PDA

View Full Version : Libbygate: Now Let's Get to the Real Story


dharmabum
03-08-2007, 06:44 PM
Libbygate: Now Let's Get to the Real Story

by Dave Lindorff

So Scooter Libby has taken the fall.

Three and a half years and a long bloody war after he and a gang of war-mongers in the White House and Blair House, including President Bush and Vice President Cheney, set out to undermine and trash the reputation of an Iraq war critic, former ambassador Joseph Wilson, Libby has been found guilty of perjury, lying to the FBI and obstruction of justice by a Washington jury.

Now maybe special counsel Patrick Fitzgerald and what passes for journalists in the mainstream media can get down to the real business of finding out just why the entire White House smear operation was unleashed upon a minor state department official and why they went so far as to violate federal law and expose his CIA-operative wife, Valerie Plame, in the process destroying her entire network of contacts for monitoring the spread of nuclear weapons in the Middle East.

Because that's what this whole Libby story is really about.

The whole focus of the media in this case has been on the narrow, inside-the-Beltway question of who leaked information about Plame to the media.

Entirely forgotten or ignored has been what this leak was all about to begin with.

For that, you have to go back and look at what Wilson did in the first place that so enraged or frightened the Vice President and the President.

And that was to go to Niger, one of the poorest nations in Africa, to prove conclusively that there was no truth to a set of forged notes on the letterhead of the Niger embassy in Rome, purporting to be receipts for 400 tons of Niger uranium ore allegedly being sought by Iraq's Saddam Hussein.

Wilson knew those documents were cheap forgeries--the name of the mines official on the papers was someone who hadn't been in office for years--but he went to Niger anyhow, just to make doubly certain that no such purchase attempt had been made.

None had.

So the real question then is, who is behind those forged documents?

There is an interesting story here--and an important mystery to be solved.

As it happens, way back in early 2001 there was a pair of burglaries at the Niger Embassy in Rome and at the home of the Niger ambassador. Police investigating the crimes found that the only things stolen were official stationary and some official stamps, used to make documents official. A cleaning lady and a former member of Italy's intelligence service were arrested for the crimes. They were odd burglaries to be sure, since there is precious little one could use, or sell, such documents for, given the country involved. I mean, it might make sense to steal official stationary from the French Embassy in Rome, which a thief might use to finagle a pass to the Cannes Festival. But Niger?

Jump to October 2001. A few weeks after the 9-11 attacks, Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi, accompanied by his ministers of defense and intelligence, made a visit to the White House. There he reportedly handed over the forged Niger documents (they were on Niger government stationary, and had Niger government stamps!), which appeared to be receipts for uranium ore, made out to Saddam Hussein. Now forget the matter of why either Hussein or Niger's government would want paper receipts for such an illegal transaction, and forget the matter of how Hussein would have transported 400 tons of yellow dust across the Sahara to his country without somebody noticing. The simple fact is that Bush's own intelligence experts at the CIA and State Department promptly spotted the forgeries, and they were dumped.

We know this because we know, from the likes of onetime National Security Council counterterrorism head Richard Clarke and former Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill, that Bush was pushing for war with Iraq almost as soon as he finished reading My Pet Goat following the attack on the Twin Towers. Surely if the White House had even thought those Niger documents might be legit, they would have leaked or broadcast them all over creation.

They didn't. The documents were deep-sixed, and mentioned to no one.

But according to some dedicated investigative reporters at the respected Italian newspaper La Repubblica, they resurfaced before long at a very suspicious meeting. This meeting occurred in December 2001 in Rome, and included Michael Ledeen, an associate of Defense Department Undersecretary for Policy Douglas Feith and a key figure in the White House's war-propaganda program, Larry Franklin, a top Defense Intelligence Agency Middle East analyst who later pleaded guilty to passing classified information to two employees of the America Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), convicted Iraqi bank swindler Ahmed Chalabi, then head of the CIA-created Iraqi National Congress, and Harold Rhode of the sinister Defense Department Office of Special Plans, that office set up by the White House and Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld under Feith's direction to manufacture "evidence" to justify a war on Iraq. Also at this peculiar meeting were the heads of the Italian Defense Department and of SISMI, the Italian intelligence agency.

According to La Repubblica, it was at that meeting that a plan was hatched to resurrect the forged Niger documents, and to give them credibility by recycling them through British intelligence.

And that is what Bush was referring to when, in his 2003 State of the Union address, he famously frightened a nation by declaring, "The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa."

Bush lyingly implied that this was new information, when in fact he knew--had to know--that the "evidence" in British hands was the same set of documents he had been offered by Berlusconi almost a year and a half earlier, which had been declared to be bogus.

No mainstream American media organization has pursued this story, or even published the details as reported in Italy. Most Americans, consequently, don't even know what a grand lie Bush and the White House perpetrated upon them and the Congress in order to win approval for an attack on Iraq.

