544 Camp Street

{1} "The estimate concludes that the radical Islamic movement has expanded from a core of Qaeda operatives and affiliated groups to a new class of 'self-generating' cells inspired by Al Qaeda's leadership but without any direct connection to Osama bin Laden or his top lietenants."
-- Mark Mazzetti; Spy Agencies Say Iraq War Worsens Terror Threat; NY Times; 9-24-06

The reports about the increased threats caused by the Bush/Cheney invasion of Iraq expose the lies of the administration in significant ways. The National Intelligence Estimate that Mazzetti and others are reporting on "represents a consensus view of the 16 disparate spy services" of the federal government. This NIE, titled "Trends in Global Terrorism: Implications for the United States," notes that the war in Iraq is serving as a training ground for militants who may return to their countries of origin, thus "exacerbating domestic conflicts or formenting radical ideologies."

Mazzetti also reports that in recent months, a number of senior intelligence officers are using information from the NIE in public speeches. There are, of course, some who will demand that this report indicates that the country needs to follow the administration's policies in order to be safe. But there is a growing trend in which military and other intelligence officers are attempting to communicate a very different message to the American public.

An interesting example of this can be found in the book "Enemies," by Bill Gertz. The Washington Monthly has called Gertz "legendary among national security reporters" because of his unique access to US intelligence agencies. The book "Enemies" includes a number of previously unpublished classified documents, as well as interviews with senior intelligence officials, that examine the issue of espionage.

"Spying" isn't new in the United States. It has been an issue since the Revolutionary War. It isn't an issue that can be blamed entirely on the Bush-Cheney administration. But it is important to consider it in relationship to the NIE, and to consider how "self-generating" intelligence cells within the administration have put the nation at risk.


{2} "One U.S. official said the FBI had unconfirmed information that Mr. Feith supplied information to Israel in the 1980s. However, the officials declined to provide further information citing the ongoing investigation. It could not be learned whether arrests are expected in the case."
-- Bill Gertz; Pentagon aide draws scrutiny from FBI; The Washington Times; 8-28-04

In this 8-28-04 article, Bill Gertz was reporting on what has become known as the "neocon/AIPAC espionage scandal." The FBI was investigating a senior Pentagon official who was suspected of passing a draft presidential directive that concerned US policy towards Iran, to a couple people who were employed by a private group, who then passed it on to a foreign intelligence officer. Gertz noted that "the suspected mole works in the office of Douglas Feith, the undersecretary of defense for policy who is considered one of the top three officials in the Pentagon." The two men from AIPAC are presently waiting to go on trial for their role in coordinating the effort to pass highly classified information to the foreign intelligence agent.

On 8-31-04, The Boston Globe's Bryan Bender reported that there was a second probe of the Pentagon, relating to the "self-generating" intelligence cells that Feith oversaw. Bender noted that the "Senate Intelligence and House Judiciary Committee staff members say inquiries into the Near East and South Asia Affairs division have found preliminary evidence that some officials gathered questionable information on weapons of mass destruction from exiles such as Ahmed Chalabi without proper authorization, which helped build President Bush's case for an invasion last year. The investigators are also looking into a more serious concern: whether the office engaged in illegal activity by holding unauthorized meetings with foreign nationals to destabilize Syria and Iran....said one senior congressional investigator who has longtime experience in intelligence oversight."

The offices being investigated were run by William Luti, the former Navy captain who served as an adviser to Newt Gingrich when he was the Speaker of the House, and Douglas Feith. Luti, of course, was identified by Seymour Hersch in his classic 2003 New Yorker article as running "a separate intelligence unit .... in the Pentagon's policy office," which "stovepiped" intelligence to the Office of the Vice President. Luti's Office of Special Plans, as Joseph Wilson noted, short-circuited the established intelligence community. When we consider that Newt Gingrich himself has been identified as being one of the heads of the OVP/WHIG meetings that were aimed at doing a "work up" on Ambassador Wilson, the overlapping operations of these self-generating intelligence cells becomes apparent.

