Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
100 words for 100 days: submit your 100 word essay and get published on AlterNet
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement

The Media's Roving Eye

By Tom Engelhardt, Tomdispatch.com. Posted July 29, 2005.


Connect some recent media 'dots' to a few forgotten ones and you have framework for understanding the Plame case.
Advertisement

Oh what a tangled web we weave
When we first practice to deceive?

I've written regularly about the media's inability to connect the dots. The other day a reporter out in the far-flung reaches of our imperium wrote in to Tomdispatch pointing to a front-paged dot that no one -- myself included -- had bothered to pay much attention to or connect to anything at all. In the July 21st Washington Post, Walter Pincus and Jim VandeHei wrote a piece, Plame's Identity Marked as Secret, describing a memo from the State Department's intelligence experts that Secretary of State Colin Powell had with him on a 5-day trip to Africa he took with the President and his aides that began on July 7, 2003.

This was only a day after former Ambassador Joseph Wilson published What I Didn't Find in Africa on the op-ed page of the New York Times, exposing the Bush administration's Niger uranium lie. ("Based on my experience with the administration in the months leading up to the war, I have little choice but to conclude that some of the intelligence related to Iraq's nuclear weapons program was twisted to exaggerate the Iraqi threat."); only four days before Time magazine's Matt Cooper had that conversation "on double super secret background" with Karl Rove and was told that "wilson's wife? apparently works at the agency on wmd"; only five days before CIA Director George Tenet took a provisional fall for the administration for letting those "16 words" that started the whole thing on Saddam's supposed search for African uranium for his supposed atomic program into the 2003 State of the Union Address the previous January; only seven days before Robert Novak wrote his now infamous Mission to Niger column outing Joe Wilson's wife as a CIA agent. ("Wilson never worked for the CIA, but his wife, Valerie Plame, is an Agency operative on weapons of mass destruction. Two senior administration officials told me Wilson's wife suggested sending him to Niger to investigate the Italian report.")

What an action-packed week for the White House and its operatives. The Pincus/VandeHei piece in the Post focused on the fact that Plame was identified by name in the secret State Department memo Powell had with him on Air Force One. They wrote that the memo "contained information about CIA officer Valerie Plame in a paragraph marked ?(S)' for secret, a clear indication that any Bush administration official who read it should have been aware the information was classified, according to current and former government officials." The rest of the piece went on to discuss who knew what about Plame -- with the exception of a single paragraph which indicated that Plame was the least of what the memo was about:

"Almost all of the memo is devoted to describing why State Department intelligence experts did not believe claims that Saddam Hussein had in the recent past sought to purchase uranium from Niger. Only two sentences in the seven-sentence paragraph mention Wilson's wife."

"Why State Department intelligence experts did not believe the claims"? So on Air Force One that July 7 was clear and present evidence not just about Valerie Plame's identity, but that one set of government intelligence experts was ready and willing to debunk the President's sixteen-word claim of the previous January (and so implicitly undermine the administration's whole case for a Saddamist nuclear arsenal in the making). It's worth reminding ourselves that they were hardly the first experts to do so. In the pre-war months, when the documents which supposedly supported the Niger uranium claim first surfaced, they proved so crudely and poorly forged that it took experts at the International Atomic Energy Agency only an afternoon, and nothing more complicated than Google.com, to utterly discredit them. The Director-General of the IAEA, Mohamed El Baradei, would inform the UN on March 7, 2003 that they were frauds (though being a foreigner, representing an international agency that seemed to stand in the administration's path to a much-wanted war, he was thoroughly disparaged and ignored).

Democratic Congressman Henry Waxman, the ranking minority member of the Committee on Government Reform, denounced the crude forgeries in an open letter to the President on that March 17, just days before the invasion of Iraq was launched, though his letter was totally ignored by the administration and the media. ("In the last ten days, however, it has become incontrovertibly clear," he wrote, "that a key piece of evidence you and other Administration officials have cited regarding Iraq's efforts to obtain nuclear weapons is a hoax. What's more, the Central Intelligence Agency questioned the veracity of the evidence at the same time you and other Administration officials were citing it in public statements. This is a breach of the highest order, and the American people are entitled to know how it happened.")


Digg!

Tom Engelhardt, editor of Tomdispatch.com, is co-founder of the American Empire Project and author of "The End of Victory Culture."

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »

Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Another dot to connect
Posted by: jheast on Jul 29, 2005 6:22 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
One more item not included in this article is that Alberto Gonzales (a probable future Supreme Court nominee and current Attorney General) admitted that nearly two years ago, he sat on the knowledge that the Justice Department had launched a criminal investigation.

Read MSNBC Countdown story at: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8727034

Some text follows: "Gonzales, who was a White House counsel in 2003, said when he was first informed about the investigation into the leak by the Justice Department he waited roughly 12 hours before informing the White House.

This time gap raises questions about whether Gonzales or Andrew Card contacted Karl Rove that night to possibly begin dumping evidence. Anybody who was worried about e-mails had a lot of time to word-search it and delete it. We also know there’s a lot of evidence that did get through. They were getting rid of documents, but some of it still got through, at least from what has been leaked from the grand jury investigation about e-mails between Karl Rove and Vice President Cheney’s chief of staff, Scooter Libby."

