Skip to main content

Wilson's "Talking Points"

Back to the SSCI report:

Page 41:

"On February 20th, 2002, CPD provided the former ambassador with talking points for his use in Niger. The talking points were general, asking officials if Niger had been approached, conducted discussions, or entered into any aggreements concerning unranium transfers with any "country of concern".

..the talking points did not refer to the specific reporting on the alleged Iraq-Niger uranium deal, did not mention names or dates from the reporting, and did not mention that there was any such deal being reported in intelligence channels.


In essense, Joe didn't ask anything of substance of the officials he talked to. Instead he went to drink sweat mint tea and toss up softball questions.

That part is known. However, these "talking point" have me bugged. First, why? If Joe was such an "expert" on the region who had 'extensive business' and diplomatic contacts, why the need for "Talking Points"? Why the "script"?

But it's not the first use of talking points.

"When the Iraq-Niger uranium reporting surfaced in early February, Ambassador Owens-Kirkpatrick decided to ask General Fulford to use the previously scheduled meeting to raise the uranium issue with Nigerien officials. Ambassador Owens-Kirkpatrick prepared talking points for General Fulford to use during his visit and the CIA coordinated the talking points."

Again, talking points. Now it's not unusual for the use of 'prepared questions' or 'talking points', but it strikes me as unusual that they would be used in both incidents, and in both cases prepared by the Agency.

So why would would the Deputy Commander of the Central European Command need talking points? And why would the CIA have to draft them?

Was it maybe so they could "match" those that Joe received? Why all this appearance of "Design"?

After all, when you think of it, the questions weren't that difficult where they?

"There is a report that Iraq is trying to buy Yellow Cake - it that true? Has it ever been true?... and so on. I mean - Specific questions get specific answers don't they?

Yet from what we know of the Wilson TPs we know they weren't designed to get squat.

It's like, "Hey, how you doing?...thanks for the sweat-mint tea, by the way, seen any Yellow Cake laying around?"

It's also noteworthy that Amb. Owens-Kirkpatrick didn't want Wilson talking with any current officials because of "on-going diplomatic efforts".

Fact is that Joes's trip was looking more and more like a "total shame". It wasn't designed to find squat. The trip was to lend credibility to his return - to his spin against the White House. Yet, even more to his role as "point man" in the scheme to embarrass the Bush Administration in the upcoming election year.

Most of the confusion and misinformation in the coverage of the Plame Game comes from "keeping the story in 2002-2003". When you look at this ONLY from the perspective of 2002-2003, it looks bad, and you might even see the case the MSM and left tries to preach, which is why that's where they have kept it. Yet when you bring it forward into 2004 and combine it with the almost daily CIA/State Departmen leaks, and all the negative books and stories, and especially the SSCI report that completely exposes Wilson/Plame the Agency for their game - and discredits them, it get's much clearer.

Much clearer indeed.

Next: The Dots Connected - the Noose get's tighter.










Filed under:

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Calling Mr. Fitzgerald?

**UPDATED AND BUMPED****

As I told you about in this post yesterday as a source confirmed to me that the Justice Department has launched a probe into the NSA leak. Mr. Risen, you are in trouble - prepare your defense. I told you so.

The White House will be announcing the probe at about 12:30pm. My source tells me that this probe will most likely result in another prosecutor being assigned as of course Fitzgerald is still busy/dizzy on the Plame/Game No-Leak. Additionally, other probes into other recent leaks such as the CIA 'prisons'leak is in the works as well. As I said, this is the NEW Bush - on the attack - it's no more Mr. Nice Guy!

About time! Also covering Michelle Malkin

*****End Update*********

UPDATE II: Looks like I owe my source big time as yet another tip comes true as the Washington Post is on the target list as well for the CIA Prison leak.

****End Update II*************************************

Update III: Via Fox: "The government has no legal right to…

Is the lid about to be blown off Able Danger?

Those who have been wishing for a full blown Able Danger investigation are about to get their wish. The "gate" has been unlocked.

9/11 Iraqi Connection

With Democrats calling for yet more investigations into pre-war intelligence, and Republicans like myself pushing back to help their 'sudden amnesia”, the growing stories of Able Danger and even China Gate, are beginning to make news.

The three main theories about why Able Danger hasn't gotten out of the "blog stage", are 1) To hide Clinton era responsibility for stopping the 9/11 attacks, and/or 2) To hide the truth behind China-Gate, or 3) The facts show that there in fact was a direct link between Iraq and 9/11.

Taking either one you can see why the Clinton worshipping MSM for the most part hasn't touched the story. Of the later point, Democrats, the MSM and even some of our investigations state that there was no 'direct' link between Iraq and 9/11. Say otherwise and the MSM will slice and di…

Monday Morning Intelligence with Kool Aid and the NY Times - UPDATE

Followup to previous post.

NY Times: 9/11 Commission's Staff Rejected Report on Early Identification of Chief Hijacker

Ok, I've been on the phone now for...oh, about three days, to some old chums in Tampa, checking this story out, asking questions,...etc. So far what I've heard is that IF this story is true, then those who are really in the know in the Intel world are feeling like a bunch of little red-hair step-childred.

Ed. Morissey is ready to hang the 911 Commission out to dry......mmm,

Ed, not so fast my friend.

Again, I am amazed at the vercacity the NY Times and AP is getting on this story, and from the same conservative bloggers who are normally parsing every "dot and tittle" the Times puts out. Who would think?...

Yeah, there is a lot of "anger" because of "Gorelick" fever where the blogshere and conservative media rightfully called attention to her conflict of interest while serving on the commission. But we can't let the "gotc…