Nov 12 2005

Plame Strange – Q&A

Published by at 8:15 pm under All General Discussions,Plame Game

The final portion of this three part post is the Q&A session for the EPIC Forum on Iraq held in June 2003. The Q&A session was for Ray McGovern and Joe Wilson and their discussions I posted in previously. Below I post the essence of the question and the essence of the response if germane to current day aspects of this issue.

Wilson on Cash Payments for every Iraqi: yes, flood the place with cash and goods (make dependents). Long term is tied to how things work with the oil revenues.

McGovern on middle class America as the foundation of democracy: Only an informed middle class can be the basis of a democracy and the American middle class is ‘not informed’ (i.e., we are ignorant). Blames Fox News for the fact America has passed these liberals by. The liberals need to fight the ’empire’ for the poor uninformed masses. Wilson goes onto predict the American people will lose heart in 6-7 months (Christmas 2003) and the polls will show America will want to bring the troops home when they will most need to stay. Boy, is Wilson going to regret those words!

Wilson on whether his proposals could achieve what he hopes (which Bush did): Creating a constituency will be difficult in his opinion. He does say we have to see this through to the end and lean on all parties in the Israeli peace process. Glad to see Wilson is behind the Bush approach.

McGovern on people stepping forward when the ‘books are being cooked’ would only open people up to oppression under the patriot act (can we say ‘paranoid’?). Ray says terrorism will have won (being the Bushes). He then goes on to explain how is secretary’s husband told her not to get between Ray and a window (like mad Ray mattered in this country?). Did I mention paranoid? He discusses tapping his phone and being arrested like this is the Soviet Union. Joe Wilson feels the same way (‘screw them if they cannot take a joke).

Wilson on logical flaws regarding rationale for going into Iraq, unless you look at the world domination theory of US military from Russia to Egypt (so much fear!). Wilson says this is all for Israeli security. Our troops died for Sharon. What a schmuck. He believes in the imperial ambition garbage.

Ray on question from Federal worker on the change of civil service laws being changes the same as those retained for Homeland defense and how to synopsize the liberal paranoia – see below.

On more leaking and what will it take to ‘wake up’ America to these fears! (In my case, it would require a double lobotomy). Ray looks to the press interest in Bush lies – like the forgery.

OK – here is the big nugget: Starting just around 12:30 into this 15 minute segment Wilson points out the administration was careful to only talk about uranium with respect to Africa initially. he says that until the story turned to Niger, and then the Niger angle was denied by state, it was difficult to make the case that the march to war was built on lies. Wilson admits, in his own words, that to attack Bush’s policies required the story to be about Niger and not Africa. Why? Well, because the forgery angle only applies to Niger, and the broader Africa angle has more substantiating intel and history.

Wilson also clearly states that people on the inside (CIA and others against the war in Iraq) could easily make the case if they could have been given voice. Which is what Joe Wilson would be doing in a few short days in the NY Times Op-Ed pages.

Wilson says it is how the Niger information was handled in the government that is critical to focus on. He claims the rumor (or RUMINT) was emphasized while the debunking (determining there were forgeries) was set aside. Howeverm we now know the forgeries were actually lost or hidden from site during this period by Val’s group in the CIA. So yes, it is important to focus on this aspect of the story. But back in 2003, what Wilson (and Ray McGovern) wanted to convey was the fact the forgeries were outright dismissed!

He goes on to say the story will have legs only if the press can make a profit, and to do that they need to make a scandal out of this issue. The guy is apparently telegraphing exactly what his little band of rogue agents planned. He is trying to lead the press and media to follow him in order to make a splash. He says “it would be great” if the press did make a scandal of this issue and he notes people are talking about the “I” word (impeachment).

Finally, Wilson also tips his partisan and political hand on the patronage subject. He clearly says Bush patronage is OK because “we can throw all those bums out when we get back into office”. This is a great piece of tape because at the time he said this he was covertly working for the Kerry campaign. I was always hoping there would be a firm link between Wilson and Kerry and now we have one in his own words. Wilson is pretending to be some whistle blower taking on the establishment. But he (we) was looking for a cabinet level job. Unless he is prone to use the imperial ‘we’!

4 responses so far

4 Responses to “Plame Strange – Q&A”

  1. mary mapes says:


    That was a good catch there on the end. He was so gunning for an appointment, you could just.

    This started out as a comment to you and when it just got too dang long, I decided to do a one post blog here:

    this is really from reading you and mac, It is my theory of how things went…Also AJ — I your first post on this of the night I think you got something and didn’t realize you did!

    One last thing, here is Brit Hume taking Larry C. Johnson to task (similar to yours, you being the first),2933,175227,00.html

  2. MaidMarion says:

    AJ/Mary Mapes,

    Just wanted to make sure you see my post under “Rome + Forgeries = Valerie Plame?” regarding my new theory on the original intent of the Niger forgery.

  3. […] All well and good. But then the Wilsons wanted to join the Kerry campaign and get back into power. Joe said himself it would take a major scandal to unseat Bush and get Kerry in. He said this days before his Op-Ed came out. The only problem was the scandal was supposed to be about Niger forgeries. It turned out to be about Valerie instead. That led to the Senate investigation the debunked any forgery connections, and which exposed the 1999 trip to Niger for Valerie. That was the mistake. To put a false story on top of a covert story. […]

  4. […] (4) Wilson, in his own words, told a group of people only days before his NY Times Op-Ed piece ran in July 2003 that the only way the story can stop Bush’s re-election is for a scandal to hit the news media. Obviously it doesn’t matter if the scandal is just Niger forgeries, it could additionally include the outing of a CIA agent ready to retire. […]