Monday 23rd of October 2017

the fall gal...

plame

There are times when I have a little doubt in the half-nuts that serves me as brains. 

Spoon-fed by clever Dick, dirty Wolfo and devious Rummy, Bush, Blair and Howard may not have had any knowledge that the intelligence they were getting on Saddam’s WMD’s was FAKE. 

There is no two ways about it. The intelligence on the Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMDs) was fake. Totally fake. And Bush, Blair and Howard “bought it”. And they don’t have any regrets — and would do it (war) again, despite knowing the “intelligence was faulty”. This proves that the intelligence was fake.

So, how do we explore the “intelligence” relationships between Bush and the CIA, between Blair and MI6 — and between John Howard and ASIO? Here we have to consider that the DGSE (France) and the BND (Germany) were very suspicious about the findings of the CIA, MI6 and ASIO, as exposed in favour of war in the media, because they themselves had the same information THAT SADDAM DID NOT HAVE ANY WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION. Why thus was the “US/UK/Aust intelligence” fake? I use the word FAKE because thereafter the war against Saddam, the general attitude and US “investigations” of the governments — and of their lackeys in the media — was that the intelligence had made “mistakes” and had been “faulty”. In the UK, the Chilcot inquiry was a “condemning” whitewash of the same flaky paint in regard to the “flawed” intelligence.  These investigations of course were designed to stir the debate towards “bad” intelligence rather that decidedly “fake” intelligence. It’s part of the course. 

As mentioned on this site many times, espionage worth its salt is mostly designed to fabricate fake information in order to manipulate the mood of the masses, or deceive enemies, while secretly knowing what’s what in regard to balance (or imbalance thereof) of power — that is comparative military power. At present for example, the US Trump President is bagging North Korea, China, Iran, Venezuela in the same bag as to make us believe that Venezuela is about to invade the USA tomorrow. Blimey!... We better brush up on our Espãnola. The questions are: Is this war going to be a pushover or are we going to lose too many troops in the process? Are we going to loose our “moral” compass? How do we convince the masses about the necessity of war, when we know it’s a crock, a land-grab, an economic advantage, a private profit making venture?

There were quite a few telltale signs that Bush might have been misled by his own deceiver in chief, Vice-president Cheney. But was Bush such a complete idiot that when told obvious porkies he was unable to ask proper questions for himself? Would his dad and his family not tell him about the birds and the bees? 

Blair was far more clever that Bush, yet he deceitfully acted as if he was blind to the obvious. Howard had always been a devious liar and possibly wanted to be remembered as the little “Aussie” battler against evil... I don’t know if Howard cared if the intelligence was fake or not — as long as “we” were going to war. 

The truth is that Bush, Blair and Howard had to know there was no WMDs in Iraq before going to war. Their military commanders had to know. Under no circumstances could this alliance of the “willing” launch an attack against an enemy armed with powerful WMDs, described as super-evil to us by the willing media, the position of which WMDs, we were told, were never known, because Saddam kept moving them around... Warfare 101: you don’t attack an enemy you don’t know where his forces are, nor anything about the strength of his forces. That would be suicidal.

Following the war, The Senate Select Committee investigating the pre-war intelligence “failures” after the failure of finding ANY WMDs was set up to understand the “intelligence failure”. The words “intelligence failure” was being repeated ad nauseam in order to make sure we could not think of the possibility that the INTELLIGENCE WAS FAKE. It had to be “intelligence failure”...

It was ONLY after the 2004 Presidential elections that saw Bush returned as a victorious Emperor against evildom in Mesopotamia that Pat Roberts, the republican Chair of the Senate Select Committee said the Committee would start to “investigate the failures”, including the role of a Pentagon intelligence “shop” — the Office of Special Plans— the Iraqi exiled leader Ahmed Chalabi and the Iraqi National Congress that influenced policy makers’ “misjudgments and misstatements” about the WMDs in Iraq. 

