Moon of Alabama Brecht quote
July 15, 2005
WB: Paper Chase II
Comments

Joe Wilson wasn’t on an obvious snipe hunt when he went to Niger
i posted hersh’s 10/20/03 newyorker story earlier, my favorite plamegate piece but i thought his description of wilson’s investigation is the clearest thus far, so here’s the link again
http://www.newyorker.com/archive/content/?040209fr_archive02
In the fall of 2001, soon after the September 11th attacks, the C.I.A. received an intelligence report from Italy’s Military Intelligence and Security Service, or sismi, about a public visit that Wissam al-Zahawie, then the Iraqi Ambassador to the Vatican, had made to Niger and three other African nations two and a half years earlier, in February, 1999. The visit had been covered at the time by the local press in Niger and by a French press agency. The American Ambassador, Charles O. Cecil, filed a routine report to Washington on the visit, as did British intelligence. There was nothing untoward about the Zahawie visit. “We reported it because his picture appeared in the paper with the President,” Cecil, who is now retired, told me. There was no article accompanying the photograph, only the caption, and nothing significant to report. At the time, Niger, which had sent hundreds of troops in support of the American-led Gulf War in 1991, was actively seeking economic assistance from the United States.
None of the contemporaneous reports, as far as is known, made any mention of uranium. But now, apparently as part of a larger search for any pertinent information about terrorism, sismi dug the Zahawie-trip report out of its files and passed it along, with a suggestion that Zahawie’s real mission was to arrange the purchase of a form of uranium ore known as “yellowcake.” (Yellowcake, which has been a major Niger export for decades, can be used to make fuel for nuclear reactors. It can also be converted, if processed differently, into weapons-grade uranium.)
What made the two-and-a-half-year-old report stand out in Washington was its relative freshness. A 1999 attempt by Iraq to buy uranium ore, if verified, would seem to prove that Saddam had been working to reconstitute his nuclear program—and give the lie to the I.A.E.A. and to intelligence reports inside the American government that claimed otherwise.
The sismi report, however, was unpersuasive. Inside the American intelligence community, it was dismissed as amateurish and unsubstantiated. One former senior C.I.A. official told me that the initial report from Italy contained no documents but only a written summary of allegations. “I can fully believe that sismi would put out a piece of intelligence like that,” a C.I.A. consultant told me, “but why anybody would put credibility in it is beyond me.” No credible documents have emerged since to corroborate it.
The intelligence report was quickly stovepiped to those officials who had an intense interest in building the case against Iraq, including Vice-President Dick Cheney. “The Vice-President saw a piece of intelligence reporting that Niger was attempting to buy uranium,” Cathie Martin, the spokeswoman for Cheney, told me. Sometime after he first saw it, Cheney brought it up at his regularly scheduled daily briefing from the C.I.A., Martin said. “He asked the briefer a question. The briefer came back a day or two later and said, ‘We do have a report, but there’s a lack of details.’ ” The Vice-President was further told that it was known that Iraq had acquired uranium ore from Niger in the early nineteen-eighties but that that material had been placed in secure storage by the I.A.E.A., which was monitoring it. “End of story,” Martin added. “That’s all we know.” According to a former high-level C.I.A. official, however, Cheney was dissatisfied with the initial response, and asked the agency to review the matter once again. It was the beginning of what turned out to be a year-long tug-of-war between the C.I.A. and the Vice-President’s office.
“They got pounded on, day after day,” one senior Bush Administration official told me, and received no consistent backup from Tenet and his senior staff. “Pretty soon you say ‘Fuck it.’ ” And they began to provide the intelligence that was wanted. “
In late February, the C.I.A. persuaded retired Ambassador Joseph Wilson to fly to Niger to discreetly check out the story of the uranium sale
it’s a good read and i love the last 2 paragraphs

Vice-President Cheney remains unabashed about the Administration’s reliance on the Niger documents, despite the revelation of their forgery. In a September interview on “Meet the Press,” Cheney claimed that the British dossier’s charge that “Saddam was, in fact, trying to acquire uranium in Africa” had been “revalidated.” Cheney went on, “So there may be a difference of opinion there. I don’t know what the truth is on the ground. . . . I don’t know Mr. Wilson. I probably shouldn’t judge him.”
The Vice-President also defended the way in which he had involved himself in intelligence matters: “This is a very important area. It’s one that the President has asked me to work on. . . . In terms of asking questions, I plead guilty. I ask a hell of a lot of questions. That’s my job.

of course he forgot to ask if anyone was following up on that trip to niger….. he didn’t hear about it till he read it in the paper!!

