leaps out at me is the image of Plame as “the good soldier,” diligently doing her job to find intelligence deemed vital to the nation’s security by the President and Vice President of the United States. And her husband, as much a patriot as his wife, continued to serve his country by helping the “joint task force” find out the truth and inform US leaders, making trips even before the Niger trip.
I agree with Peterr’s observation about what “joint” means, but we can speculate further, that one of the other groups in the joint effort was Feith’s operation in DoD, and from that, it would be reasonable to expect that the reason Valerie’s team kept running into false leads was because other members of the joint effort — Feith — were feeding these false sources directly into the mix. DoD was polluting the effort to get good intelligence. The honest analysts, including Plame, would have, at some point, come to suspect, then believe what was happening, if they did not already know the histories of the people they were forced to work with. And there’s another tale there, I suspect.
That tale is how Valerie, and Joe, came to realize that they were being asked to invent intelligence or validate intelligence they knew to be untrue. And havinig come to that realization, at what point did they decide to fight against the dishonesty? We know that after the SOTU speech, but before the NYT op ed, Joe started to let Congressional intelligence leaders know there was a problem in the intelligence. We can now assume that this was not a unilateral decision by Joe; he would have talked this over with his wife, given her position (and the likely fact that Cheney/Libby et al knew her role in the CIA), and she would have been part of the decision that they both knew could put her position within the CIA in jeopardy, not from having her covert status purposely or carelessly revealed — I doubt they thought anyone would be so despicable as to do that — but allowing the Cheney cabal to label her as disloyal to the President — which could effectively end her career. One can imagine the courage it took for Valerie to make that decision.
We had other evidence that the Administration wanted to remove Saddam well before 9/11, but the Corn revelation yesterday adds an important piece of confirmation. And it helps provide context for the Rummy statement, reported by Clarke, that as soon a 9/11 happened, and folks were asking what targets we might hit in retaliation, Rummy’s said “Iraq.” He wasn’t making a comment about who hit us on 9/11; he was just furthering the plan.
new thread
lina (114), see http://www.truthout.org for William Rivers Pitts’ article of 14 July 2003 where Pitts recounts how Tenet took the blame for Bush’s sixteen words regarding Iraqi attempts to procure uranium from Niger when Tenet had personally knocked this assertion down with the White House in October 2002. I consider that a Tenet lie.
murtha on msnbc
Sally @ 156
i totally agree.
i’d forgotten that ugly little fact.
The neocons wanted a war from the beginning of the Bush administration for the purpose of showing the world we’re No.1 and for the added benefit of warprofiteering. Bush, the useful idiot, was allowed to pick the country. “Iraq it is! Sounds good to us! Now let’s find some way to sell the war to the naive public!”
9/11 must have been like Christmas for the neocons. Finally they could manage to find a casus belli, even if they had to utterly fabricate a connection between 9/11 and Iraq.
“He tried to kill my dad.” — Bushie re: Hussein
“Born with a silver foot in his mouth.” — Ann Richards re Bush I
The entire motivating emotion of Bushie’s political career, in Texas and now on the world stage, has been exacting revenge for slights Mommy perceives against Daddy — remember what Nixon said about Bar? “Now, that woman can really hate.”
We — the entire world — are locked in an epic oedipal struggle for Mommy’s love. Sick, twisted, and glorious: Bushie’s attempts to win Mommy from Daddy.
Mad Dogs @ 151
No problem! Cheney at the Soref Symposium, 4/29/91:
Great post. Two points:
1. The Sullivan/ONeil book makes clear that they were interesting in invading Iraq from their FIRST CABINET meeting, well before 9/11, obviously.
2. Fact that Valerie heads this unit makes it even more improbably that Dick Armitage and the rest of them didn’t know she was covert, etc. I’m sure they had her full dossier, knew exactly what she was about. They had to silence her to put forward the crap from the Pentagon’s special plans group, the false intelligence we went to war with.
3. Then to blame the CIA for “bad intel” when the CIA said “wait a minute” — isn’t that the height of hypocrasy and lyingness? Or is it “strategery”? “Presidentializing?”
This latest Plame news is a perfect example of the lapdog like behavior of the MSM.
Trumpet the news that may help Bush and his cronies, and also covers up their complicity.
Silence on news that refutes right wing talking points.
Amazing.
History shows that a country at war traditionally rallies around its current leader, no matter how incompetent the leader is.
Charles I, George III, Louis XVI, Kaiser Wilhelm II, Nicholas II, and Galtieri would all disagree.
