Niger Uranium – Wilson’s Allegations Irresponsible
Posted By John Moore on July 14, 2003
This post addresses Wilson’s allegations and is in answer to the following comment posted on this blog by David Dodenhoff:
If Bush wasn’t talking about Niger in the speech, why did the CIA send Wilson to that country to investigate?
VP Cheney asked the CIA to investigate a Niger-Saddam connection almost a year before Bush’s speech, and the CIA sent Wilson (NOT an intelligence agent, but rather a former ambassador to a different African country, Gabon). Since the US was interested in all possible aspects of Saddam’s potential WMD development, the request certainly made sense. Wilson reported that “it was highly doubtful that any such transaction had taken place.” In other words, he did NOT say that Iraq didn’t seek the uranium, but that they didn’t get it!
However, Wilson made serious charges effectively alleging the White House knew the statements about Saddam seeking uranium in Africa were false. In order to responsibly make such allegations, he would have to:
- know that Niger was the *only* country referred to. Since other countries in Africa (Congo, Gasbon, Malawi, Namibia, South Africa, Zambia and Zimbabwe) also mine uranium, one wonders how he knows that only Niger was in the intelligence.
- know that hat *his* investigation was perfect. In other words, he would have to be sure that there were no attempts by Iraq to get the uranium from Niger. Supposedly he proved this negative in a one week trip consisting solely of a series of meetings. Since the uranium in Niger is controlled by the French, who have already proven their perfidy with regard to Iraq, one wonders about Wilson’s apparent omniscience.
- know all intelligence leading to Bush’s statement, and the details. But the British had intelligence supporting Bush’s statement, the details of which were never furnished to the US or Mr. Wilson. Hence he is accusing the White House of using faulty intelligence, even though HE DID NOT KNOW THE INTELLIGENCE THEY WERE USING, in a speech they gave many months after the end of his involvement.
- ignore Bush’s use of the word “sought” and replace it with “acquired.”
Given Mr. Wilson’s hostility to the Bush regime and foreign policy, it is likely that he was predisposed to believe their guilt. Furthermore, nobody, especially former Ambassadors to such important countries as Gabon, likes to be ignored!
Since there was false, forged intelligence data allegedly tying Niger to Saddam, the most likely explanation is that Mr. Wilson *assumed* that the White House used only this false information and intentionally ignored Mr. Wilson’s input. This sort of confusion may in fact have been the reason that the forgeries were created in the first place!
A more plausible explanation than Wilson’s is that the White House and CIA used independent intelligence from a reliable ally (British MI6), and possibly had additional intelligence about attempts with other countries. Hence they specifically mentioned that it was British Intelligence that they were using and they used the word Africa instead of Niger. They also used the word sought – something not denied by Wilson!
This post addresses the Wilson’s allegations and reacts to the one posted by John Moore at July 14, 2003.
For those who know about the French control and use of African mineral resources, the idea that they (French) could let Saddam get such resources is simply a kinda nonsense.
Joseph C. Wilson has a tremendous experience on, not only gabon, but most of the francophone Africa and he was first in Niger with USAID during the Carter administration, then later in the 1990s as a Clinton National Security Council staffer.
Th accuracy of the so-called British source has been well established as to be falsed, insofar as the National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice acknowledged June 8 that Bush’s claim was based in part on inaccurate information (which include the M16’s source).
The conduct of the Iraqi war and occupation have provided substantial reasons to believe that the Bush administration is a “liecracy”.
Man your an idiot you need help.
Roger