It was July 9, 2003, less than 48 hrs after the bogus "CIA agent T J Wilkinson" popped up as a named source in a Capital Hill Blue article that, through a Truthout.org submission to "Japan Today," propelled the Wilson story back into the lime light and into the MSM when CNN picked up the scent of the disredited story, edited it, and ran with it.
July 9 was the date that Greg Thielman came out with his rant against colin Powell and Bush.
Remember this apology from CHB on that TJ Wilkinson story?
Recently, this web site [Capitol Hill Blue] discovered it has been played as a sucker by a source that was used in seven stories that ran in Capitol Hill Blue from September 2002 until July of 2003. The person in question was quoted as an unnamed source in six of the seven articles and by name (Terrance J. Wilkinson) in the seventh. We later learned the name was bogus even though I had known (or thought I knew) the person by that name for more than 20 years.
We have turned all our information on this source over to the appropriate law enforcement agencies and, at their instruction, will not discuss the matter publicly until they have concluded their investigations. When those investigations are complete, we will publish a full accounting with every piece of detail that we can produce or uncover about the individual involved. We owe that to our readers....
...But we live in a different era now. Technology makes it easier for people to pull together enough information to create a story that sounds credible on the surface but still have hidden agendas underneath.
Many journalists have told me they cannot do their job without unnamed sources. I used to agree with them but events of this past week have caused me to rethink that philosophy.
---- - "A message from Capitol Hill Blue. . .No more "unnamed sources," DOUG THOMPSON, Jul 10, 2003, 11:51
Note that under the same law that pertains to the alleged outing of Plame, this T J wilkinson tale would also require investigation since the guy was claiming to be CIA.
Hmmm, what else occurred on July 11, 2003 while Cooper was jotting down his email to his bureau chief? Was it something in the UK like this, where a reporter by the name of Watts tells her bosses at the BBC she can't go along with their request for her to back up the BBC's correspondent Gilligan's claims about what the late wmd expert Dr. Kelly told him?:
JULY 11, 2003 : (UK : NEWSNIGHT SCIENCE EDITOR WATT'S LAWYER WRITES THE BBC TELLING THEM THAT WATTS WAS PREPARED TO COOPERATE WITH THE BBC ONLY IN LINE WITH HER DUTIES AS AN EMPLOYEE, BUT NOT IF IT MEANS VIOLATING HER ETHICS AND RESPONSIBILITIES AS A JOURNALIST : See HUTTON INQUIRY ) Documents released by the [Hutton] inquiry show that Fiona Campbell, of Finers Stephens Innocent, wrote to the BBC on 11 July saying that Watts was prepared to cooperate only in line with her duties as an employee. 'Such duties, however, do not extend to "co-operating" where her ethics and responsibilities might conflict or in circumstances where she is being asked to participate in statements with which she cannot agree.' - "Email kept from BBC board; said that Gilligan had been guilty of 'loose use of language'," by Kamal Ahmed and Martin Bright, UK observer, 08/17/03 and "Email kept from BBC board : · Governors split over 'dumbing down' of Today programme · Gilligan accused of being 'too distant' from colleagues ," by Kamal Ahmed and Martin Bright, The Observer, Sunday August 17, 2003
Interesting chronological correlation. Kelly went missing on July 17, 2003 right?
Wow. I remember following that story that night as it mutated its way around the world AFTER having been discredited.