In order to diminish the impact (read steer the investigation away from finding that the intelligence was FAKE to suit a warmongering President) of this charlatan committee investigation, Pat Roberts instructed the release of the findings on a piecemeal basis — findings that themselves mostly concentrated on exposing individual low-ranking personnel of the CIA who had found “nothing” except a few fake documents. This exposure of fall guys and gals was designed to shift the blame away from the “core philosophy” of the warmongers in the White House. Of course the media was blind as a bat with no radar and lapped up the individual “scandals” to publish as serious double-spreads about them as a magazine would show us the big new butt of Kim K.  The media had been swindled big and was prepared to be swindled. The media did not want to know the truth, because this it would have showed a media prepared to lie — as the media always is. The New York Times’ apology of sorts to its readers was not designed to show that the intelligence was FAKE, but that there had been “intelligence failures” and that the paper should have been more circumspect on the matter.

Of course, Pat Roberts was under constant relations with the office of the Vice-President, Cheney, to stall any investigation as to why the Bush administration used “flawed” intelligence to go to war. The new Chairman of the Committee in 2007, said that “it was not hearsay”. The Vice-President, Cheney, had regular meetings with the Republican staffers of the Committee to make sure the Bush administration was not investigated.

In the Senate Select Committee “investigations, one of the fall guys was a fall-gal. Valerie Plame Wilson. 

 

As chairman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, Sen. Pat Roberts’s (R-KS) duty is “to provide vigilant legislative oversight over the intelligence activities of the United States” and “to assure that such activities are in conformity with the Constitution and laws of the United States.” But on the most important intelligence issues facing Americans — such as the manipulation of Iraq intelligence, warrantless domestic spying, and torture — Roberts has transformed his committee into a “Senate Coverup Committee” for the Bush administration.

...

The Senate Select Committee on Intelligence released Phase I of its Iraq prewar intelligence report on July 9, 2004. The report found numerous failures in the intelligence-gathering and analysis process in the lead-up to the Iraq war. Roberts politicized the report by attacking Ambassador Joseph Wilson and by falsely asserting the report absolved the White House from charges of misusing prewar intelligence. After months of stonewalling, Nov. 14, 2005, was the negotiated deadline for the Senate Intelligence Committee to report on Phase II of its investigation into the administration’s use of prewar intelligence. More than three months later, the public still has not received a report. Roberts has impeded progress on the report and reneged on his pledge to complete Phase II. Below is a chronological breakdown of Roberts’s efforts to squash the report:

Roberts Politicized Phase I Report By Criticizing Joseph Wilson. In the additional views to the intelligence report, Roberts joined Sens. Kit Bond (R-MO) and Orrin Hatch (R-UT) to veer away from a meaningful investigation into prewar intelligence, and instead devoting over two pages to criticism of Joe Wilson. They concluded, “The plan to send the former ambassador to Niger was suggested by the former ambassador’s wife, a CIA employee.” “Rather than speaking publicly about his actual experiences during his inquiry of the Niger issue”¦the former ambassador seems to have included information he learned from press accounts.” [Additional Views of Roberts, Bond, and Hatch]

Read more:

https://thinkprogress.org/sen-pat-roberts-r-ks-chairman-of-the-senate-co...

 

Here one has to know that BEFORE GOING TO WAR, Ambassador Joseph Wilson had shown without doubt that the documents used by the Bush administration to tell the world that Saddam was buying Uranium were FAKE DOCUMENTS. The press glossed over this quickly, because as punishment for having exposed this FAKERY, Joseph Wilson’s Wife was exposed BY THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION as a CIA spy. Here the idea from the administration was to quickly create a diversion for the media to publish serious double-spreads about her — a beautiful clever blonde — as a magazine would show us the big new butt of Kim K. It worked. The origins of the FAKE documents affair was never investigated, but Valerie took a shot from both barrels and could never work again for the CIA.

A movie was made but basically the affair on screen might have got three and a half stars, but then was forgotten as a ONE-OFF when the whole of the “intelligence” on Saddam’s WMDs had been PURE manufactured DECEPTION from the start. 

This fact would not get any traction in the MMMS (mediocre mass media de shits) nor the MMMMM (mediocre Murdoch mass media de mierda) because the issue would have exposed the MMMS as pissweak and the MMMMM as colluding with the Bush administration.

Why should we still harp on this old story? Well, if you are a young person today, you should know that this lie about Saddam has shaped the political landscape of today. Administrations lied, lie and will lie — not to protect you — but to make sure some people profit from wars —illegal wars. The moral compass has long been broken. We need to repair it.

Gus Leonisky

Your local expert on governmental deceit

 

dream gal, back in 2013...