Bender identifies another intell-cell, the "now defunct Policy Counterterrorism Coordination Group," which was set up to identify the links between al Qaeda and state sponsors including, of course, Iraq. The neoconservatives claimed that the OSP and PCCG never gathered intelligence, but rather limited their efforts to reevaluating previous findings. But this was exposed as untrue when it was found that several Pentagon officials had held meetings with foreign intelligence agents, including Ahmed Chalabi, Manucher Ghorbanifar, and Imad el Hage.


{3} " 'People are concerned about covert action being conducted by a policy office with no legal mandate to do so,' said one Democratic official involved in the Judiciary Committee inquiry. 'If the Senate and House intelligence committees in their review only look at the Chalabi relationship but don't look at the office's role in what was in effect covert action to explore regime change in the entire arc of the Middle East, then their inquiry will be a joke'."
-- Bryan Bender; 2nd probe at Pentagon examines actions in Iraq; Boston Globe; 8-31-04

Larry Franklin, the Pentagon official who passed the intelligence reports to the AIPAC officials, who passed the information on to a foreign intelligence agent, was also involved in other illegal activities. Franklin and Harold Rhode met secretly with Ghorbanifar, the arms dealer from the Iran-Contra scandals, in Italy and France. Ghorbanifar has said the meetings were held to discuss efforts to destabilize Iran.

The second meeting was not authorized by the Pentagon. It reportedly involved discussions about an exchange of money between the US officials and Iranians, including Mujahedin-e Khalq. This group, which was advocating regime change in Iran, is recognized by the US State Department as a terrorist organization.

Bender reported that another Near East official, F. Michael Maloof, was being investigated for having engaged in back-channel efforts to destabilize Syria. Maloof was suspected of coordinating efforts with Lebanese-American weapons runner Imad el Hage, and with hard-line former Lebanese general Michel Aoun. Maloof's security clearance was reportedly stripped in 2003, when a handgun registered in his name was found in Hage's possession.

Two fascinating reports on "War and Piece: International News & Commentary" were posted by Laura Rozen on August 27 and 31, 2004. In the second one, she wrote, "What's at issue here? Two things: Whether these alleged Feith office back channels were authorized or not by the administration; and secondly, whether they were not just about intelligence gathering [which would be problematic in and of itself], but if they had aspirations to be operational."

Rozen makes reference to a 10-14-03 Knight Ridder article by Jonathan Landay and Warren Strobel that documented that Feith's office had requested that money be paid to Ghorbanifar. They quote a classified message from Harold Rhode, a Farsi-speaking official from the Pentagon's Office of Net Assessments, who wrote that he had "made contact with Iranian intelligence officers who anticipate possible regime change in Iran and want to establish contact with the United States government. ... A sizable financial interest is required ..."

Reportedly, when Colin Powell and George Tenet found out about this, they immediately complained to Donald Rumsfeld. Powell was told that deputy national security advisor Stephen Hadley had been informed, and had prohibited further contacts between the Pentagon cells and the Iranians. Still, Franklin and Rhode met secretly with the Iranian intelligence agent in Paris a few months later.


{4} "So far, the commentariat and blogosphere (both left and right sides) have been curiously quiet about the news that Pentagon official Larry Franklin was arrested for improperly passing classified information to AIPAC. Last summer, you may recall, there was quite a bit of analysis -- from colleagues I respect and admire -- downplaying this. Despite the arrest and gravity of the charges, the NY Sun is continuing to pooh-pooh Franklin's alleged actions. 'To us this sounds more like sandy Berger or John Deutch than it does, say, Jonathan Pollard,' The Sun says. Uh, really Both Berger and Deutch mishandled classified information -- but neither was accused of passing on that information to others, as Franklin allegedy did. There is, as they saw, a war going on. Franklin's alleged actions are scandalous. The apologists and apathetic are troubling."
-- Michelle Malkin; The National Security Scandal No One's Talking About; 5-5-05

It seems strange that the corporate media does not seem willing to cover the Franklin/AIPAC espionage scandal. Michael Isikoff and Mark Hosenball had covered it briefly in a Newsweek article "And Now a Mole?" But Isikoff and co-author David Corn make no mention of the scandal in their new book "Hubris." As I noted in a recent essay, the connections between the Plame and the Franklin/AIPAC pionage scandals are numerous, and include characters such as Elliot Abrams and David Wurmser.

