Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

An alternate theory to what happened with Plame

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
Singular73 Donating Member (999 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-22-05 12:20 AM
Original message
An alternate theory to what happened with Plame
The plame thing has never made sense to me. The motivations arent quite there. Why would Libby or Rove try to burn Wilson so badly? There were tons of critics of the WMD arguement, talking heads all over the TV dissenting from the administrations views.

I dont believe that Wilson was the target. I believe Plame and her operation was.

I believe its possible that the CIA, specifically Plame's group, was disgruntled regarding the downward pressure being put on them, especially post-911 when the intelligence community had taken a big hit.

It is possible that Plame DID in fact push Wilson through as the guy that was to go to Africa, because he had a good name as a public figure, and she knew he would reveal the truth publically -- something the CIA couldn't do directly.

The white house figured this out. The only way to shut down the operation Plame was involved in, was to out her, via Wilson.

I'm sure that effectively shut down the CIA's operation to counter white house claims about WMDs.

I think this was about Plame, not Wilson.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
amitten Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-22-05 12:22 AM
Response to Original message
1. I think you might be right. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Singular73 Donating Member (999 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-22-05 12:22 AM
Response to Reply #1
2. Well, recommend it man, I want some input
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mythsaje Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-22-05 12:25 AM
Response to Original message
3. I've been saying that for a while now...n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Carolab Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-22-05 12:26 AM
Response to Original message
4. This has been discussed much elsewhere as well as DU.
Edited on Sat Oct-22-05 12:32 AM by Carolab
Check out Justin Raimondo's fine reporting on this, which ties it back to the AIPAC scandal as well.

http://www.justinraimondo.com

{snip}

The interconnectedness of the investigation into AIPAC's treason with Fitzgerald's probe is underscored by the following passage from Franklin's indictment:

"On or about June 3, 2003, Franklin met with FO-3 at the POAC , and the discussion centered on a specific person, not in the United Status government, and her thoughts concerning the nuclear program of the Middle Eastern country and, separately, certain charity, efforts in Foreign Nation A."

If Franklin and his Israeli handler – a nuclear weapons specialist – were talking about a woman whose "thoughts concerning the nuclear program" of a certain "Middle Eastern country" had some significance, then surely Judith Miller is a likely candidate. When we add in the business about "certain charity efforts in Foreign Nation A," the identification becomes even more credible: "Foreign Nation A" is Israel, the "charity efforts" consist of work on behalf of the Iraqi Jewish Archive, a joint project undertaken by Miller, Harold Rhode (Franklin's associate – and fellow suspect – in Feith's policy shop), and Ahmed Chalabi. It might be said that these efforts on behalf of the Archive are not taking place "in Israel," as the wording of the indictment puts it, but the ultimate location of the archives is uncertain, and surely Israel is one very possible destination. In any case, it can safely be said that this is a project undertaken on Israel's behalf.

As Franklin and Gilon hung out at the Pentagon Officers Athletic Club, shooting the breeze, it seems Ms. Miller was the subject of their conversation, at least in part. Did the name Valerie Plame also come up?
\

{snip}
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
applegrove Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-22-05 12:27 AM
Original message
The Cheney WH had a lock on the CIA. Remember the secrets act?
CIA are public servants who can be fired or whatnot - controlled unless they want to quit.

Wilson was dangerous because he was credible, been around the WMD, Iraq, prvy to all the intel on Saddam leading up to the Kuwait war as he was acting ambassador there & had the info on Niger. Plus he wasn't employed by the feds in Washington. So he could speak. He had the perspective & two threads of knowledge. Enough so that the knew the WH intelligence was cooked in many ways. He was gutsy and a hero. I doubt even he expected his wife to be attacked as a way to diminish him.

Remember that Cheney still thought they would 'uncover WMD' at some point in the future. So the 'faulty intelligence' would pay for itself in his mind.

Sorry - I don't agree with you.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Singular73 Donating Member (999 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-22-05 12:27 AM
Response to Original message
5. Thats why this crime is even bigger...
Their intent was not to out Plame...their intent was to out the entire operation.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TahitiNut Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-22-05 12:48 AM
Response to Reply #5
10. Yep. Exactly.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Singular73 Donating Member (999 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-22-05 12:29 AM
Response to Original message
6. Discussed elsewhere?
Sorry, didnt mean to steal anyones thunder...I dont read all the threads...this just occured to me today, so Im sure its occured to others previously...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Carolab Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-22-05 12:33 AM
Response to Reply #6
7. It's cool...it just now "hit you"...
check out my post #4 for some good stuff...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Oilwellian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-22-05 12:34 AM
Response to Original message
8. I've seen many theories...
on why Plame was outed. Hopefully Fitzgerald will show us which one is correct.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TahitiNut Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-22-05 12:40 AM
Response to Original message
9. Close, but not quite. (In my OPINION, of course.)
Edited on Sat Oct-22-05 12:50 AM by TahitiNut
(OK ... first go ahead and get your :tinfoilhat: )

Field operations focused on Nuclear Non-Proliferation has been one of the more long-established functions of the CIA. It, and it's NOCs, are VERY compartmentalized within the CIA, and the identity of NOCs safeguarded even within the agency.

