It is now clear that the Bush Administration committed treason with Scooters conviction. With RICO the man at the top is responsible.
It is also coming out that plans to destroy Plame’s covert CIA operation Brewster -Jennings was the real target and decided upon before Joe Wilson even wrote his article. The Joe Wilson smear spin is just that, spin that the MSM has swallowed hook line a sinker.
Brewster-Jennings was our Nations most important intelligence operation tracking Nuclear and WMD acquisition and development in the Middle East. Cheney and Bush wanted tnis destroyed so there would be no ‘pissant’ cia trying to meddle in their Iran and Iraq war plans.
It is also rumored that Plame's Brewster-Jennings just prior to Plames exposure had been instrumental in stopping a load of WMD headed for Iraq through Turkey, and it has been conjectured that this was the shipment and Bush operation to plant the WMD’s in Iraq.
When Brewster-Jennings was destroyed, people were killed as a result and a multi-year and multi-million dollar covert front company was destroyed. Covert front companies are the most complicated covert operations to create, and maintain, and they historically provide the best intelligence.
Bush and Cheney destroyed our nation’s most important and primary WMD/Nuclear proliferation intelligence efforts in the Middle East. And for this they should be tried, impeached and perhaps put to death for treason.
This is the most disgusting and reprehensible thing that has ever been done to our country. Sy Hersh published some wiffs on this awhile back.
Plame's outing was a heinous and treasoness conspiracy with no equal. The Joe Wilson smear angle was BS from the start and is pure Rovian mis-direction. It may even be the case that Cheney's office sent Wilson to Niger to get the conspiracy and mis-direction rolling.
Think about it, and try to stop yourself from throwing up or running for the pitchfork.
Concerned Citizen. I am a father of one and a husband that has had enough of the fair and balanced lies and spin spewed by the mainstream media. Truth has been abdaoned in the name of giving vile creatures their due to spew.
It is time for all good men and women to stand up and be ready to sacrifice for the earth and children! It aint going to be easy destroying the old and birthing the new. A world of community, creativity, fun, and local food production is just waiting to be born.
The tale that Plame's outing was to smear Wilson came from where? The Whitehouse and their right wing pundits.
The fact that keeps get pushed to the background is the fact that Plame's front company was a covert intelligence operation that took decades and hundreds of millions of dollars to create. These front companies provide the most obscure and hard to obtain intelligence.
Bush/Cheney/Rove knew that Brewster-Jennings could dispute any claims they made about Iranian nukes since they were the key COA operation that knew the best intelligence. To ensure that they could lie again they needed to take it out.
Good intelligence is the last thing this criminal cabal wants. It gets in the way of their false witness and spin. They knew Plame had integrity and they needed her operation destroyed. So that's what they did. Out her and destroy Brewster-Jennings.
All the talk about the 'smear' belittles and seeks to send into obscurity the true treasoness action that was the destruction of our best and most secret mid-east intelligence covert operation.
Just look at Reid and Kerry's statements about the smear, but nothig about the result of the smear which was Brewster-Jennigs demise. Operatives connected to Plames organization were killed, and Bush/Cheny/Rove/Libby caused these murders. But all you here about is the smear smear smear.
Did Plames outing ever discredit Wilson. No. So why did they do it?
'Douglas Feith, of all people, was a registered foreign agent of Turkey from 1989-1994!! Valerie Plame was actually burned by Libby and the neo-cons not because of Wilson's Op-Ed, but because her CIA front company, Brewster Jennings, may have been getting 'too close' to exposing illegal WMD activities that someone like Libby might have been tied up in.
Brewster Jennings and the Planted WMD: Maverick/'highly untrustworthy' internet journalist Wayne Madsen raised the possibility that Brewster Jennings and Valerie Plame got burned because they intercepted a WMD that some in Turkey were trying to sneak into Iraq - but the twist is that neoconservatives were trying to get the weaponry into Iraq, because they wanted to stage its exciting discovery there, thus providing the casus belli to drive the American public into a belligerent, fearful frenzy.'
It's a tangle web and is tied to Sibel Edmonds etc.