On August 9, 2006, Judge Ellis ruled against the AIPAC defendants effort to have the case against them thrown out. Among the issues they raised was that the case posed a threat to a free press. I think it does, though in exactly the opposite reason than the one they cite. In an up-coming essay, I will focus on the significance of Ellis's recent ruling. But, for today, I think we could agree that the Bush administration has made the world a more dangerous place in two ways: first, by the invasion of Iraq, which has resulted in an increase of the self-generating extremists cells that threaten to disrupt countries beyond the Middle East; and second, by allowing the spread of self-generating intelligence cells within the executive branch, that threaten the very groups that are most capable of providing the intelligence analysis and operations that protect our country.

The Shanksville Redemption

"Did you tell her I don't like motherfuckers who gas their own people?" the president snapped. "Did you tell her I don't like assholes who lie to the world? Did you tell her I'm going to kick his sorry motherfucking ass all over the Mideast?"
-- President George W. Bush asking Press Secretary Ari Fleischer about a conversation with reporter Helen Thomas; from page 3 of "Hubris," by David Corn and Michael Isikoff

Our democracy has been hijacked. This is not news to those on the progressive left, including participants on forums such as the Democratic Underground. When we read the angry outburst above, directed at an elderly lady who simply asked a question that challenged the president's lies, we are not surprised. We recognized that this fellow who fronted for the group of thugs who forced their way into the cockpit of the nation was a hostile, unstable man from Day One.
But not all of the other passengers of these United States saw him the same way. Many were fooled into believing that he was a strong leader, who had mastered aviation in his days serving in the National Guard. They saw a gentle side, when he sat and read "My Pet Goat" to little school children. And they believed the charade on the USS Abraham Lincoln, when Bush gloated under a banner that said, "Mission Accomplished." He promised the American public that major combat operations were completed, and that we had prevailed. Bush said we would begin to investigate "hundreds of sites" with WMD components.
Those systems that were supposed to alert the American public to the dangers posed by the gang of hijackers, commonly known the "neoconservatives," failed us. In large part, it wasn't that they made a noble attempt; rather, they were too cowardly to even speak up. Only a very few even tried, and that made it easier for the hijackers to carry out their criminal activities. The neocons savagely attacked those few individuals who attempted to challange them.
The example that sticks out the most is, of course, what has become known as the Plame scandal. Almost immediately, the progressive left recognized that something that went absolutely in the face of democracy had taken place. The neocons were unsettled by author David Corn's pointing out that the administration may have violated federal. And they were surprised when progressive democrats and others on the left took an interest in a case involving the CIA.
The neocons engaged in attempts to bury the investigation. In early December of 2003, a "senior White House official" told a Financial Times reporter, "We have rolled the earthmovers in over this one." Then, at the end of December, the neocons were shocked to learn that Patrick Fitzgerald had been appointed to head the investigation.
This month, a new book has been published that does a remarkable job of uncovering that which the White House earthmovers had thought they buried. The book is "Hubris: The Inside Story of Spin, Scandal, and the Selling of the Iraq War," by David Corn and Michael Isikoff. Early reviews of the book focused almost entirely upon the authors identifying Richard Armitage as the first "source" for Robert Novak, the scum who publicly exposed Valerie Plame. The neocons almost immediately began pushing this as "proof" that the operation to damage Joseph Wilson had not been conducted by the Office of the Vice President.
"Hubris," however, does quite the opposite: the book documents the Plame scandal as belonging to Dick Cheney, Scooter Libby, Karl Rove, and others connected to the White House Iraq Group. To the extent that Corn and Isikoff have pointed this out on various news shows, the WHIG has brought Novak out of the moth balls, and again had him play point for their team.
DUers are not fooled by these tactics. We've studied the role of the secretive Rendon Group, for example. We know all about their tricks of the trade, which they call "perception management." But the truth is that most Americans don't. And so it is a good thing when a "mainstream" author like Michael Isikoff has a book that contains some information about the Rendon Group. Indeed, if most of us told others about what we've learned about the Rendon Group from the Democratic Underground, they are going to be less likely to accept it as true, than if we are able to introduce them to Rendon through a Newsweek writer. We have to be able to communicate to others by using the language they understand, and are comfortable with.
