Thursday, March 8, 2007

march 7th new york times opinion highlights. . .

finally catching up now -- back
from europe, and some vacation. . .

here is some of the analysis of
the import of the libby conviction,
from the new york times opinion page:

". . . . .the case provided a look at the methodical
way that Mr. Cheney, Mr. Libby, Karl Rove and
others in the Bush inner circle set out to
discredit Ms. Wilson’s husband, Joseph Wilson
IV. Mr. Wilson, a career diplomat, was sent by
the State Department in 2002 to check out a
British intelligence report that Iraq had tried
to buy uranium from the government of Niger for
a secret nuclear weapons program. In his 2003
State of the Union address, Mr. Bush said: 'The
British government has learned that Saddam
Hussein recently sought significant
quantities of uranium from Africa. . .'

The specter of a nuclear-armed Iraq was
central to Mr. Bush’s case for rushing
to war. So, the trial testimony showed,
Mr. Cheney orchestrated an assault on Mr.
Wilson’s credibility
with the help of Mr.
Libby and others. They whispered to journalists
that Mr. Wilson’s wife worked at the C.I.A.
and that nepotism was the reason he had
been chosen for the trip.

That is what we know from the Libby trial,
and it is some of the clearest evidence yet
that this administration did not get duped
by faulty intelligence; at the very least,
it cherry-picked and hyped intelligence
to justify the war. What Mr. Wilson found,
and subsequent investigations confirmed, was
that there was one trip in 1999 — not
'recently,' but four years before Mr. Bush’s
statement — by an Iraqi official to Niger
and that during that trip, uranium was
never discussed. . .

One of the most senior officials in the
White House, Lewis Libby, the chief of
staff for Vice President Dick Cheney, was
caught lying to the F.B.I. He appears to
have been trying to cover up a smear
campaign that was orchestrated by his
boss against the first person to unmask
one of the many untruths that President
Bush used to justify invading Iraq. . .

it is high time that congress convene
hearings into what cheney knew -- what
he ordered -- and whom he used to get it done.

we all know, from the trial evidence, that
scooter libby's defining characteristic
is loyalty -- fealty -- never, ever was he
a "rogue" agent cheney cut loose. . .

no, he was, almost certainly, and
according to special prosecutor patrick
fitzgerald, the most loyal, and dutiful,
and careful of hand-servants to the
vice president. . .

so -- how much of this sordid mess did
dick cheney personally oversee/order/direct?

we, the people, are owed an answer.

an answer in small words, and in
short sentences. from his own mouth.

you are our servant, mr.
cheney -- not the other way around. . .


jackie said...

I completely agree with you.
This White House deliberately gave up one of our secret agents. That's TREASON.
An agent who wasn't just a 'foot soldier', but one who was responsible for a 300 man team, who's mission was to find and stop the flow of WMDs on the black market.
They knew that as soon as Valerie Wilson was named, everyone who had used Brewster Jennings as cover was at risk. Everyone who worked there and anyone associated with them, was now a suspected CIA asset.
They closed our eye's in the war against nuclear weapons and put brave people in harms way.
How many agents did we lose?
How many agents are missing?
This White House has done more damage to America's undercover services, then any foreign enemy could ever have done.
It's not about lying or covering up, it's about TREASON and we need to be looking at it as such.

nolo said...

hello and welcome, jackie --

well -- you know i agree
with you -- so, i am actually
appearing just to thank
you, personally, for being

t h a n k s.

do stop back, from
time to time. . . i'll
leave the lights on.

s m i l e. . .