From Wayne Madsen (grain of salt required~
ovember 11, 2005 -- New aspect of Valerie Plame/Brewster Jennings exposure revealed. According to U.S. intelligence sources, the White House exposure of Valerie Plame and her Brewster Jennings & Associates was intended to retaliate against the CIA's work in limiting the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. WMR has reported in the past on this aspect of the scandal. In addition to identifying the involvement of individuals in the White House who were close to key players in nuclear proliferation, the CIA Counter-Proliferation Division prevented the shipment of binary VX nerve gas from Turkey into Iraq in November 2002. The Brewster Jennings network in Turkey was able to intercept this shipment which was intended to be hidden in Iraq and later used as evidence that Saddam Hussein was in possession of weapons of mass destruction. U.S. intelligence sources revealed that this was a major reason the Bush White House targeted Plame and her network.
by
Crede Calhoun (8 articles, 0 quicklinks, 8 diaries, 32 comments)
on Wednesday, March 7, 2007 at 3:11:45 PM
I think that VultureMan is right on the mark. I have had a nagging suspicion for ages that this may have been the true reason for outing Plame and her front.
by
Karen Backman (1 articles, 0 quicklinks, 8 diaries, 11 comments)
on Thursday, March 8, 2007 at 11:36:18 AM
The act of outing Plame and destroying the covert value of Brewster Jennings & Associates gave aid and comfort to the enemies of America and the world-wide community of nations.
As such, it was an ACT OF TREASON by anybody who knew of it, knew that it was GOING TO HAPPEN, knew that it DID happen, or ordered or allowed it to happen. Each and every one of those people is guilty of TREASON AGAINST AMERICA.
They should be tried, convicted, and SHOT.
But, since this is Rethuglican America, Bush/Cheney will probably give each and every one of them the Presidential Medal of Freedom.
Any American who would offer support and aid to these treasonous scum is obviously a supporter of TERRORISM and should be suspect. Perhaps a few hours of water boarding will get a confession out of them (I think five minutes is the record before most people will sell out their parents and children). Remember, it's not torture -- it's just "extreme interrogation." If they won't confess with some boarding, we can outsource their interrogation to some foreign country like Syria or Pakistan -- I'm sure they won't be abused, and we can get to the "truth."
by
Charlie L (2 articles, 4 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 720 comments)
on Wednesday, March 7, 2007 at 4:20:00 PM
libby already has a pardon in his back pocket, that's why his attorney decided, at the last minute not call cheney or rove.that's why he didn't tesify in his own defense. he had to know it would be devastating to his case. and even if by some chance he faces jail time, he'll suddenly have a heart attack and "die", then go join ken lay on a beach in the caymens with their toes in the sand sipping on umbrella drinks for the rest of their days.
by
mike wygant (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 287 comments)
on Wednesday, March 7, 2007 at 6:58:35 PM
What's the fuss (smoke & mirrors) will be poping up anyways
If one of us were in scooter's shoes, we would be tried for treason plain and simple. That's not even mentioning blowing her undercover status as an CIA personnel.
Scooter should not be aloud a simple slap on the hands by are court system or the Bush Administration, for the same reasons Nixon should have never been aloud a pardon by Ford.
Corruption will be still hiding behind smoke and mirror's and the path will remain open for more government corruption. If they allow this one we will be turning the other cheek for the God only knows time once again.
by
Fred F (1 articles, 1 quicklinks, 4 diaries, 361 comments)
on Wednesday, March 7, 2007 at 7:28:55 PM
If Libby gets pardoned it will be an absolute disaster for the GOP. Talk about ammo for the 2008, 2010 election cycles.
<> If the MSM would focus on the damage that was done to Brewster-Jennings and how important a CIA operation it was, the American people might wake up to the treasoness nature of this criminal junta and demand justice.
<><> <>If Howard Dean or any of the DEMS would just get on this and start exposing the effects of outing Plame on our Nation's intelliegence efforts we might get somewhere. Our nation will never build another covert operation that can equal Brewster-Jennings. Instead, Reid, Kerry, etc just repeat the smear line and say its all over now, justice was done. What a bunch of enabling fools. This issue could be the straw that breaks the Bush cabal's back, instead most DEMS have not a clue.
