DU'ers please READ and discuss this is an interesting post by

[stop the bleeding]

Peace Patriot part of another discussion related to the whole Plamegate debacle

Why would Cheney send Wilson or the CIA on a wild goose to Niger,
to investigate an allegation that Cheney and other Bushites knew was a bogus, and based on forged documents?

Why would a discredited allegation based on crudely forged documents be placed in Bush's SOTU speech, after it had been taken out of a previous speech because it was known to be false?

Why, when Wilson called Condi Rice, to get the regime to back off of the Niger allegation, did she say, through intermediaries, that she was not interested in his information, but, if he was so concerned about the matter, why didn't he publish it? (Wilson interview.)

Why--given that she said this--does the reaction to the expected article seem so panicked and rushed, with Bushites contacting at least SIX reporters (six journalist witnesses to treason), circulating a top secret memo on AF-1 for all eyes to see, and putting many top Bushites, if not the whole regime, at great risk of treason charges, in order to "punish" Wilson for the EXPECTED article, by outing his CIA wife within a week of the article's publication, and then, four days later, outing, disabling and destroying the entire CIA weapons monitoring program (Brewster/Jennings), putting all of its covert agents and contacts at great risk of getting killed?

Why the full court press to do this? Why not just ignore Wilson's article, as they had all other dissent--for instance? Or just quietly destroy his bank credit, or something? What did they have to fear from the lapdog press anyway? Why not let it fade into the short-attention-span newstream? Why risk the entire regime over an article?

And why, after destroying his wife's career and putting her at great risk, compound the risk of treason charges by outing the entire CIA weapons monitoring program?

Why was there such a stupid cover story for all this--put out by Rove--that Wilson being married to a CIA covert weapons expert somehow discredits Wilson, in undertaking a weapons mission to Niger, when, in truth, it would seem to do the opposite--it would seem enhance his ability to carry out the mission? Did this cover story get garbled in the translation (because it went through so many people)? Were its purposes confused, hastily cobbled together--say, to point away from Cheney as the instigator of the Niger mission, and at the same time taint Wilson in some way? (--but how it taints Wilson is beyond me.)

Isn't this "master of P.R.," Karl Rove, capable of a better cover story than this?

Why were Judith Miller and Scooter Libby meeting about Wilson back in June 2003, before he published his article, in addition to their meetings on July 8 and 12? (Wilson article published July 6.)

Why did the Bushites prime the public to expect a find of WMDs in Iraq, and why did Donald Rumsfeld personally sign Judith Miller's "embed" contract to accompany the U.S. troops who were hunting for WMDs in Iraq--if they all knew there no WMDs in Iraq? Were they simply hoping that she might find some by chance?

What was Tony Blair informed of, on July 7, 2003, when those who had interrogated David Kelly (the Brits chief WMD expert) told Blair that Kelly "could say some uncomfortable things"? What were the "uncomfortable things" that Kelly "COULD say"? What ELSE did Kelly know beyond what he had been whistleblowing to the BBC about (the Brits "sexed up" Iraq WMD intel)? What caused such a panic among the Blairites, that they hunted him down within government, held him at a "safe house" and interrogated him for days, and then outed his name to the press, amidst a press frenzy, and sent him home without protection?

Why didn't Kelly's bosses or the Blairites provide Kelly with protection or surveillance, and, if they were watching him, after they sent him home, what was that surveillance doing while he bled to death all night out in the rain, near his home, from one slit wrist?

Is it just a coincidence that Kelly was found dead, under highly suspicious circumstances, four days after Plame was outed--or are the two events related?

Is it just a coincidence that Blair was told that Kelly "could say some uncomfortable things" on July 7, 2003, that the Plame memo got onto AF-1 and Miller met with Libby the next day (July 8), that Plame would be outed a week later, on July 14, that Kelly was found dead four days later, on July 18, and that, four days after that, the Bushites then outed the entire CIA WMD operation?

Busy couple of weeks in the skulduggery world.

Is it just a coincidence that Judith Miller, who was thickly involved in outing Plame, was also the person to whom David Kelly sent his last email, on the day he died, warning of the "many dark actors play games"?

Is it just happenstance that Miller, in writing Kelly's obit for the NYT, on July 21, 2003, failed to disclose her close connections to Kelly (she'd written a book with him--"Germs") and his rather newsworthy email? What "dark actors"? What did he mean? What was going on? (Not a clue from Judith.)

To answer all of these questions, think about this: The Bushites were trying to plant WMDs in Iraq, to be "found" by Judith Miller--a "find" that would make the CIA (who had objected to the Niger forgeries, and the war) look like fools--discredit them, and make them more vulnerable to purges by the Cheney/Rumsfeld neocons; a "find" that would justify the war, save Bush's and Blair's political skins, and rehabilitate Miller's journalism career with a triumphant "scoop" that would "prove" her right about Saddam's weapons.

And consider this, also, on spec: Their dirty, massively deceitful scheme to take the weapons into Iraq to be "found" got foiled. (Several news reports in Pakistan and Iran about this in March 2003--covert U.S. arms unloaded at Basra; covert U.S. arms convoy hit by '"friendly fire"). David Kelly found out about the Bushite plot to plant WMDs in Iraq (he was an experienced hand in Iraq), possibly supported foiling the plot, and/or knew something about CIA involvement in foiling it. (The CIA's B/J had a worldwide network of covert eyes and ears upon WMDs, 20 years in the making.) He did not intend to disclose it (several items of evidence on this point), but he couldn't be trusted; he was already whistleblowing. And it was so explosive, so dangerous, to the Bushites and the Blairites, that all the top Bushites got involved in immediately silencing, disabling and punishing Plame--taking careless, panicky, highly risky actions to do so---and, when they got corroboration of B/J/CIA involvement in foiling their plot (possibly from the search of Kelly's office and computers after his death), they silenced, disabled and punished the entire covert B/J network (some of them likely forever).

The set up of Wilson/CIA (with the Niger forgeries, and the wild goose chase to Niger) intersected with the Kelly story on July 7, probably with a phone call from Blair to Bush (on AF-1) warning the Bushites that Kelly knew. They had intended to tie Wilson to the CIA and prove the CIA to be fools and useless, when the planted weapons were "found." Now the opposite was happening--THEY were going to be the fools (not to mention criminal falsifiers), if this ever came out.

It had to be stopped. That's why the rush and panic, the cobbled together cover stories, the risks taken, the involvement of top people, and the seemingly cavalier attitude about treason (or getting charged with it--not that they would care about it on principle or out of patriotism). They were desperate--even possibly to the point of ordering the murder of an insider white guy--Kelly.

This wasn't just about punishing an ex-diplomat for his dissenting article, nor about Kelly's rather mild statements to the BBC. This was about something far worse. And the WMD-planting theory is a very good guess as to what it was, and solves many mysteries about Treasongate (or points to their solution).