Perhaps now that Libby has gone down for his part in this grotesque crime, some editor will ask the obvious question: Why did the White House and the Office of Vice President go to such extraordinary lengths to attack Wilson and his wife? And more importantly, who was behind those Niger embassy burglaries and the forged uranium ore sale documents? And what was OSP doing meeting in Rome in December 2001 with the head of Italian intelligence?

Make no mistake: this whole story has the odor of a "black op" designed to target the American people.

If so it was an act of high treason.

It is not just Libby who should go to jail for this crime. It is the president and vice president.

At this point, whether or not the mainstream media decide to do their job, one has to hope that Fitzgerald, with Libby in the bag, will take the next step and hold the prospect of a lengthy prison sentence recommendation over the convict¹s head in order to try and win from him a promise of cooperation with the prosecution.

Because Libby knows who was behind all of this.

And that¹s the real story that needs to be told.

DAVE LINDORFF is an investigative reporter based in Philadelphia. His work is available at www.thiscantbehappening.net and at www.counterpunch.org His latest book, co-authored by Barbara Olshansky, is "The Case for Impeachment: The Legal Argument for Removing President George W. Bush from Office" (St. Martin's Press, 2006).

Brooks
03-08-2007, 07:51 PM
There is an interesting story here--and an important mystery to be solved.

As it happens, way back in early 2001 there was a pair of burglaries at the Niger Embassy ......the only things stolen were official stationary and some official stamps, My money's on Sandy Berger.

dharmabum
03-08-2007, 07:54 PM
My money's on Sandy Berger.

And you would lose that money.

You need to stop making such bad wagers.

Cataletyc
03-08-2007, 08:37 PM
Cant wait till Valerie Plame testifies.

Brooks
03-08-2007, 08:49 PM
Joe Wilson does any interview show that will have him, does interviews with photos of Superspy, I think he wrote a book, and has announced that he's suing someone.

But guess where he won't talk. He was subpoenaed to testify under oath at Libby's trial and fought the subpoena. Wouldn't you think he'd be really really anxious to testify?

Not under oath apparently.

http://sweetness-light.com/archive/joe-wilson-fights-against-having-to-testify-in-libby-trial

dharmabum
03-08-2007, 08:57 PM
Cant wait till Valerie Plame testifies.

She still isn't allowed to talk about details of what she did for the CIA. She is currently sueing to be allowed to talk about it, since the entire operation has been compromised anyway.

dharmabum
03-08-2007, 08:59 PM
Wouldn't you think he'd be really really anxious to testify?


Sure, in the right circumstances. That trial wasn't about the issues Wilson is anxious to talk about.

Brooks
03-08-2007, 09:00 PM
I'm waiting to hear Joe Wilson's testimony about how the administration, and not his wife, got him the Niger assignment.

Brooks
03-08-2007, 09:01 PM
Sure, in the right circumstances. That trial wasn't about the issues Wilson is anxious to talk about.
He was subpoenaed. It's not up to him to decide if the attorney's want his testimony or not.

He can never testify under oath because of his lies up to this point.

dharmabum
03-08-2007, 09:13 PM
I'm waiting to hear Joe Wilson's testimony about how the administration, and not his wife, got him the Niger assignment.

You really should have paid attention to the Libby trial.

That is irrelivent anyway.

Back to the real issues:

I want to know what Bush was thinking in using those forged niger documents repeatedly after the CIA told him they were fake.

dharmabum
03-08-2007, 09:15 PM
He was subpoenaed.

So was Cheney and he straight up said he wouldn't go no matter what.


It's not up to him to decide if the attorney's want his testimony or not.

Tell that to your boy Cheney.

Brooks
03-08-2007, 09:36 PM
I want to know what Bush was thinking in using those forged niger documents repeatedly after the CIA told him they were fake.The report by British Intelligence was not based on those documents. Also, I think the Brits still stick by their report.
Here's a pretty good summary
http://www.factcheck.org/article222.html

Brooks
03-08-2007, 09:39 PM
Tell that to your boy Cheney.What was each of their reasons not to testify?

And if Cheney was basing a career on this case and speaking to anyone who would listen, then I would be surprised if he didn't want to testify in this case.

Travh20
03-08-2007, 09:53 PM
I want to know what Bush was thinking in using those forged niger documents repeatedly after the CIA told him they were fake.

I think it was the libs who said of the fake documents regarding Bush and the national guard that got on 60 Minutes just before the election: "they may not be real but that doesnt mean the story isnt true"

dharmabum
03-08-2007, 09:56 PM
The Downing Street Memo showed that the American and British intelligence agencies were under orders to "Fix in intelligence" to support invading Iraq.
You shouldn't put too much stock in the British intelligence services, especially since they also thought Iraq had WMDs.

Some good sources. (http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Yellowcake_forgery)

Another good source. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yellowcake_forgery)

The Butler Report issued after a review by the British government concluded that the report Saddam's government was seeking uranium in Africa appeared credible. Nevertheless, the Butler report fails to advance any evidence to substantiate this conclusion. Furthermore, the Butler report concluded that "The forged documents were not available to the British Government at the time its assessment was made, and so the fact of the forgery does not undermine it,"[4] which again could not be verified. In some ways the Butler Report does dispute the findings with this statement in the review. [5] "authorship of the dossier was a mistaken judgement."