Just found this site that claims to be a complete timeline of the iraq/US thing. It is full of reminders of key events and leaves you breathless. Nevertheless it could be used to find many “trigger points” in our research.
http://www.iraqtimeline.com/
TeddySanFran @ 160
Methinks you might be giving Junya far too much credit as the instigator of this tragedy.
If that was your intent. *g*
While all you say may be true, I’m of the opinion that Junya was/is nothing more than a useful idiot for the real powers behind the throne; i.e. Darth and the rest of the PNAC Bad Boys.
Christy Hardin Smith @
19
Made it only halfway before I now have to run—but if no one else mentioned it, Risen’s book State of War describes the part of the JTF program that involved getting relatives to debrief Iraqi scientists. However, he didn’t suggest the scale of the program, as I recall, just focussed on one team with a few agents, maybe 10 percent of the group as it turns out. Will probably re-read it this week;)
lina, 69:
I am dubious that execution is the standard fate of captured spies. Sometimes spies who get caught are valuable assets to the capturing nation. Not only for information but also for exchanging spies. It is also great domestic PR for the capturing nation, and usable leverage against the offending nation. A live spy is a lot more valuable to the capturing nation than a dead one.
In any case:
Just curious, but it brings to mind the scientist who killed himself (whatever) in the lead up to the Iraq war. Could there have been a connection?? Could there have been even more deliberate silencing going on?? That whole scenario seemed a little on the crazy side and didn’t fit…but motive is starting to look huge here.
Anyone see a connection…
tommy yum @ 161
Now when have any of us known Cheney to tell the truth?
This is the same Cheney who denies that he ever conflated 9/11 with Saddam? The same Cheney that insisted that Irag had ties with Al Qaeda?
Sorry Tommy yum, but using Cheney as the source of “truth” on Cheney don’t fly with me.
Cheney has always had his own version of reality, so I take his own words with a whole lot of salt.
My memory is still that it was other folks who demurred on taking down Baghdad in 1991. Folks like Scowcroft and Powell.
In any event, tis neither here nor there, ’cause there is no doubt that Darth has been a, if not the, principal this time around in driving the bus over the cliff.
Sherrod Brown up next on MSNBC
Mad dog @166
Exactly!
obvious question that nobody is asking: where did those extra 50 CIA agents come from? How many were previously tracking Al Queda?
http://www.powells.com/
http://www.elliottbaybook.com/
Support your local bookstore
These books helped most with following the story of the betrayal of CIA agents:
The Lies of George W. Bush: Mastering the Politics of Deception, by David Corn
Dick: The Man Who is President (Dick Cheney), by John Nichols
Against All Enemies: Inside America’s War on Terror, by Richard A. Clarke
The Politics of Truth: A Diplomat’s Memoir: Inside the Lies that Led to War and Betrayed My Wife’s CIA Identity, by Joseph Wilson
Unspeakable Acts, Ordinary People: The Dynamics of Torture, by John Conroy
How is it that otherwise normal people can become part of the institutionalized practice of torture? He investigates the “five torture techniques” (hooding, noise bombardment, food deprivation, sleep deprivation and forced standing against a wall) …
Treason, pure and simple. All those people dead because of a lie. Bush and Cheney should be behind bars, at the very least.
Where is our Golden Boy Fitz? The NY Times has an editorial today calling on him to put up or shut up.
Jay at 176 — I don’t feel like re-typing, but you can read my comment above on what I’ve heard at this point.
windje @ 68
The next time you’re gonna run a Joe Wilson pic, lemme know ahead of time so I can put a bib on. It keeps the drool off the keyboard.
Does no one else remember Cheney travelling to Saudi Arabia in mid-2001 to gin up support for an invasion of Iraq? The program was well in place at that point. I remember the Saudis weren’t too keen on the idea and the whole trip flopped like a wet noodle. Then 9/11 gave the PNAC Mafia the excuse they needed.
Great catch Christy. This settles it once an for all. The cabal that perpetrated this crime must be stopped. They are not to be trusted as they will stop at nothing to further their agenda that is distinct and separate from that of keeping our union and citizens safe.
They knew about the David Corn/Isakoff book. They are slamming Fitz because they had to get out ahead of the revelation that Valerie was doing important work for our nation’s security counter to all their previous contentions.
Outing Valerie is at least a crime in the sense of violating the spirit of the law. It is morally wrong to out an undercoveragent working to protect American citizens.
Once again we need to reframe the debate. The debate should not be about Fitzgerald, it should be about the behavior of the Bush Administration officials that broke the spirit of the law and can’t be trusted with national security information.