Now this, of course, makes the neocons uncomfortable. They try to silence any "mainstream" voice that can communicate the truth to a larger, unaware audience. A good example is found in Chris Matthews, the host of MSNBC's Hardball. Most people who follow the Plame scandal are aware that I. Liar Libby claimed that Tim Russert told him about Valerie Plame. Libby is charged with telling that lie to FBI investigators, and to Mr. Fitzgerald's grand jury. Libby's supporters used to say that it was just a case of one man's word against another's. But they have stopped that weak stuff, and the reason why is fully described in "Hubris." On pages 266-7, Corn and Isikoff detail how Libby called Russert to complain about Matthews' coverage of the Iraq war and the Plame scandal. Libby accused Matthews of anti-Semitism, because Chris focused on the roles of Libby, Perle, and Wolfowitz. Russert suggested Libby call NBC president Neal Shapiro. Russert himself called Shapiro, and made a record of the Libby conversation. Russert described Libby's call as "an implicit warning" from the Vice President's office. Shapiro actually did contact Matthews' exexcutive producer, and made clear that Chris had to "throttle back a bit" because "this guy is still the vice president."
If you told your co-workers that "H2O Man" from the Democratic Underground said the OVP had attempted to keep Chris Matthews from reporting the truth, they might think that you've lost your mind. In fact, a lot of DUers have thought I had lost mine when I've said that Matthews has tried to be honest, but that his job restricts his ability to tell us what he knows about this case. Well, now we have Corn and Isikoff reporting this very thing.
At the same time, we find that Ahmed Chalabi was able to spread his lies not only to the fools in the VP's intelligence outfit, known as the "Office of Special Plans," but also through the corporate media. His #1 cheerleader and concubine was Judith Miller, and so his misinformation made the New York Times' front page frequently. More, the authors show that Chalabi's INC could access The Sunday Times of London; Vanity Fair; Time; The Atlantic Monthly; NPR; CNN; The New Yorker; Newsweek; Fox News (shocking!); 60 Minutes; The National Review; The Weekly Standard; the Associated Press; The Washington Times; and the Washington Post. (page 53)
On the Democratic Underground, we have discussed the fact that the OVP runs a "shadow government." On pages 5-6, the authors note that Libby oversaw a "shadow" National Security Council, and that he "had a reputation of being a prick" and "was nasty and obnoxious" in his dealings with the real intelligence community.
The administration has long scoffed at reports that Bush is simply a tool being used by Dick Cheney & Co., who really run the country. Yet, the authors reveal things such as the fact that neither George Bush or Condi Rice read the National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) that was used to support administration claims that Saddam's Iraq posed a threat with WMD. We know, of course, that Team Libby has claimed the NIE is essential to establishing Scooter's defense in his upcoming trial. Scooter, his lawyers note, was focused almost entirely on the NIE information. Cheney gave Libby the green light to share parts of the NIE with reporters such as Miller. Pretrial documents show that Bush okayed this; it is important to note Bush had never even read the classified document that Cheney asked his permission to leak to reporters.
Very few US Senators had read the NIE, either. It is sadly obvious that members of both parties, in both the House and Senate, betrayed this country by cowering from the neocon hijacking gang. The book shows that of those who knew the administration was absolutely lying about the intelligence, a couple republicans were braver than the majority of democrats. When Joseph Biden and two republicans (Lugar and Hagel) were "pushing an alternative that would narrow the president's authority," they were undercut by a House democratic leader, Dick Gephardt. (page 127)
Likewise, when individuals in the intelligence community were willing to challenge the distortions of the White House, they were betrayed by George Tenet. Instead, our country relied on clowns like Douglas Feith, who helped lead the charge on such issues as the cave that might hold WMDs (which turned out to be a pond for cattle); the uranium being stored in a warehouse before being sent to Iraq (oops! it was bales of cotton, not uranium); and the containers of ricin (okay, they were actually barrels of curdled milk).
The book is not perfect. It does not include much information on the OVP/WHIG efforts to do a "workup" on Joseph Wilson from March to June in 2003. It doesn't discuss the neocon/AIPAC espionage scandal, either. However, it does provide some insight on a character involved in both the Plame and neocon/AIPAC espionage operations: David Wurmser. They twice note Wurmser called Chalabi his "mentor." And the authors provide some interesting information on Chalabi's top aide, Aras Habib, who the CIA had identified as being an agent of Iranian intelligence in the mid-1990s. It also has enough inside information on Judith Miller to support the often made claim on DU that her reporter status was merely a cover for her true position.
Most important, however, is that Corn and Isikoff document what Valerie Plame Wilson's position was at the CIA. She was working on WMD issues involving both Iraq and Iran. Her group recognized that there was no substance to the information on Iraq's WMD programs that the neocons were endorsing as fact. More, they recognized that much of the misinformation was able to be traced back to Chalabi's INC.
Of course, people on DU have read information similar to this many times before. But it helps to have mainstream authors documenting it. And Corn and Isikoff add a good bit of new information, and raise many, many interesting and thought-provoking points. The book is worth buying and reading. It is worth our placing it on our bookshelves next to Amassador Wilson's "The Politics of Truth." More than that, it is a valuable tool for us to use to educate the general public about "the inside story of spin, scandal, and the selling of the Iraq war" between now and election day.

