Peculiarities in the Wilson story don't change one fact: the Bushists lied

[BurtWorm]

to get us into war.

I've been rereading some of the key documents in the Wilson saga, beginning with his July 6, 2003 editorial in the NY Times, the Senate report criticizing his story, and his response to his Senatorial critics.

It's eye-opening. I recommend this exercise to everyone interested in the Plame story, and I recommend you read closely and carefully. You may be surprised and confused. But it can only make you more careful with the facts as they really are, not as they're being predigested for everyone on the left and the right.

Wilson really may have been suggested for the Niger trip by his wife, as the wingers claim and as he somewhat cagily denies (usually by citing news reports, as though the subject is someone else). The CIA's motive (not Tenet's, but the analysts in charge of nonproliferation who sent Wilson) really may have been to add substance to the skepticism against the Niger documents claiming Iraq was trying to buy 550 metric tons of yellowcake.

Wilson, oddly enough, admits (in his NY Times editorial) that he never saw those documents. He also says in that editorial that his role in refuting the Niger story was "small."

Rereading the Wilson documents is rather rewarding. It explains why Bob Somerby of the Daily Howler is so hard on Wilson. He can be maddeningly vague--lots of passive-voice constructions in which the actor in the sentence is not clear.

It's difficult to get a handle on why Wilson was sent to Niger at all. The documents had already been debunked by textual analysis, and the embassy and a military analyst on the ground were already looking into whether or not anyone in the Niger government had contacts with Iraqis. The ambassador to Niger asked Wilson not to talk to anyone in the current government, so Wilson only talked to former ministers. He never wrote a report, he merely gave an oral briefing to the ambassador and his contacts back at CIA. Oddly enough, his analysis was graded a middling "good" because he added one little piece: Evidently an Iraqi delegation did show up in Niger, but the Nigeriens said they didn't talk about yellowcake because it was understood to be off limits. (So what did they talk about? The report doesn't say.)

In any case, Wilson's piece corroborated the rest of the analysis suggesting that Iraq got nothing from Niger in 1999, certainly, and nothing in Niger supported the Bushists' "fear" (or hope) that Iraq was immanently rebuilding its nuclear weapons program in 2002-2003. Which leads me to conclude that the point of Wilson's editorial (that the Bushists were knowingly exaggerating the threat to justify the rush to war) was essentially sound.

The question of who sent Wilson, in short, is irrelevant to the main questions: Did the Bushists "fix the facts and intelligence around the policy" so they could throw an illegal war? And did they try to smear Wilson and his wife to throw the media off the scent leading to the real meat of the issue?

Duh!

[The Magistrate]

1. That Is True, Sir

And the use of forged documents in deciding for war is damned serious business, whether those deciding produced or were duped by the documents....

"It is worse than a crime: it is a mistake."

[autorank]

2. Thanks for a "flack" preview.

It makes no difference. The DC metro area is FULL of husbands and wives who both have careers, some times the same, sometimes related, sometimes entirely different. Cross referrals are common and they're done openly. The people who get the referrals are no dummies and they generally get a few others from the referring spouse. It's not illegal, it's not even bad business. A lot of times the person will ask for the spouses name as a contact because they trust the other spouse with whom they do business.

BIG DEAL, and I agree with you, IRRELEVANT.

I'll wager a large sum that investigations of an urgent nature were compromised and I'll wager a large some that people have been "disappeared" who were associated with Wilson's wife.

This causes me true outrage. How dare they..."at long last, Mr. President, have you lost all sense of common decency, Sir."

[BCBud]

3. Well said

I believe this is why focus has to be put on the politcal issue as opposed to the legal issue. This will expose the deliberate falsification of evidence..........impeachment and the disgrace of the worst administration ever.

Of course having the White House stay mum only helps as it makes them look guiltier.

Also, if the damage has been done, why is Miller still in jail? This could get even better.

[radfringe]

4. you bet - the real story is about the lies

The press is up in arms because Miller is in jail - the white house is keeping their mouths shut about Rove.

but the real story is about the lies that put us in Iraq in the first place.

[Chomskyite]

5. If I'm the editor of a major paper

. . . I send a reporter to the place where Plame was stationed to nose around and find out what happened to her contacts.

[BurtWorm]

6. I'd like to know that as well.

That would be very difficult to find out without a whistleblower, though. Exposing a contact could inadvertently expose more who may have escaped notice. Valerie Wilson herself would probably have a pretty good idea how much damage her outing casued her contacts.

[BurtWorm]

7. kick

[BurtWorm]

8. People should read the original Wilson docs.

To be better informed.