Joe Wilson's Latest 15 Minutes
It has been a tough few weeks for the publicity-hound Iraq war critic Joseph Wilson and his ex-CIA agent wife Valerie Plame. First, Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald disclosed that Karl Rove, the man Wilson wanted "frog-marched out of the White House in handcuffs" for supposedly leaking Plame's identity to columnist Robert Novak, wouldn't be charged with anything. Fitzgerald's decision makes it extremely unlikely that anyone will be charged with the alleged "crime" that triggered his lengthy investigation. To make matters worse, Plame's deal with Crown Publishing for her memoirs, worth some $2.5 million, was dissolved without explanation from either party.
So late last week, the Wilsons filed a civil suit against several senior Bush administration officials. The lawsuit is a joke. But it provided the couple with another few minutes in the spotlight, and the news media with another opportunity to misreport the basic facts of this entire sorry episode.
In virtually every story about the case, there is a summary paragraph. And in virtually every story about the case, that summary paragraph is wrong. Most of them read like this, from an Associated Press story on July 14 by one Toni Locy:
The CIA had sent Wilson to Niger in early 2002 to determine whether there was any truth to reports that Iraq had made a deal to acquire yellowcake uranium from the government of Niger to make a nuclear weapon. Wilson discounted the reports, but the allegation that Iraq was trying to buy uranium from Africa ended up in President Bush's 2003 State of the Union address.
A Washington Post article tells us:
Despite Wilson's findings, Bush referred to the Niger uranium charges in his 2003 State of the Union speech outlining his reasons for going to war in March of that year.
You get the idea: Bush lied, people died.
We refer our colleagues once more to the Senate Intelligence Committee Report on the Iraq-Niger-Wilson affair. Wilson did not "discount" the reports of Iraqi uranium shopping when he was debriefed by the CIA about his trip. According to the Senate report (p. 46), a CIA reports officer gave Wilson's reporting a grade of "good." The officer "judged that the most important fact in the report was that the Nigerien officials admitted that the Iraqi delegation had traveled there in 1999, and that the Nigerien Prime Minister believed that the Iraqis were interested in uranium."
From Conclusion #13 of the Senate Report, we learn that "for most analysts, the information in the [Wilson] report lent more credibility to the original Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) reports on the uranium deal."
There's more. A month after Bush's 2003 State of the Union, the CIA was still defending Bush's statement. On February 27, 2003, the CIA responded to a letter from Senator Carl Levin asking for more information on "what the U.S. [intelligence community] knows about Saddam Hussein seeking significant quantities of uranium from Africa." The CIA said it had reporting to "suggest Iraq had attempted to acquire uranium from Niger."
And where did the U.S. government get the idea that Iraq was seeking uranium from Niger? Both from the original reports that led to Wilson's trip and--you guessed it--from "the CIA intelligence report on the former ambassador's trip to Niger."
Mark Lane Returns
Just when we thought that the CIA, ExxonMobil, Mossad, and the British Royal Family had finally gotten away with it, THE SCRAPBOOK learns that Mohamed Al-Fayed, the Egyptian-born proprietor of Harrod's and father of Princess Diana's last boyfriend, Dodi, has commissioned none other than attorney Mark Lane to reinvestigate the 1997 deaths of Diana and Dodi.
Clearly, Mr. Al-Fayed is serious. For in the people's republic of conspiracy theories, the 79-year-old Mr. Lane is a Founding Father. He is the author of Rush to Judgment, the 1965 bestseller that first claimed the Warren Commission covered up the truth about the Kennedy assassination (Lee Harvey Oswald was a patsy), and over the years, he has attached himself to the causes of Martin Luther King's murderer, James Earl Ray (another patsy), and the Rev. Jim Jones of Jonestown fame (not a patsy but, presumably, a much-misunderstood man). His labors on behalf of New Orleans District Attorney Jim Garrison inspired Oliver Stone's immortal JFK.
For the sentimental old SCRAPBOOK, the zenith of Lane's career in public service was the 1968 presidential election, when he was the vice-presidential candidate of the Peace and Freedom party. (*Who was his running mate? Answer in a moment.) Yet readers will note that Lane has not exactly been on the cutting edge of paranoia for the past few decades, which explains our pleasure at his reappearance in the news. Now, a new generation of conspiracy buffs, from Rep. Cynthia McKinney, D-Ga., to Sidney Blumenthal, to the bloggers on Daily Kos, may watch a master at the top of his form.
"I have met with Mr. Al-Fayed and reviewed some of the evidence he has uncovered," Lane told the New York Post last week. "My preliminary inquiry reveals that there are numerous and serious unanswered questions which I intend to pursue with my staff at Mr. Al-Fayed's request." Until, of course, Mr. Al-Fayed's checkbook is depleted. (*Answer: Dick Gregory.)
Times in Denial?
Despite the fizzle of the Joe Wilson leak investigation (see first item, above) New York Times website readers can still peruse the paper's interactive "Timeline of a Leak." Despondent editors have perhaps understandably lagged in updating the feature. "Current questions swirl around whether or not Karl Rove will be indicted," it helpfully tells us. No doubt more attention would have been paid if Rove had been indicted.
Another highlight from that timeline:
October 4, 2003. In a column on the Wilsons' political donations, columnist Robert Novak reveals that "Valerie E. Wilson identified herself as an 'analyst' with 'Brewster-Jennings and Associates'. No such firm is listed anywhere," potentially revealing a CIA front company.
Ah, yes-the good old days, when the New York Times was alarmed over national security secrets being blown.
Scoop Lives!
In the early 1970s, Sen. Henry "Scoop" Jackson of Washington co-founded the Coalition for a Democratic Majority, a group of hawkish Democrats who reached across party lines to promote a strong national defense in the face of Soviet expansionism. Today, "Scoop Jackson" Democrats like Sen. Joe Lieberman are increasingly rare, and increasingly abhorred by their own party. But in Europe, a Scoop revival may be stirring.
In Britain, a "bi-partisan group of progressives and democrats" have formed the Henry Jackson Society ( henryjacksonsociety.org) to advance the principle that "democratic governments should consider the internal character of foreign states when dealing with them." They have just released a new book we highly recommend, The British Moment: The Case for Democratic Geopolitics in the Twenty-First Century--"a response to the failure--on strategic as well as idealist grounds--of a generation of 'realist' policies." The book's authors recommend "for Britain--and its partners and allies--a foreign and security policy based on a 'democratic geopolitics', which breaks with repressive regimes, holds out to their peoples a better future." Hear, hear!
Now if only a Scoop revival would take hold among our Democratic friends here in the States.