We Hold These Truths

{1} "As pointed out by thoughtful students of history, one must not be distracted by the 'how' of an event but instead should on the 'who' and the 'why.' Accumulate the facts, though often contradictory, then concentrate on the overall process by which these events transpired. .... Who had the means, the motive, and the opportunity -- not only to devise such attacks, but to circumvent normal security measures and hinder any objective investigation?"
-- Jim Marrs; The Terror Conspiracy; page X
Those who have taken an interest in the Plame scandal are eagerly anticipating the arrival of "Hubris: The Inside Story of Spin, Scandal, and the Selling of the Iraq War" to their local bookstores. Recent articles in Newsweek and The Nation have confirmed that Richard Armitage was one of Robert Novak's sources, and "what Valerie Plame really did at the CIA." The authors, Newsweek's Michael Isikoff and The Nation's David Corn, have provided some of the essential reporting on the case over the past three years.
In a discussion of an article about Armitage, a friend said to me, "I just hope that Isikoff tells the whole truth about the scandal." Now, that is an interesting proposition. Will Isikoff and Corn tell the whole story? Indeed, could they? I do not think so, although I do not believe that lessens the value of the book. In fact, it may add to it.
When we consider two scandals that most citizens are familiar with, Watergate and Iran-Contra, the reasons may become clearer. In both cases, most Americans are aware of the "central" crimes that these scandals exposed. Yet both were far larger than the central crimes that were the substance of televised hearings and best-selling books.
Large criminal conspiracies are always compartmentalized. Even those at the highest levels tend to get their information on a "need to know" basis. This allows those questioned in any potential investigation to honestly say they do not know much about other people's roles, and more, it prevents almost anyone "turned" by investigators from being able to expose the larger criminal conspiracy.
It is worth examining how this tactic, used by "organized crime," evolved from the Watergate era to the Iran-Contra crimes. In Watergate, even with talented, serious investigator and several co-conspirators who became cooperative witnesses, there was no one investigation that revealed the "whole truth about the scandal."
We have to examine the grand jury investigation, including the work of the two Special Prosecutors, Archibald Cox and Leon Jaworski; the work of Peter Rodino Jr.'s House Judiciary Committee; and the Senate Watergate Committe, led by Sam Ervin. There is no single book that reveals the whole truth about the scandal: even Woodward and Bernstein's interpretation of Watergate demands that one reads two equally important books, "All the President's Men" and "The Final Days."
In Watergate, the various investigations were somewhat coordinated, and resulted in a number of the participants in the conspiracy being convicted for their crimes. Though certainly not flawless, the effort helped the country recognize the threat that Nixon's "Imperial Presidency" posed to our democracy. It helped reestablish the practice of separation of federal powers defined by the U.S. Constitution.
The series of crimes known as "Iran-Contra" posed many of the same threats to the separation of powers in our federal government. Not surprisingly, this larger conspiracy -- which was played out on a global stage -- involved many of the people who were associated with the right-wing of the Nixon administration. The investigations of the crimes were not coordinated, and this was one of the reasons that the majority of those involved in the conspiracy evaded justice. Another reason was that those running the conspiracy had learned the importance of compartmentalization from the Watergate affair.