 

Valerie Plame Wilson was an undercover operative in the CIA's counter-proliferation division. That line of work is also known as "spying," and in that capacity she made covert efforts to delay, deter and thwart rogue states and others from obtaining nuclear weapons. She performed such work for two decades, until her career was effectively ended after Washington Post columnist Robert Novak revealed her identity in a July 2003 column.

The fallout from "Plamegate" further divided an already partisan Washington, as accusations flew that the unwelcome revelation was made for political reasons (to embarrass or discredit her husband, Joe Wilson, a former U.S. ambassador to two African nations, who had just penned a New York Times op-ed piece casting doubt on the weapons of mass destruction narrative that had justified the Bush administration's Iraq War).

Now Plame is combating fallout of a different kind. As a "movement leader" of Global Zero -- an initiative to completely dismantle all of the world's nuclear weapons -- Plame is helping to kick off a high-profile campaign this week. This initial effort will culminate on April 5, a date that marks the four-year anniversary of a speech that President Barack Obama made in Prague, in which he "state[d] clearly and with conviction America's commitment to seek the peace and security of a world without nuclear weapons."

Plame stopped by The Huffington Post offices in New York to talk about the Global Zero initiative.

Huffington Post: What are the specific details of Global Zero's proposal to completely dismantle all nuclear weapons by 2030?

Plame: What we're doing in launching this campaign this week, is taking two steps:

One, we're calling on President Obama to further reduce the nuclear arsenals in the U.S. and Russia. We've made some good beginnings with the New Start Treaty, but a lot more can be done. And that was backed up by the Cartwright report. General Cartwright, former vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, who along with Chuck Hagel [current U.S. secretary of Defense] was an author, as was Thomas Pickering [former U.S. ambassador to the U.N.]. They released this report last year, testified before Congress, saying that we can cut to below 900 nuclear warheads, and still in no way have a deleterious effect on our national security.

The next really historic step is urging President Obama to call together the nuclear powers and hold international negotiations to reduce nuclear arms. That's never been done. But nuclear weapons are a global problem and it has to be solved globally. We in no way are naive to think that just because Russia and the United States agree to reduce their arsenals, that everyone else will fall in line. "Gee, I didn't think of that -- what a great idea!" But it's a great start.

 

 

read more:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com.au/entry/valerie-plame-nuclear-weapons_n_2...

 

In regard to casting doubt by her husband, the DOCUMENTS WERE FAKES... NO DOUBT. We also know that Obama was bullshitting in Prague and has been pushing for one trillion dollar to "modernise" the US nuclear weapon program....

the same mistake... AND the same lies...

In 2003, the United States initiated perhaps the greatest strategic disaster in US history by diverting attention from a necessary war in Afghanistan to an unnecessary war in Iraq. The Iraq war resulted in hundreds of thousands dead and wounded, untold economic catastrophe, states in the Middle East in complete ruin, and the rise of Isis – all while the effort to go after terrorists in Afghanistan languished.

President Donald Trump’s first speech before the United Nations general assembly this week made clear that Trump wants to take America down a similar path by diverting much-needed attention from North Korea to starting an unnecessary conflict with Iran.

If the United States and the world cannot convince Trump to support the Iran nuclear deal and instead focus on real problems, America may once again plunge into a violent disaster in the Middle East, and in the process damage efforts to deal with a country that already has nuclear weapons.

The threat from North Korea is real, and Trump used his speech to outline the need for an international pressure campaign against Kim Jong-un. There is little disagreement on the need for a tough stance against North Korea, as evidenced by the UN security council’s recent unanimous vote to impose new sanctions.

But Trump is having a difficult time implementing a coherent strategy on North Korea. He has picked a fight with America’s South Korean ally, whose support is essential. He frequently hurls hyperbolic rhetoric, raising the chances of miscalculation that could lead to conflict. And he talks as though war is inevitable, a theme he reiterated before the world’s leaders when he said, “Rocket Man [Kim Jong-un] is on a suicide mission for himself and his regime.”

read more:

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/sep/20/trump-george-w-bus...

 

Read from top...

flatly untrue...