In late October 2005, left of center Italian Newspaper La Repubblica published a three-part series which alleged that the Italian Intelligence Service SISMI played a large role in obtaining the the forged Niger Documents and distributing them to Western Governments. Rocco Martino, formerly a dishonest policeman as well as a former SISMI double agent, is identified as the documents source, and he pitched them to SISMI, who in turn handed them over to the CIA station head in Rome. The documents were reportedly identified by the Italian embassy's intelligence personnel as probable forgeries and were refused. The La Repubblica expose then claims that SISMI Director Nicolò Pollari, at the behest of Italian Prime Minister, Silvio Berlusconi, did an end run around the CIA and delivered the documents by hand in Washington D.C. to White House National Security Council (NSC) staff.

"If you want one piece to bring you fully up to date on the Niger forgery flap, check out Neil Mackay's "Niger and Iraq: the war's biggest lie?" in the Glasgow Sunday Herald ("One senior western diplomat told the Sunday Herald: 'There were more than 20 anomalies in the Niger documents -- it is staggering any intelligence service could have believed they were genuine for a moment.'"). --TomDispatch.com, July 2003

Seymour M. Hersh wrote in the March 24, 2003, The New Yorker Magazine:

"Then the story fell apart. On March 7th, Mohamed ElBaradei, the director-general of the International Atomic Energy Agency, in Vienna, told the U.N. Security Council that the documents involving the Niger-Iraq uranium sale were fakes. 'The I.A.E.A. has concluded, with the concurrence of outside experts, that these documents . . . are in fact not authentic,' ElBaradei said."
"One senior I.A.E.A. official went further. He told [Hersh], 'These documents are so bad that I cannot imagine that they came from a serious intelligence agency. It depresses me, given the low quality of the documents, that it was not stopped. At the level it reached, I would have expected more checking.'"

In early October 2002, George Tenet called Deputy National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley to ask him to remove reference to the Niger uranium from a speech Bush was to give in Cincinnati on October 7. This was followed up by a memo asking Hadley to remove another, similar line. Another memo was sent to the White House expressing the CIA's view that the Niger claims were false; this memo was given to both Hadley and National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice.

In January 2006, the New York Times revealed the existence of a memo which stated that the suggestion of uranium being sold was "unlikely" because of a host of economic, diplomatic and logistical obstacles. The memo, dated March 4, 2002, was distributed at senior levels by the office of former Secretary of State Colin L. Powell and by the Defense Intelligence Agency.

Brooks
03-09-2007, 07:26 AM
In the meantime the British haven't fled from their original findings and the veracity of said Niger documents are irrelevant since they had no basis in the British or American intelligence agencies' findings.

But I'm sure this will all be straightened out when Mr. Wilson is willing to testify under oath.

Freethinker
03-09-2007, 09:06 AM
I want to know what Bush was thinking in using those forged niger documents repeatedly after the CIA told him they were fake.

?!?!

We know beyond any doubt what they were thinking.

He and others in his Administration were deperate for any an all excuses they could put forward in order to incite the dimwitted American Public into agreeing to the U.S. going to war againt Iraq.

They lit upon the (forged) Niger documents --even they they themselves knew them to be thoroughly false-- as a means of accomplishing that.

Travh20
03-09-2007, 09:52 AM
?!?!

We know beyond any doubt what they were thinking.

He and others in his Administration were deperate for any an all excuses they could put forward in order to incite the dimwitted American Public into agreeing to the U.S. going to war againt Iraq.

They lit upon the (forged) Niger documents --even they they themselves knew them to be thoroughly false-- as a means of accomplishing that.


same witht he fake national guard documents shown on 60 minutes right before the election, right?

Freethinker
03-09-2007, 06:26 PM
same witht he fake national guard documents shown on 60 minutes right before the election, right?

Regardless of the typeface of the documents, that fact remains that Bush was AWOL from the Texas National Guard, and the fact remains that Bush and others in his Administration did knowingly -and with the intent to deceive- orchestrate a huge campaign of lies, including the one about the Niger documents, in order to incite the American Public into supporting the U.S. going to war against Iraq

Travh20
03-09-2007, 10:38 PM
Regardless of the typeface of the documents, that fact remains that Bush was AWOL from the Texas National Guard, and the fact remains that Bush and others in his Administration did knowingly -and with the intent to deceive- orchestrate a huge campaign of lies, including the one about the Niger documents, in order to incite the American Public into supporting the U.S. going to war against Iraq

OK, just making sure. Fake documents to get Bush= good Fake documents from bush = bad. What a 'tard :rolleyes:

dharmabum
03-12-2007, 09:37 AM
We know Bush knowingly used fake documents to mislead us into a war.

If lying about a BJ is an impeachable offense then lying us into a war certainly is.

Travh20
03-12-2007, 01:23 PM
what fake documents were those?