{2} "Stability is an unworthy American mission, and a misleading concept to boot. We do not want stability in Iran, Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, and even Saudi Arabia; we want things to change. The real issue is not whether, but how to destabilize. ... Creative destruction is our middle name, both within our society and abroad. .... we must destroy them to advance our historic mission."
-- Michael Ledeen; The War Against the Terror Masters
Since the beginning of the Plame scandal, Ambassador Joseph Wilson has stated that it is part of a larger threat to our democracy. It is impossible to consider the "who," the "how," and the "why" of the Plame scandal without placing it in the context of the administration's efforts to bring our nation to war in Iraq. And the Iraqi invasion was part of the larger neoconservative agenda for the Middle East.
The neoconservatives were frustrated when the first President Bush refused to occupy Iraq in the first Gulf War. In 1992, a document that Barton Gellman of the Washington Post called "a classified blueprint intended to help 'set the nation's direction for the next century' " was leaked from the office of assistant secretary of defense Paul Wolfowitz. He had prepared the 46-page memo, with the help of his deputy, I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, for Dick Cheney. Among other things, the document called for a permanent American military presence on six contenents to prevent any "potential competitors from even aspiring to a larger regional or global role."
The neoconservative plan for the Middle East is further documented in the "Clean Break" policy paper that Doug Feith, Richard Perle, and David Wurmser prepared for Benjamin Netanyahu, and in the Project for the New American Century (PNAC) call for President Clinton to back their agenda in Iraq. Central to the neoconservatives' plans was Ahmed Chalabi, the head of the "Iraqi National Congress."
Chalabi was born into a Shiite Muslim family with close ties the monarchy that ruled Iraq. He fled the country at the age of 14. He would become a student of Albert Wohlsetter, who would introduce him to both Perle and Wolfowitz. Chalabi enjoyed the trust of the leaders of the neoconservative movement, despite his conviction for embezzlement in Jordan. He was considered untrustworthy by many in the American intelligence community, especially in the CIA.
In his article "What Valerie Plame Really Did at the CIA," David Corn notes that the Agency's Joint Task Force on Iraq members found no evidence of WMD production in Iraq when the Bush2 administration was preparing to remove Saddam from power. "JTFI officials came to suspect that some (defectors) had been sent their way by Ahmed Chalabi's Iraqi National Congress, an exile group that desired a US invasion of Iraq," Corn writes.
In "The Stovepipe" (The New Yorker), Seymour Hersch had in 2003 wrote, "Chalabi's defector reports were now flowing from the Pentagon directly to the Vice-President's office, and then on to the President, with little prior evaluation by intelligence professionals." The significance of this grows when we consider part of James Bamford's "Iran: The Next War" (Rolling Stone), where he writes, "On May 20th, shortly after the discovery of the leak, Iraqi police backed by American soldiers raided Chalabi's home and offices in Baghdad. The FBI suspected that Chalabi, a Shiite who had a luxurious villa in Tehran and was close to senior Iranian officials, was actually working as a spy for the Shiite government in Iran. Getting the U.S. to invade Iraq was apparently part of a plan to install a pro-Iranian Shiite government in Baghdad, with Chalabi in charge. The bureau also suspected that Chalabi's intelligence chief had furnished Iran with highly classified information on U.S. troop movements, top-secret communications, plans of the provisional government and other closely guarded materials on U.S. operations in Iraq. On the night of the raid, The CBS Evening News carried an exclusive report by correspondent Lesley Stahl that the U.S. government had 'rock-solid' evidence that Chalabi had been passing extremely sensitive intelligence to Iran -- evidence so sensitive that it could 'get Americans killed'."
Bamford was detailing the neocon-AIPAC spy scandal in that article. It is important for us to recognize that the neocon-AIPAC spy scandal, and the Niger forgeries scandal as well, are parts of the larger criminal conspiracy that includes the Plame scandal. They are evidence of the compartmentalization of activities that makes it difficult for any one investigation to uncover the "whole truth."