I was old enough during Watergate to understand the issue. This administration makes Nixon look like a fairy princess. Further, if Republican's witch hunt of Bill Clinton's lie about consensual sex was really about "the rule of law", they need to explain why Bush lies that have killed thousands of innocent people are not.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Another dot to connect Posted by: trutex
TotoLander
Posted by: michele0726 on Jul 29, 2005 6:23 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Could this finally be the light at the end of the tunnel??? Could some of the administration's lies and manipulations be exposed???? One can only hope, and I do.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Another Dot?
Posted by: spaghetti happens on Jul 29, 2005 6:48 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Seems to me there's one more element in this conspiracy that's worth pondering.

"And then [Bush] and his aides boarded the plane and, with Secretary of State Colin Powell having that State Department document in hand, they -- and Rove and Libby back in Washington -- evidently began furiously to plan for payback."

If Rove and Libby weren't on the plane and therefore could not have read the memo themselves, who among those who were on the plane and who did read it gave them the information about Plame?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Another Dot? Posted by: sgammato
» RE: Another Dot? Posted by: Jersey Devil
vote the rascals out
Posted by: kevo on Jul 29, 2005 7:09 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
As our collective wisdom grows in regard to this abuse of executive power, thanks to the few journalists who can honestly convey the "dots" and have continued to do so, we need to turn our attention to the fact that this Republican congress has yet to invoke its oversight powers to check this administration's abuses. If Republican congressional leaders continue to turn their deaf ears, roll their blind eyes, and twist their rationales, I say let the backlash continue and vote the rascals out in '06 and then in '08. I'm in agreement, when it comes to corrupt unAmerican values, It's the War Stupid! Our Taxes are becoming Haliburton's profit margin.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: vote the rascals out Posted by: Pepper
» RE: vote the rascals out Posted by: monkeywrench
» RE: vote the rascals out Posted by: diof09
Isn't treason a capital crime?
Posted by: kirkmuse on Jul 29, 2005 9:32 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I submit that Karl Rove's actions were not only dangerous to our national security--his actions were blatant acts of treason!

Where is the outrage that the President's closest political adviser exposed our network of foreign informants and their families to capture, torture and death?

Where is the outrage that Karl Rove has prevented
possible future spies and informants from ever working with our Central Intelligence Agency?

Where is the outrage that Karl Rove has effectively neutralized our Central Intelligence Agency with his acts of treason?

Isn't treason a capital crime? Why is there no discussion about how we should execute Karl Rove after he is tried and convicted of treason?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Another dot
Posted by: kmj on Jul 29, 2005 9:58 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It is mere speculation on my part, but Bush could have made his initial "fire anyone involved in the leak" statement because he asked around and was lied to by those involved.

Then he had to modify his statement to "fire anyone convicted of a crime" after learning that Rove was involved, because Rove just might know enough to bring down the President if the President happens to alienate Rove.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Journalists! Keep connecting the dots!
Posted by: mrsmagoo on Jul 29, 2005 10:43 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Now if we could only get the media to keep connecting the dots and keep it in the FOREFRONT where it belongs. It didn't take long for the Space Shuttle to take over the front page of our newspapers and take over as the top story in the so-called news reports on television. Journalists! Keep connecting the dots and make sure they don't fade away!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

cjons
Posted by: cjons on Jul 29, 2005 12:57 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
re. "At the time, Tenet's strange "confession" seemed to me to radiate an undertone of threat -- to the administration."
An issue I haven't seen addressed is the Bush Administration's complete revamping of national security agencies, giving the president more power to control national security information and to operate under the radar.
Many experienced agents were unceremonilously released from service under G.W., taking with them the experience, background information, the agency connections and the access to past, present and future information needed to connect the dots. Just one more safeguard for the neocons to rewrite history.
Classification of as much information as possible, with extraordinary powers of the Patriot Act further block detection. Classified records of the Reagan and G.H.W. Bush Administrations cover key evidence linking players in Iran-Contra to people and activities still in use today.
No wonder Tenet and the FBI may have tried to protect themselves. G.H.W. 's term as director of the CIA gave Bushco inside knowledge of the agency operations. What don't the neocons have to operate independently in their own best interests?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Project for a New American Century
Posted by: gimletblue on Jul 29, 2005 3:25 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This is located at PNAC's website. It's dated 1998, urging Clinton to go to war with Iraq, signed by, among others, Rumsfeld.


January 26, 1998

The Honorable William J. Clinton
President of the United States
Washington, DC

Dear Mr. President:

We are writing you because we are convinced that current American policy toward Iraq is not succeeding, and that we may soon face a threat in the Middle East more serious than any we have known since the end of the Cold War. In your upcoming State of the Union Address, you have an opportunity to chart a clear and determined course for meeting this threat. We urge you to seize that opportunity, and to enunciate a new strategy that would secure the interests of the U.S. and our friends and allies around the world. That strategy should aim, above all, at the removal of Saddam Hussein’s regime from power. We stand ready to offer our full support in this difficult but necessary endeavor.

The policy of “containment” of Saddam Hussein has been steadily eroding over the past several months. As recent events have demonstrated, we can no longer depend on our partners in the Gulf War coalition to continue to uphold the sanctions or to punish Saddam when he blocks or evades UN inspections. Our ability to ensure that Saddam Hussein is not producing weapons of mass destruction, therefore, has substantially diminished. Even if full inspections were eventually to resume, which now seems highly unlikely, experience has shown that it is difficult if not impossible to monitor Iraq’s chemical and biological weapons production. The lengthy period during which the inspectors will have been unable to enter many Iraqi facilities has made it even less likely that they will be able to uncover all of Saddam’s secrets. As a result, in the not-too-distant future we will be unable to determine with any reasonable level of confidence whether Iraq does or does not possess such weapons.

--------- (missing content)

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]