When the Washington Post published an editorial in 2006, "End of an Affair", Plame described it as untrue:

 

... "I suddenly understood what it must have felt like to live in the Soviet Union and have only the state propaganda entity, Pravda, as the source of news about the world. One didn't always agree with an editorial, but there was an understanding that it should be grounded in reality-based facts. The Post's claim that Joe was the one responsible for the end of my career and that his report about Niger had been debunked were flatly untrue..."

 

The Washington Post:

 

 

It follows that one of the most sensational charges leveled against the Bush White House -- that it orchestrated the leak of Ms. Plame's identity to ruin her career and thus punish Mr. Wilson -- is untrue. The partisan clamor that followed the raising of that allegation by Mr. Wilson in the summer of 2003 led to the appointment of a special prosecutor, a costly and prolonged investigation, and the indictment of Vice President Cheney's chief of staff, I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, on charges of perjury. All of that might have been avoided had Mr. Armitage's identity been known three years ago.

That's not to say that Mr. Libby and other White House officials are blameless. As prosecutor Patrick J. Fitzgerald has reported, when Mr. Wilson charged that intelligence about Iraq had been twisted to make a case for war, Mr. Libby and Mr. Cheney reacted by inquiring about Ms. Plame's role in recommending Mr. Wilson for a CIA-sponsored trip to Niger, where he investigated reports that Iraq had sought to purchase uranium. Mr. Libby then allegedly disclosed Ms. Plame's identity to journalists and lied to a grand jury when he said he had learned of her identity from one of those reporters. Mr. Libby and his boss, Mr. Cheney, were trying to discredit Mr. Wilson; if Mr. Fitzgerald's account is correct, they were careless about handling information that was classified.

Nevertheless, it now appears that the person most responsible for the end of Ms. Plame's CIA career is Mr. Wilson. Mr. Wilson chose to go public with an explosive charge, claiming -- falsely, as it turned out -- that he had debunked reports of Iraqi uranium-shopping in Niger and that his report had circulated to senior administration officials. He ought to have expected that both those officials and journalists such as Mr. Novak would ask why a retired ambassador would have been sent on such a mission and that the answer would point to his wife. He diverted responsibility from himself and his false charges by claiming that President Bush's closest aides had engaged in an illegal conspiracy. It's unfortunate that so many people took him seriously.

 

read more:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/08/31/AR200608...

 

 

Valerie Plame Wilson WAS FURIOUS about this editorial.

 

See also an "apology" by the NYT:

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/05/26/world/from-the-editors-the-times-and-i...

 

But we have found a number of instances of coverage that was not as rigorous as it should have been. In some cases, information that was controversial then, and seems questionable now, was insufficiently qualified or allowed to stand unchallenged. Looking back, we wish we had been more aggressive in re-examining the claims as new evidence emerged -- or failed to emerge.


As Gus calls this : a bullshit cope-out

see also:

http://www.yourdemocracy.net.au/drupal/node/11276

 

memoirs, in collusion...

Have you ever wondered why Blair Howard and Bush have ALL written their "autobiography"?... One could suspect a collusion. And there is. It is a well orchestrated way to frame the debate about the Iraq war in a sea of other titillating subjects — including the foetus of George W Bush's unborn sibling his mother kept in a pickle jar or the sexual celebration of Blair's political victory, with Cherie. Like in a well tuned orchestra, Blair, Howard and Bush, all play an Iraq tune, with counterpoints and slightly different notes BUT IN HARMONY... The theme tune of the song is that "Saddam deserved to be taken out" and the WORLD IS BETTER FOR IT. Conspiracy? You bet.

They have the knack to absolved themselves from the most heinous crime: an illegal war... And the worst part is that the media at large is letting them get away with it...

So far I haven't seen any serious journalists  — even the small gang of renegades, Fisk, Loyd, Pilger, whose works are sharp but not penetrating the main media stream and even Gore Vidal — explain like I have done here that the way the US, the UK and Australia attacked Iraq indicates that the weapons of mass destruction was a crock. My major premise as mentioned several times on this site, is that one does not attack a country that one claims to have strong armament when one knows zip about the position of such strong armament... 

We also knew that Bush, Blair and Howard were lying before going to war against Iraq. The difficult part is to irrefutably prove this fact with proper DOCUMENTATION, and second, our debate "has been (still is)" framed by the mantra that Saddam was not a very nice fellow and that "we should be grateful" that Bush, Blair and Howard took him out. 

Bollocks. The act is a war crime.

remembering when...