{3} Rep. Boggs: "Let's say (someone) .... was recruited by someone in the CIA. The man who recruited him would know, wouldn't he?"
Allen Dulles: "Yes, but he wouldn't tell."
Chairman Warren: "Wouldn't tell it under oath?"
Dulles: "I wouldn't think he would tell it under oath, no .... He ought not tell it under oath. Maybe not tell it to his own government ...."
McCloy: "Wouldn't he tell it to his own chief?"
Dulles: "He might or might not."
-- January 22, 1964 Warren Commission session transcript made public in 1975.
James Mann, in "Rise of the Vulcans," notes that Richard Armitage's military record doesn't tell the whole story of his service in Vietnam. Mann writes that he took part in "some of the grittiest, most secretive operations of the war." Some of the people close to him believe that Armitage was part of the Phoenix program, which was run by the CIA. Others are less sure what connection Armitage had with US intelligence operations in Vietnam. It appears that even 30 years later, Dick Armitage has not disclosed exactly what he did, even to some of his closest associates.
In "Plan of Attack," Bob Woodward notes that "Armitage decided to insert himself somewhat dramatically into the Time's developing story and protect Powell's flank by speaking on the record." Woodward gives a few examples of Armitage's talent in manipulating the news media, generally in an attempt to counter some of the agenda being pushed by Scooter Libby. Woodward also states that Armitage "wasn't enthusiastic about Chalabi."
In the recent reports concerning Armitage being a source for Novak and Woodward, regarding valerie Plame's identity, it has been said that Dick is known as "something of a gossip." This is something that comes from his association with the Iran-Contra scandals, when he "explained" his participation as being merely a result of his enjoying "gossiping" with others. Although no one believed it then, today the reports that Mr. Armitage is prone to gossip is accepted as fact by many in the corporate media.
Armitage's known role in the Plame scandal centers upon the State Department report, produced at the request of Scooter Libby, concerning Joseph Wilson's 2002 trip to Niger. A couple versions of the report were made public earlier this year. One, which is dated July 7, 2003, appears to be what the public has been told was passed around members of the administration after Wilson's New York Times op-ed was printed. The other is dated June 10, 2003. On page 4 it notes, "Meeting apparently convened by Valerie Wilson, a CIA WMD managerial type and the wife of Amb. Joe Wilson, with the idea that the agency and the larger USG could dispatch Joe to Niger to use his contacts there to sort out the Niger/Iraq uranium sale question. Joe went to Niger in late 1999 in regard to Niger's uranium program, apparently with CIA support."
In the "What Valerie Plame Really Did..." article, Corn notes that Valerie had served the agency in Athens, where she had "posed as a State Department employee." This is a common practice for Agency employees, as it provides the protection of diplomatic immunity. Later in her career, she would work in the most clandestine role, as a NOC. "They do not pretend to work for the US government," Corn writes, "They might claim to be a businessperson."
Dick Armitage would certainly have recognized the significance of Ambassador Wilson's 1999 trip to Niger, "apparently with CIA support." Surely Dick Cheney and Scooter Libby would, as well. One might speculate on if Armitage spoke with Woodward and Novak in support of the OVP, or in opposition to them, but it seems rather unlikely that it was merely gossip.