The fact that these officals still remain in office and have security clearances a failure of leadership by the President himself.
Throw the bums out!
Crime? I don’t like the term, “Spirit of the law,” not when we have actual laws being violated with impunity. Remember what Daddy Bush said about the crime of revealing a CIA agent? Treason. Anyone have the quote?
kirby @ 36
No, even before that, actually:
“He was thinking about invading Iraq in 1999,” said author and journalist Mickey Herskowitz. “It was on his mind. He said to me: ‘One of the keys to being seen as a great leader is to be seen as a commander-in-chief.’ And he said, ‘My father had all this political capital built up when he drove the Iraqis out of Kuwait and he wasted it.’ He said, ‘If I have a chance to invade….if I had that much capital, I’m not going to waste it. I’m going to get everything passed that I want to get passed and I’m going to have a successful presidency.”
Full article here, with context by Josh Marshall on why Herskowitz is a credible witness here.
This was always in the works. Always. 9/11 was just a convenient excuse.
Christy, I know the timing jumped out at me immediately as well. There are a lot of comments linking to neocon websites and conservative think tanks (stink tanks?) that very plainly lay out the neoconservative plans we watch unfold every day. Hiding in plain sight? No, arrogantly advertising the RIGHT way to do things. Every time I read them I am reminded of “Mein Kampf.” Everything Hitler planned was there, but he was dismissed as an amateur nutcase. Thanks for highlighting the ravings and actions of the nutcases running this country into the ground.
urban pirate @
134
I’m upset I didn’t buy these … oh well
http://www.WhinyJoe.com
Quite a large snip from Corn’s book on Rawstory:
http://tinyurl.com/ljf4w
Christy Hardin Smith @
19
Just thought I’d mention (in case nobody else has) that the following sentence can be read two ways.
In other words, the JFTI may have grown to fifty employees within months after 9/11.
We know that during the Ford administration Cheney and Rumsfeld marginalized Rockefeller and Kissinger and ultimately undid Kissinger’s policy of detente with the Soviet Union. They had George Bush, Sr. placed as director of the CIA and he approved Team B (replete with a young Paul Wolfowitz) as an alternative to official bureaucratic intelligence. Team B provided the overblown assessment of Soviet military capabilities that Cheney and gang were seeking. Members of Team B went on to form the Committee on the Present Danger that would later evolve into the PNAC. All this foreshadows the run-up to the Iraq war, the denigration of the intelligence services, and the Office of Special Plans. The attack on Plame and Wilson and the CIA is part of a pattern of operation for the old Nixonites.
Cheney and the neocons have probably considered the US to be at war with Iraq since the 1980’s. Maybe Shrub saw this as a personal opportunity to shine. But long before he arrived a military invasion of Iraq was in the cards.
For decades Cheney and associates have produced erroneous, alarmist assessments of external threats based on the one percent doctrine. It comes down to a particular, perhaps authoritarian, perspective where every potential threat must be treated as a struggle for survival. This includes political threats.
Cheney was in charge of both the Energy Task Force and the Counter-terrorism Task Force from early 2001 through 9-11. It is absolutely critical for the activities of Cheney relating to these two task forces to be compared and contrasted.
Cheney met many times (secretly) with the Energy Task Force and never met with the Counter-terrorism Task Force before 9-11.
It seems that he was keeping the lid on possible investigations of upcoming terrorist attacks during this (pre 9-11) time. Anyone have additional information or observations about this contrast?
This is an old thread, but I’m putting this here anyway.
Remember that the Niger embassy in Italy was broken into over the New Year holiday, Jan 2001, before Bush was sworn in. The stationary stolen was used to create the forgeries that Iraq was trying to get yellowcake.
So in answer to your question, was the Bush admin planning to go into Iraq way before 9/11? YES!!!!
mrobinsong @
138
Yes, I think it’s no accident that Plame and her entire cover operation got burned. By the time Joe Wilson wrote his article, it was clear the Administration wasn’t getting the kind of “intelligence” out of Iraq they wanted. Solution? Compromise the agent. Now there’s maybe not anyone left on the ground to contradict bogus information about WMD’s in Iraq… Iran… fill in the blank. Obstacle removed… who cares about the cost.
I’ve been saying forever that Plame was the object in her outing, Joe was secondary. She was not finding the ‘right’ stuff and was not playing ball. So they got her out of the way.
.
Hello Christy,
You might find the following interesting. It’s apparent that Chimpy, et al, had Iraq in their sights long before 9/11.
Thanks to you, Jane, and the Mighty Firedoglake columnists/commentators, who make this blog such fun.