These deep cover agents and contacts were the source of most of the reliable intel that debunked and contradicted the Chalabi/Niger/Curveball/Mossad/PNAC disintel.

That's what drove Cheney/Libby to put pressure on the CIA. In the process, they learned about Plame/Wilson. I believe it was a setup to destroy all BJ&A-associated agents and contacts (the network).

I believe the Niger trip by Wilson was part of the setup. I believe Plame was baited and made the recommendation ... but I believe it was deliberate to get her to recommend Joe. To do that, a neocon insider in the CIA chain of command cooperated with the assignment - purportedly (but not written) due to "questions" from Cheney's office.

Let's remember that the Niger scam was the WEAKEST of the points. Amateurish and not even swallowed by the Italians or British. So, that's where they sent Wilson.

Upon his return, he was dissed and demeaned. He was poked and prodded for many months before he went public in the NYTimes. They wanted him to go public. I think they believed they could 'launder' the leak enough and escape any accountability ... but even if they did, it'd be solely characterized as political revenge.

I think they viewed the smaller expected consequences to be more than a fair price to pay for eliminating "uncontrolled" intel in the CIA from that part of the world, dealing with WMD.

Pakistan's current government is happy. Israel's current government happy. Iraq's current government is 'in the fold' no matter what happens. So is Afghanistan's. Iran is next.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DELUSIONAL Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-22-05 01:46 AM
Response to Reply #9
14. This is my assessment also -- the object was to close BJ&A down
Edited on Sat Oct-22-05 01:48 AM by DELUSIONAL
Somewhere I read that Halliburton has been (or still is for all we know) involved in shady deals which involved selling components related to WMD to just about any country that had the money. Halliburton/Cheney ran into trouble -- even with their offshore companies who were involved in weapons etc sales -- and Cheney wanted to shut the CIA down.

BJ&A was the target -- Plame through Wilson was the means.

In an earlier post Powell is said to have mentioned that he showed the top secret file ONLY to bushie and Cheney -- and Cheney was the one who was very interested.

So we have an ex-CEO of a dirty WMD peddling company who has been road blocked by unknown government agents -- Powell gives Cheney the key to getting rid of the troublesome goodie two shoes who doesn't want every tom/dick & dirty harry to have WMD. There is probably a whole lot of money to be made in the weapons trade and every tin-pot dictator wants to have something to make him seem a little bigger to his neighbors/enemies. Cheney and his ilk just want to get richer and richer and they don't give a damn how they make the money.

Powell screwed up by showing these two dirt bags the top secret file -- and whoever wrote the report also screwed up. But then I guess the dumb asses didn't expect the Prez and bushie to be traitors.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Garbo 2004 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-22-05 03:54 PM
Response to Reply #14
19. Was Brewster Jennings much of a target though, even as a CIA front?
Boston Globe article suggests that in itself likely not. More like a holding pen for a cover rather than an operational enterprise in itself:

Plame's exposure as an intelligence operative has become a major controversy in Washington. Former intelligence officials confirmed Plame's cover was an invention and that she used other false identities and affiliations when working overseas. "All it was was a telephone and a post office box," said one former intelligence official who asked not to be identified. "When she was abroad she had a more viable cover."...

...A spokeswoman for Dun & Bradstreet Inc., a New Jersey operator of commercial databases, said Brewster Jennings was first entered into its records on May 22, 1994, but wouldn't discuss the source of the filing. Its records list the company at 101 Arch St. as a "legal services office," which could mean a law firm, with annual sales of $60,000, one employee, and a chief executive identified as "Victor Brewster, Partner."...

...Vince Cannistraro, the CIA's former counterterrorism chief, said that when operating undercover outside the United States, Plame would have had a real job with a more legitimate company. The Boston company "is not an indicator of what she did overseas," he said.

http://www.boston.com/business/globe/articles/2003/10/10/apparent_cia_front_didnt_offer_much_cover/
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Carni Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-22-05 07:29 AM
Response to Reply #9
17. I tip my tin foil hat to you
The below that you wrote is also along the same lines I am thinking!
I believe Wilson is not lying or confused when he stated that he was sent per Cheney--that is what he was told initially because he WAS sent by Cheney via a neocon insider in the CIA.

"I believe the Niger trip by Wilson was part of the setup. I believe Plame was baited and made the recommendation ... but I believe it was deliberate to get her to recommend Joe. To do that, a neocon insider in the CIA chain of command cooperated with the assignment - purportedly (but not written) due to "questions" from Cheney's office."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BuyingThyme Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-22-05 12:52 AM
Response to Original message
11. A couple nights ago, I heard a theory about Plame's group getting close
to the Bushes funding (and or arming) of al Qaeda, causing the Bushes to go shut down the Plame front.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Carolab Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-22-05 01:00 AM
Response to Original message
12. I think it's all of the above. And probably more. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tavalon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-22-05 01:39 AM
Response to Original message
13. I've believed that for quite some time n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Garbo 2004 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-22-05 06:00 AM
Response to Original message
15. You do know Wilson went to Niger in Feb 2002? And there was nothing
for him to refute until Bush mentioned the Niger claim in January 2003's State of the Union speech? And Wilson didn't go public until July 2003. That's about a year and a half of public silence before revealing a truth about a claim that wasn't made for about a year.