{4} Question: Would you oppose a congressional investigation into the leak of Valerie Plame's identity? And if not, would you be willing to cooperate with such an investigation by handing over the work product of your investigation?
Fitzgerald: ... There are strict rules about grand jury secrecy if there were an investigation. And, frankly, I have to pull the book out and get the people smarter than me about grand jury rules in Chicago and sit down and tell me how it works. My gut instinct is that we do not -- very, very rarely is grand jury information shared with the Congress. ....
I think what people may be confused about is that reports used to be issued by independent counsels. ... That statute has lapsed. I'm not an independent counsel, and I don't have the authority to write a report ..."
-- Patrick Fitzgerald's press conference; 10-28-05
It has been reported that in October of 2003, after reading a Robert Novak article, Richard Armitage concluded that he was one of the two sources Novak had mentioned in his previous article exposing Valerie Plame's identity. After contacting Colin Powell, Armitage spoke to the FBI agents investigating the leak. Their investigation continued, and what they found resulted in Patrick Fitzgerald's being assigned to the case two months later. Mr. Fitzgerald was aware of Armitage's story, but did not choose to make him a target.
Two years later, when Bob Woodward's role in the scandal was exposed, Armitage apparently spoke to Mr. Fitzgerald. Again, no charges resulted from that incident.
In pre-trial motions, Team Libby has requested documentation concerning Woodward's source. Judge Walton has ruled it is not material to Scooter's case. It is possible that the OVP has considered using information on Armitage to try to take the focus off of the criminal activities of both Scooter Libby and Dick Cheney. If so, the book by Corn and Isikoff may have done those who want to see justice in this case a real favor.
In "The Final Days," authors Woodward and Bernstein told of Special Prosecutor Leon Jaworskigoing to see Judge Sirica, to say that the grand jury had named Richard Nixon as an unindicted co-conspirator in the plot to obstruct justice. "You can expect a report from the grand jury," he told Sirica. "The grand jury wants the report to be sent to the House Judiciary Committee. It pertains to the President."
At this point, we know that Mr. Fitzgerald has indicted Scooter Libby in the Plame scandal. And, from the pre-trial documents which have become part of the public record, we know that VP Dick Cheney was involved in daily discussions with Libby regarding how to respond to Ambassador Joseph Wilson.
It is uncertain what future actions -- if any -- that Mr. Fitzgerald may take, beyond convicting Libby for his part in the criminal conspiracy. But just as in the days of Nixon's being identified as a co-conspirator, there is significant evidence that VP Cheney violated the law. And, just as Watergate required the coordinated efforts of all three branches of the federal government to achieve justice, this case does, too.
Citizens should be pressing the case for members of the House and Senate to initiate investigations into the lies that brought our nation to war in Iraq, including the Plame scandal. VP Cheney should be impeached. With the war in Iraq being recognized as being built on a foundation of lies, and with Cheney's approval rating being under 20%, democrats are indeed in a position to move on this. It is as important today as it was in the Watergate era.

{5} "We Americans all too often take for granted the luxury of living and benefiting from the rights and freedoms guarenteed by our constitution. Several actions undertaken by this administration serve as a reminder that the social contract that binds us is fragile and requires our vigorous protection if we ever hope to preserve it. We have known this since the time of the drafting of the constitution over two hundred years ago when Benjamin Franklin remarked that the founding fathers had bequeathed to the nation 'a republic, if you can keep it'."
-- Ambassador Joseph Wilson
Joseph and Valerie Wilson filed a civil suit against Scooter Libby, Dick Cheney, Karl Rove, and "John Does No. 1-10" in US District Court on July 13, 2006. This case holds the potential to complete the investigation in all three branches of the federal government: Mr. Fitzgerald, through the Department of Justice, acts on behalf of the executive branch; the House and Senate are, of course, the legislative branch; and the civil case brings in the judiciary.
Let us consider the situation with Armitage. On August 22, AP writers Matt Apuzzo and John Solomon reported, "Plame considering suing Armitage." They quoted the Wilson's attorney Melanie Sloan as saying, "I think maybe Armitage was in on it. The question is just what was Armitage's role?"
On August 31, Byron York whined that the Wilsons would likely not sue Armitage. He quoted Ms. Sloan as saying that "it doesn't look at this point that Armitage was party" to the effort to damage the Wilsons, and that his role "is really not the same as the concerted effort that Cheney, Rove, and Libby made to get Valerie's undercover identity out to the newspaper."
Melanie Sloan is a very talented attorney. She hasn't closed the door on Dick Armitage. It seems very likely that her team will depose Mr. Armitage, to find out what he knows about the OVP/WHIG/OSP effort to damage Joseph and Valerie Wilson. Before becoming the executive director of CREW (Citizens for Ethics and Responsibility in Washington), shewas an aide to John Conyers and Charles Schumer.
Readers who are interested in investing in the civil suit against Cheney, Rove, and Libby are encouraged to contribute to their Legal Support Trust. We cannot afford to take for granted those rights guarenteed by our Constitution. We cannot allow a criminal conspiracy centered in the Office of the Vice President to trash the separation of powers. Please consider contributing today. For more information, see:
http://wilsonsupport.org/