“…In interviews I conducted last fall, a well-known journalist, biographer and Bush family friend who worked for a time with Bush on a ghostwritten memoir said that an Iraq war was always on Bush’s brain.
“He was thinking about invading Iraq in 1999,” said author and Houston Chronicle journalist Mickey Herskowitz. “It was on his mind. He said, ‘One of the keys to being seen as a great leader is to be seen as a commander-in-chief.’ And he said, ‘My father had all this political capital built up when he drove the Iraqis out of Kuwait and he wasted it.’ He went on, ‘If I have a chance to invade…, if I had that much capital, I’m not going to waste it. I’m going to get everything passed that I want to get passed and I’m going to have a successful presidency.’”
Bush apparently accepted a view that Herskowitz, with his long experience of writing books with top Republicans, says was a common sentiment: that no president could be considered truly successful without one military “win” under his belt. Leading Republicans had long been enthralled by the effect of the minuscule Falklands War on British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher’s popularity, and ridiculed Democrats such as Jimmy Carter who were reluctant to use American force. Indeed, both Reagan and Bush’s father successfully prosecuted limited invasions (Grenada, Panama and the Gulf War) without miring the United States in endless conflicts.
Herskowitz’s revelations illuminate Bush’s personal motivation for invading Iraq and, more importantly, his general inclination to use war to advance his domestic political ends. Furthermore, they establish that this thinking predated 9/11, predated his election to the presidency and predated his appointment of leading neoconservatives who had their own, separate, more complex geopolitical rationale for supporting an invasion.
http://www.russbaker.com/TomPaine_com – Why George Went To War.htm
The Nefarious Leslie@183
Sorry I missed your earlier post! :)
G.
As the small bits,bigger pieces and the
final clarity of one storyline are aligned the
American invasion and occupation of Iraq will
be much better seen and understood.
It is a certainty several very complete and
revealing books and histories will be done.
The Bush WH will have little control over any
of this. Call it the McNamara effect.
Clearly the pre-invasion effort remains the
darker episode thus far. It is surely going
to become known. Much like the machinations
of the Vietnam War era are now known.
The neocons wanted this war very badly.It
is likely oil and the control of oil was a
big reason also. The biggest story being?
That G.W.Bush was only a patsy,frontman and
huckster for a deeper run operation out of
the VPs office. Making G.W. the new version
of W.G.Harding.
W is not the sharpest pencil in the drawer
it is plain to see. That combined with some
other character qualities and flaws made him
the perfect puppet for shaded out puppeteers.
Here in mid 2006 it is plainly evident
the GOP run Congress was derelict in not
fulfilling its constitutional duties and
powers. What happened to Congress? Too
much money flooding in,single party control
corruption and spineless conduct three good
possible answers.
Why is Sen.Roberts pouring lots of “slow”
on getting anything completed anytime quick?
This election cycle is bringing on once
again a ferocious attack from the GOP and
the Bush WH to hold on to agenda control.
It is plain they are very afraid to lose
that power. These last 2 years of the Bush2
WH may well be the unreeling of all previous
6 years of Bush WH chicanery and deceit.
So, let’s see:
1) After 9/11, Bushco diverted resources and manpower from capturing Osama bin Laden and shutting down the Taliban in Afghanistan as Bushco prepared for starting a war with Iraq, a country which was not involved in the 9/11 attacks.
2) Before 9/11, Bushco diverted the attention of our intelligence assets into preparing for war with Iraq while blowing off completely the threat that al Qaeda posed to U.S. citizens.
Of course, maybe George W. Bush, when he had the August 6th, 2001 PDB read to him, thought that Osama bin Laden was a Labor Organizer who was determined to “strike” inside the United States? Hey, if I remember correctly, during the 2000 presidential campaign, Georgie got some world leaders mixed up. Sometimes one wonders exactly what kind of medication Bush is on.
All of the 9/11 pieces are propaganda with Hollywood cooperation….and Hollywood has a history of doing that if the governmnent wants to pay for it. They did it in ww2, Korea, and Vietnam. It stinks.
American Petrocracy
Among the shifting rationales for the war in Iraq, the most plausible motive may be the least discussed: access to oil.
by Kevin Phillips
[emphasis added]
see also:
Yes, It’s About Oil, at Greg Palast’s site
and
Oil and Iraq, by the Global Policy Forum
What a load of garbage and most of you actually believe it? To do so, you have to draw the conclusion that Fitzgerald was completely clueless. Because if he were on the ball he would have figured this out and gone after the culprits. It’s folks like you who give conspiracy theories a bad name.