<> <><><>Imagine the noise machine if Clinton had caused such an operation to be destroyed and many covert operatives killed? Not to mention the waste of decades of works and hundreds of millions of dollars.
by
Crede Calhoun (8 articles, 0 quicklinks, 8 diaries, 32 comments)
on Thursday, March 8, 2007 at 6:47:21 AM
Great article. Thanks for posting it. You might like this:
This was in the Wall Street Journal, 3/7/2007, Page A3
Headline: Libby's Backers Push For Pardon
Excerpt: "Some presidental pardons have been deeply controversial. President Clinton came under fierce criticism for pardoning fugitive financier Marc Rich, whoe ex-wife was a major Democratic campaign contributor, just before leaving office in 2001. Ironically, Mr. Rich was represented at one point by Mr. Libby, then a high-powered Washington lawyer in private practice."
Amazing, they ALL know each other.
Respectfully,
Edward Ulysses Cate
by
Edward Ulysses Cate (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 221 comments)
on Thursday, March 8, 2007 at 10:35:34 AM
BILL MOYERS: So this is not just about weapons of mass destruction.
JOE WILSON: Oh, no, I think it's far more about re-growing the political map of the Middle East.
MOYERS: What does that mean?
WILSON: Well, that basically means trying to install regimes in the Middle East that are far more friendly to the United States - there are those in the administration that call them democracies. Somehow it's hard for me to imagine that a democratic system will emerge out of the ashes of Iraq in the near term. And when and if it does, it's hard for me to believe that it will be more pro-American and more pro-Israeli than what you've got now.
MOYERS: Tell me what you think about the arguments of one of those men, Richard Perle, who is perhaps the most influential advocate in the President's and the administration's ear arguing to get rid of Saddam Hussein. What do you think about his argument?
WILSON: Well, he's certainly the architect of a study that was produced in the mid-'90s for the Likud Israeli government called "a clean break, a new strategy for the realm." And it makes the argument that the best way to secure Israeli security is through the changing of some of these regimes beginning with Iraq and also including Syria. And that's been since expanded to include Iran.
JOE WILSON: Well, the underlying objective, as I see it, the more I look at this, is less and less disarmament, and it really has little to do with terrorism, because everybody knows that a war to invade and conquer and occupy Iraq is going to spawn a new generation of terrorists.
So you look at what's underpinning this, and you go back and you take a look at who's been influencing the process. And it's been those who really believe that our objective must be far grander, and that is to redraw the political map of the Middle East...
Q: In response to the reader who said s/he wasn't trying to be anti-semitic, you said that "his advisors" have argued for years that the way to peace in the Middle East is to crush the Palestinian resistance, etc. Whose advisors and can you elaborate on the history of this argument? It's not something I've heard of before, but then I imagine we don't hear to much about the arguments that go on in our government behind the scenes.
Also, could you tell us a little bit about your company JC Wilson International? Thank you.
Joseph Wilson: We do political risk assessment for companies wanting to do business in Africa Europe and the Middle East. As to advisers: Richard Perle, Paul Wolfowitz, Bill Kristol et al. Perle's study group produced a report for Bibi Netnayahu in the mid 90s called "A Clean Break, A New Strategy for the realm." Read also the Project for a "New American Century." Michael Ledeen from the American Enterprise Institue is another leading figure. He is Mr. Total War. Go to Iran after this.
The real agenda in all of this of course, was to redraw the political map of the Middle East. Now that is code, whether you like it or not, but it is code for putting into place the strategy memorandum that was done by Richard Perle and his study group in the mid-90's which was called, "A Clean Break - A New Strategy for the Realm." And what it is, cut to the quick, is if you take out some of these countries, some of these governments that are antagonistic to Israel then you provide the Israeli government with greater wherewithal to impose its terms and conditions upon the Palestinian people - whatever those terms and conditions might be. In other words, the road to peace in the Middle East goes through Baghdad and Damascus. Maybe Tehran. And maybe Cairo and maybe Tripoli if these guys actually have their way. Rather than going through Jerusalem.
On the other ones, the geopolitical situation, I think there are a number of issues at play; there's a number of competing agendas. One is the remaking of the map of the Middle East for Israeli security, and my fear is that when it becomes increasingly apparent that this was all done to make Sharon's life easier and that American soldiers are dying in order to enable Sharon to impose his terms upon the Palestinians that people will wonder why it is American boys and girls are dying for Israel and that will undercut a strategic relationship and a moral obligation that we've had towards Israel for 55 years. I think it's a terribly flawed strategy.
The administration short-circuited the discussion of whether war was necessary because some of its most powerful members felt it was the best option -- ostensibly because they had deluded themselves into believing that they could easily impose flowering democracies on the region.
A more cynical reading of the agenda of certain Bush advisers could conclude that the Balkanization of Iraq was always an acceptable outcome, because Israel would then find itself surrounded by small Arab countries worried about each other instead of forming a solid block against Israel. After all, Iraq was an artificial country that had always had a troublesome history.
It was not until late in the game that the so-called moral war came into being as a further justification. But the people, the neo-conservatives who brought this war upon us, who were the biggest supporters of this war, did not mention the moral case when they wrote the Project for the New American Century, when they wrote their 1998 letter to then-President Clinton, when Mr. Perle and company wrote their paper for Bibi Netanyahu, called "A Clean Break, a New Strategy for the Security of the Realm," or even when Mr. Wolfowitz drafted his security statement when he was undersecretary for policy in the Bush I White House, Bush I Defense Department.
The neoconservatives who have taken us down this path are actually very few in number. It is a small pack of zealots whose dedication has spanned decades, and that through years of selective recruitment has become a government cult with cells in most of the national security system. Among those cells are the secretive Office of Special Plans in the Department of Defense (reportedly now disbanded) and a similar operation in the State Department that is managed in the office of Under Secretary for Disarmament John Bolton. _
President Bush could fundamentally change the direction of his administration by firing fewer than fifteen senior officials, beginning with those signatories of the Project for the New American Century and those currently holding government posts who signed a 1998 letter that urged President Clinton to wage war on Iraq. They are clustered at the National Security Council, in the Defense and State Departments, and within Vice President Cheney's own parallel national security office. That particular little-known organization -- not accountable to Congress and virtually unknown to the American people -- should be completely dismantled. Never in the history of our democracy has there been established such an influential and pervasive center of power with the ability to circumvent longstanding and accepted reporting structures and to skew decisionmaking practices. It has been described to me chillingly by a former senior government official as a coup d'etat within the State. That's all it would take -- firing fewer than fifteen officials, and the scuttling of Cheney's questionable office -- to alter this administration's radical course. _
The other name that has most often been repeated to me in connection with the inquiry and disclosure into my background and Valerie's is that of Elliott Abrams, who gained infamy in the IranContra scandal during the first Bush administration. ... According to my sources, between March 2003 and the appearance of my article in July, the workup on me that turned up the information on Valerie was shared with Karl Rove, who then circulated it in administration and neoconservative circles.
Vice President Dick Cheney's chief of staff was so angry about the public statements of former Ambassador Joseph C. Wilson IV, a Bush administration critic married to an undercover CIA officer, that he monitored all of Wilson's television appearances and urged the White House to mount an aggressive public campaign against him, former aides say.
Those efforts by the chief of staff, Lewis "Scooter" Libby, began shortly after Wilson went public with his criticisms in 2003. But they continued into last year - well after the Justice Department began an investigation in September 2003, into whether administration officials had illegally disclosed the CIA operative's identity, say former White House aides.
While other administration officials were maintaining a careful distance from Wilson in 2004, Libby ordered up a compendium of information that could be used to rebut Wilson's claims that the administration had "twisted" intelligence to exaggerate the threat from Iraq before the U.S. invasion.
Libby pressed the administration to publicly counter Wilson, sparking a debate with other White House officials who thought the tactic would call more attention to the former diplomat and his criticisms. That debate ended after an April 2004 meeting in the office of White House Communications Director Dan Bartlett, when staffers were told "don't engage" Wilson, according to notes taken during the meeting by one person present.
"Scooter had a plan to counter Wilson and a passionate desire to do so," said a second person, a former White House official familiar with the internal deliberations.
Richard Clarke: I remember vividly, in the driveway outside of the West Wing, Scooter Libby, from the vice president's office, grabbing me and saying, "I hear you don't believe this report that Mohamed Atta was talking to Iraqi people in Prague." I said, "I don't believe it because it's not true." And he said: "You're wrong. You know you're wrong. Go back and find out; look at the rest of the reports, and find out that you're wrong."
I understood what he was saying, which was: "This is a report that we want to believe, and stop saying it's not true. It's a real problem for the vice president's office that you, the counterterrorism coordinator, are walking around saying that this isn't a true report. Shut up!" That's what I was being told.
I witnessed neoconservative agenda bearers within OSP usurp measured and carefully considered assessments, and through suppression and distortion of intelligence analysis promulgate what were in fact falsehoods to both Congress and the executive office of the president. _
In the early winter of 2002, a co-worker U.S. Navy captain and I were discussing the service being rendered by Colin Powell at the time, and we were told by the neoconservative political appointee David Schenker that "the best service Powell could offer would be to quit right now." I was present at a staff meeting when Bill Luti called Marine Gen. and former Chief of Central Command Anthony Zinni a "traitor," because Zinni had publicly expressed reservations about the rush to war.
[NYTimes' Tom] Friedman laughs: I could give you the names of 25 people (all of whom are at this moment within a five-block radius of this office) who, if you had exiled them to a desert island a year and a half ago, the Iraq war would not have happened.
I remember the weaken congressional investigations by congress and the testimony of former CIA agents about Mrs.Wilson and the resulting loss of intelligence. She had the perfect cover .As wife of an important man she was above suspicison. She was pretty, so of course she would never be suspected of doing anything important. She was not looking for credit. She was a woman doing a serious job. She is a Patriot and Heroine. So the low life chickenhawks destroyed her program for the obvious reason. She was doing her job too well. Theyhad a problem with her husband but as the cowards they really are why not go after the wife too. Sort of like criminal "thugs" work. Talk about your high crimes and misdemeanors.
by
cluelessfl (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 184 comments)
on Friday, March 9, 2007 at 1:06:43 AM
This article suggests that the outing of CIA operative Valerie Plame was specifically intended to destroy Plame's covert CIA operation, and thus that the CIA front Brewster-Jennings was the real target. Calhoun suggests that Brewster-Jennings was America's most important intelligence operation tracking nuclear and other weapons of mass destruction acquisition and development in the Middle East. Calhoun indicates that Cheney and Bush wanted Brewster-Jennings destroyed so there would be no 'pissant' CIA trying to meddle in their Iran and Iraq war plans. The neoconservative clique may have also had another additional motivation for destroying this part of the CIA; because, with the destruction of America's most important intelligence operation on WMD in the Middle East, the U.S. would likely be forced to become much more heavily dependent upon Israel for Middle East intelligence. Thus, Israeli intelligence operations would in effect take over essentially all of this part of American intelligence operations in the Middle East, leaving us with virtually no independent information of our own, - not a good place for America to find itself.
by
joao (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 1 comments)
on Friday, March 9, 2007 at 8:10:46 PM
Treason is the number one impeachable offense. Forget about wilson and focus on their destruction of Plames covert front company.
<> Treason. So why can't the Dems or Repubs call a treasoness SOB a treasoness SOB? Just look at exxon. halliburton, carlyle group, and skull and bones profits for the motivations.
by
Crede Calhoun (8 articles, 0 quicklinks, 8 diaries, 32 comments)
on Tuesday, March 20, 2007 at 1:53:07 PM
14 comments
How would you rate this?
You must be logged in (if signed up) to do ratings.
It's free to signup! And easy. And takes just a minute or two....
Must Read (
Well Said (
News (
Touching (
Funny (
Supported (
Interesting (
Inspiring (
Valuable (