Your theory is that Plame had such tremendous foresight in Feb 2002 and she had to "push Wilson through" to get the CIA to send him to Niger despite the fact of Wilson's previous experience, expertise and qualifications in Africa affairs through his government service? (My understanding is that this was not the first time he'd helped the CIA to check out something regarding a country in which he had experience.)

Bush didn't publicly use the Niger claim until January 2003's State of the Union speech. (It was a toss off and small potatoes compared to the much bigger aluminum tubes story the Administration had been publicly pushing hard in 2002. Powell wouldn't use the Niger claims in his Feb 2003 speech to the UN but he did use the aluminum tubes claims that of course were bogus.) And Wilson only went public with his op ed six months later in July 2003, well after Bush's "mission accomplished."

Remember what else was going on that summer of 2003 to put things in context? Blair was under pressure as a result of a BBC report stating that the Brit gov't "sexed up" the intel to support the claim that Saddam was such a threat he had to be removed from power. In Australia Prime Minister Howard also was facing parliamentary scrutiny regarding doctored and exaggerated pre-war intel. Months before El Baradei, head of the IAEA, had pronounced the Niger documents a fraud and a ridiculously badly done one at that.

The wheels were threatening to come off the justification for the war that the Bush administration had pushed. Not just the Niger claim. And it wasn't that the claims of the prewar intel were simply mistaken, but that the Administration knowingly went forward with info they knew were dubious, unconfirmed or they had created themselves. And meanwhile no WMD's were being found. And by the way, an election year was coming up. (No small consideration.)

Wilson had been a critic before the war (he thought Saddam had WMD's but was contained) but after the State of the Union he had tried through his connections to get the Administration (Condi) to correct the record. But they didn't. Then he was a anon source for some articles about the Niger claims in the spring, most notably and transparently a NYT Kristof article in May and a Pincus WaPo article in mid June. Finally, after hearing from a "senior administration official" that Condi wasn't interested and if he wanted the story to get attention he should go public with it, Wilson decided to do just that.

This suggestion to go public, according to Wilson, was in June. Recall that the State Dept memo mentioning Valerie Wilson was already in existence (although the NYT reported it was dated June 10, Newsweek has reported it was originally prepared in May). According to Judy Miller, when she first met with Libby on June 23 he was bitching about Wilson, his wife and the CIA. The Administration was already primed to smear Wilson prior to his July 6 op ed. To discredit him, perhaps shut him up and certainly warn others, especially those pesky CIA types that didn't toe the company line. (Remember the noise machine before the war had put out that Scott Ritter was a child molester? They defended against credible critics by going on the attack with smears. SOP)

Although Condi had ignored Wilson's attempts to get her to clear the record on the Niger claims, the day after Wilson's op ed she admitted the claim shouldn't have been in the state of the union since the intel was unsubstantiated. To which, Wilson recounted, Sandy Berger said if they admit that so readily, what else are they hiding?

That the whole justification to go to war was a fraud, of course.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Carni Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-22-05 07:22 AM
Response to Original message
16. I think CHENEY may really have sent Wilson per Rove's orders
OK this is going to sound confusing...

BUT what I think was done and I agree with you that this was always about shutting down Plame's unit/dummy company whatever...

BUT I think that through initial orders of Cheney (just like Wilson said but it was probably done indirectly so it couldn't be tied to Cheney later)that Wilson was sent because he would be easy to target to discredit later because of his wife's position.

Not describing this very well...but my theory is they arrange for Wilson to go knowing full well he (or anyone else) would find nothing...but BECAUSE Wilson's wife was an operative they at least then would have something to fall back on, something to discredit and expose-- and of course they were also able to out her identity in that same process because Wilson was their patsy.

The reason I think this is Rove's prior track record with this type of thing...take Jim Hatfield and the book Fortunate Son for instance. They knew that a book would come out that was uncomplimentary to bush about his record, rumored drug abuse/arrest etc--so instead of just letting the cards fall where they may Rove chose to plant a story with Hatfield/ they knew he had a shady past and they could expose him later. All claims from there on out about bush along the same lines looked like lies and were received by the public as been there and been debunked.

They did the same thing with the Dan Rather AWOL deal.

The whole Wilson trip and the outing is CLASSIC Karl Rove--if you can't stop an event from occurring then you pick someone you can compromise to do the job.

JMO
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MiniMe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-22-05 08:44 AM
Response to Original message
18. I think she somehow thwarted their attempt to plant WMD's
I was sure that they would plant some WMD's in Iraq to justify *'s war, I always wondered why they didn't. I think that somehow, Plame got too close to the truth, and they are taking her down for it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sun May 05th 2024, 12:34 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC