|
Edited on Mon Oct-20-08 12:28 PM by pretzel4gore
she's a danger to society:
-------------cut'n'paste from old DU thread, thanks to KOKo01, Peace Patriot----------
Snip>
we can see much but the tip of the iceberg in Treasonate.
Why did the Bushites prime the public to expect a find of WMDs in Iraq, and set Judith Miller up--including giving her a special embed contract signed by Donald Rumsfeld--to make a highly visible show of hunting for the WMDs with U.S. troops--if they all knew there were no WMDs?
Were they just setting themselves up on purpose to be destroyed by public opinion, when no WMDs were found?
Why did they send Joseph Wilson to Niger to look into the Niger yellowcake allegations, when they all knew it was based on forgeries --B.S.?
WHY did they out Valerie Plame?
If their purpose was to punish her husband Wilson for his NYT article, why did they do TWO outings, the first of Plame (on 7/14/03), and then, six days later (7/22/03), the entire Brewster Jennings/CIA weapons monitoring program, putting all covert agents at great risk--and, not incidentally, compounding the risk of treason charges for many top Bushites?
Why did they go about it the way they did--contacting at least SIX reporters, circulating the Plame memo on AF-1, and putting almost all the top Bushites at great risk of treason charges?
Just to shut up a dissenting ex-diplomat?
Why, if Wilson's public dissent was such a shock--causing such conniption fits throughout the regime that they all broke the law and outed a CIA agent and an entire 20-year CIA project in a fit of pique--did the following take place (source: Joseph Wilson interview--Raw Story maybe? I can't recall.): He called her to get the regime to back off of the Niger allegation, and she replied, through intermediaries, that she wasn't interested in his information, but, if he was so concerned about the matter, WHY DIDN'T HE PUBLISH IT?
If they EXPECTED Wilson's article, why the rush to out Plame (in the week of 7/6/03 to 7/14/03)? Why so hurried? Why so panicky? Why involve SIX REPORTERS--all journalist witnesses to treason--in a crazy scattershot effort to find one who would be their patsy?
Why not find some other, slower, subtler, LESS WITNESSED way to punish Wilson?
Bush, Cheney, Libby, Rove, Powell, Rice, Bolton, Gonzales, and a half dozen others--all put at serious risk, to punish Joseph Wilson? For an opinion piece?
I think the answer to all these questions is that there was something far more serious at stake than a dissenting article--and that it was something UNEXPECTED, which made the outing of Valerie Plame and the disabling of the CIA weapons monitoring capability extremely urgent, and the real reason for the precipitous and foolishly hasty outings, and for the involvement of virtually the entire regime, may be found in this timeline:
Late May 2003: David Kelly, the Brits chief weapons expert, began whistleblowing anonymously to the BBC about the Brits' "sexed up" Iraq intel (two months after the invasion, which he had supported).
July 7, 2003: Kelly's bosses found out who the whistleblower was; he is interrogated at a "safe house," and Tony Blair is informed that Kelly "could say some uncomfortable things." Not HAD said. COULD say. (Hutton report.)
July 14, 2003: Plame outed (by Novak).
July 18, 2003: Kelly found dead, under highly suspicious circumstances; his office and computers searched.
July 22, 2003: The second outing, of the entire Brewster Jennings operation (also by Novak).
(Note: Wilson published his article on July 6.)
There were two news reports (that I know of) about covert U.S. arms shipments into Iraq, in March '03 (in the Pakistani and Iranian press,) both of them suspected of being efforts to plant WMDs in Iraq, one report by an Iraq Governing Council member in Basra, the other by a Pentagon whistleblower who had heard debriefs on a covert arms movement that met with "friendly fire."
David Kelly was in Iraq in spring '03, and had friends there. He would likely have heard of these reports, and very possibly investigated them. He was a highly reputed scientist and an honest man, by all reports; and highly experienced as an Iraq weapons inspector. If he found out that the Bushites were trying to PLANT nukes or other WMDs in Iraq, it would surely have angered him, and could be what turned him around about Iraq (and into a whistleblower).
Are we to think that the Bush Cartel, after priming the public to expect WMDs, was just sitting around HOPING that Judith Miller might find some? Not likely.
And what would mobilize the entire Bush regime into highly risky action to shut down the CIA weapons monitors (all those covert eyes and ears around upon WMDs around the world)?
I don't think it was Wilson's July 6 publication. I think it was a July 7 phone call from Tony Blair to AF-1 warning the Bushites that they had been found out.
Whatever plot they had going to "get" the CIA (with all this Niger yellowcake nonsense, and their opportunistic use of Wilson) got accelerated, and made urgent, by this new and unexpected information that an insider Brit (a whistleblower) was onto their darkest secret-- that they had shipped nukes or other WMDs into Iraq to be "found" by Judith Miller, and that the plot had been foiled.
Considering what they did next--activating all top Bushites, contacting at least six reporters, and getting Plame outed within seven days--they probably found out that Valerie Plame knew about it, too (and the outing was meant to terrorize her into silence), and then, after Kelly was killed (highly probable), and his files were searched--four days later--they outed the entire CIA operation, to silence and punish them all. Possibly they found evidence that the CIA had foiled their dirty little plot, and wanted to get at the covert network more certainly than with the Plame outing. It may also be--considering Kelly's fate--that he participated in foiling their plot.
David Kelly seemed caught off guard by his bosses finding out that he was the BBC whistleblower (circa June '03). He heard it on the grapevine, and then wrote them a letter saying it was him, which was followed by his interrogation (and a circus of publicity in England during which they outed his name to the press). He promised them he wasn't going to give away any state secrets, and thought that was an end of it. He was looking forward to his daughter's wedding, and returning to Iraq. He did have forebodings, however. On the day he died, he wrote an email his old friend Judith Miller--who had used him as a major quoted source in her book on germ warfare--warning her of the "many dark actors playing games." (--emails later released by his family, not by Miller.)
"Protecting" her sources, indeed. Did she rat on him to his bosses? That's what I suspect (if not worse).
If this scenario is more or less correct, David Kelly may have played a key role in spoiling the greatest moment in her fake journalism career: "finding" the phony WMDs that her buds Cheney and Rumsfeld had planted in Iraq, and announcing to the world that the slaughter of over 100,000 innocent Iraqis, and the torture of thousands, was now "justified."
Whatever the truth of Treasongate, I think that the coincidence of the Plame/Kelly dates is so provocative that the investigation into his death ought to be re-opened. He may be the person who gave our democracy a chance to be reborn, by preventing a phony Bush triumph in Iraq. A successful plant of WMDs would likely have sealed our fate as the subjects of tyranny.
We may owe him a lot.
<snip
|
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