Posted by: annie | Jul 15 2005 5:25 utc | 1

Commission on Intelligence Capabilities WMD report (torrent)(6.4 MB zip file – the Commission on Intelligence Capabilities WMD report – and – the “Key Findings” section from the Duelfer CIA report on Iraq WMD; the “Conclusions” section from the Senate Intelligence Committee’s report on Iraq; the 45 PowerPoint slides on WMDs Colin Powell presented to the UN on 2/5/03; and the Forged Iraq Uranium documents) from the Government Document Library at http://www.outragedmoderates.org

Posted by: Outraged | Jul 15 2005 5:35 utc | 2

sorry

Posted by: annie | Jul 15 2005 5:35 utc | 3

annie — What Sy wrote isn’t wrong, but it appears there is more to the story.
Whoever passed that SISMI report to the CIA (I think it was the Brits)later sent along a second report, which included more details and a supposed full text of a Niger-Iraq deal. This is what set Cheney off and prompted the CIA to send Wilson to Niger.

Posted by: Billmon | Jul 15 2005 6:06 utc | 4

i have been rereading paperchase#1 and am a little confused as you can probably tell, what exactly is a ‘verbatim text? recording or? a dialogue , like reading a play? and why wouldn’t the first report have been of the same fabricated ilk?

Posted by: annie | Jul 15 2005 6:15 utc | 5

A good holistic ‘background’ piece …

Bush Family Tradition: Ducking Scandal
By Robert Parry
July 15, 2005
If there is one trait that has followed the Bush family through generations of privilege, it is the ability to escape scandal – a skill that will be put to the test again …

Posted by: Outraged | Jul 15 2005 7:36 utc | 6

according to the original niger reporting the first set of documents came to the attention of the US on 10/15/01
“IC initial report to be very limited and lacking needed detail.
cia,dia, doa analysts considered the reporting to be “possible”
(INR) regarded the report as “highly suspect,”
the CIA wrote a finished intelligence product on the report10/18/01 from (unidentified) foriegn service “There is no corroboration from other sources that such an agreement was reached or that uranium was transferred” although they establish that if the quantity of yellowcake was transfered it could be enough to support one nuclear bomb.
this is not a stellar report if one is trying to drum up support for an invasion. a month later 11/20 US Niamey embassy reports”The Director General said “there was no possibility” that the government of Niger had diverted any of the 3,000 tons of yellowcake produced in its two uranium mines.”
On January 30th, the C.I.A. published an unclassified report to Congress that stated, “Baghdad may be attempting to acquire materials that could aid in reconstituting its nuclear-weapons program.”(hersh)
2/5/02 second report issued to cia again cited the source as a foreign government service. but it doesn’t specify here it is a different foriegn service than the first report ,”the second report provided more details about the previously reported Iraq-Niger uranium agreement and provided what was said to be “verbatim text” of the accord. ”
“IC analysts at the CIA and the DIA were more impressed with the detail and substance of the second report”. this is the report w/the verbatim text(?). just sounds like a more flushed out version of the original adding that al-Zahawi was traveling in niger in 99. cia issued its report on 2/12 “report that lacks crucial details, and we are working to clarify the information and to determine whether it can be corroborated.”
“The report contradicts reporting from the U.S. Embassy in Niamey. U.S. diplomats say the French Government-led consortium that operates Niger’s two uranium mines maintains complete control over uranium mining and yellowcake production.”
still sounds to me like a sham. wilson leaves and bring back nothing.

Posted by: annie | Jul 15 2005 8:19 utc | 7

Did Bush not state “The British Government has learned…”?
He was referring to the September “Dossier”.
The “Dodgy Dossier” had yet to be plagiarised.
Wilson’s op-ed challenged those “sixteen words”, no?
Wilson did not write about forged documents.
Bush did not talk about “The Italian Government”.
When challenged on the forged documents in Parliament, Jack Straw said “We did not rely on the forgeries. We had other information.”
Maybe I’m missing something, but the forgeries themselves don’t actually enter into this at all, do they?
But the British “other information” does. For it is that “other information” that corroborates the State of the Union message.

Posted by: John | Jul 15 2005 11:56 utc | 8

Which of course means you Americans got suckered by the Treason Felony Act

Posted by: Anonymous | Jul 15 2005 12:39 utc | 9

Jason Leonard (cokehead investigative reporter according to reviews of his upcoming book) seems to have a pretty detailed timeline of who talked when, to prove that Rove at least busted the same laws that sent Ms. Martha to jail for 6 months.

Posted by: catlady | Jul 15 2005 17:29 utc | 10

But the British “other information” does. For it is that “other information” that corroborates the State of the Union message.
Ya think Judy Miller might be able to shed some light on that?

Posted by: park | Jul 15 2005 19:47 utc | 11