Posted on 06/01/2006 8:04:08 AM PDT by the Real fifi
In the infamous Vanity Fair article on Joseph Wilson and Valerie Plame (the one with a photo spread of them in their Jaguar convertible), an article obviously sourced by them, Alan Foley is described as Plame’s boss:
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
:)
Pretty soon we'll see stories revealing she never worked for the CIA.
CIA = Culinary Institute of America.
Whole lotta questions but no answers. Plus, you'd have to be a Plame junky to follow this. Can you clear up exactly what all this means?
Maybe Miller got that misinformation from Wilson whose name and phone number was in her notebook. Or, if Libby gave her that information, it appears that he hadn't received it from official sources. Cheney told Libby that Plame worked for the agency's DO CPD (Counter proliferation dept of the Directorate of Operations). The SSCI report said the same thing..Yet as late as the time he spoke to Vanity Fair, Wilson and his cronies were saying she worked for WINPAC.
How come we can trust the CIA and this government to figure out the inner workings of foreign enemy entities, when they can't even figure who ran a low-level CIA office?
Great comment.
That's just the way they want it to look. The public does not have a need to know.....
I remember pulling up the hierarchy from the dates when the Duty Officer testified before the Senate and identified "the ambassador's wife" as the person who chose him for the Niger trip. Alan Foley was indeed the section chief at the anti-proliferation office.
In that case, What is Foley hiding and why isn't Fitz grilling him?????
What's WINPAC?
Well, if she wasn't in WINPAC and he never spoke to or knew Plame, he can't add much to the case. OTOH if she worked for someone else, why did Wilson (the apparent source of this information to VF) say Foley was her boss?
Weapons Intelligence, Non-Proliferation and Arms Control Center (WINPAC)..its work is analytical which would seem inconsistent with a claim that she was working covertly.
Catching up on Clarice Feldman's prior columns will help you.
http://www.americanthinker.com/search.php
Are you suggesting that Foley's denial to Feldman is inaccurate?
I'm not exactly a Plame junkie, but what this means to me is that Libby is likely to have accurate official information. If the information on a reporter's notes is inaccurate, it probably did not come from Libby. Or, if it did come from Libby, it likely did not come from official sources (other reporters maybe?)
Maybe because he isn't interested in the truth, that he is interested only in nailing the President?
Yeah,right!"Way Down Upon The Hudson River"?
Thanks. That helps.
Then maybe what he is saying is that "she" wasn't part of the anti-proliferation office.
I keep going back to the fact that Novak called CIA to confirm her employment. If she was undercover, her cover employer would confirm her employment, but CIA would not. The fact that CIA confirmed her employment means to me that she was not undercover.
And now the head of the anti-proliferation office, where she supposedly worked, says she didn't work for him.
I think it means that this whole thing was cooked up by Wilson,Plame,and others at CIA to discredit George Bush,his administration,The Iraq War,and(lastly but not leastly),The Republican Party!One more thing,the acquisition of"Celebrity",etc.,etc.,.......It's ALL VERY SEEDY and without willing accomplices in The LIB Media,it had"no legs"at all!!!!!!!!!!!!
I believe the LAT reported Plame worked at the desk next to Foley after the FBI investigation was first announced in Aug/Sept (?) 2003. Also, Foley retired very early during this scandal, denying his retirement was related. I thought he protested too much, ha ha ha. I've always wondered what he was hiding and why no one was focusing on his role.
Could be a sure sign we have entirely TOO MUCH government...
Gentle friendly hint - try putting a space after punctuation marks. It would lend your posts a certain clarity that now they lack.
We know she worked for the CIA. John Kerry gave her a ride into Cambodia. It's seared in my memory. Seared, I tell you.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4088146/site/newsweek/
"One crucial witness in the Senate probe was Alan Foley, the recently retired director of the CIA’s Non-Proliferation Center..."
I find Foley's response to The American Thinker very interesting. Those were excellent questions and deserve to be answered. There are several people who should be required to testify under oath.
Well Foley says the first he ever heard of her was the Novak article so the report that their desks were near eachother seems unlikely.
Thanks for the *ping*!
It's quite possible Plame did indeed work in counter-proliferation, and Foley was indeed her ultimate boss - several levels above her, and she was a relative flunky (perhaps even a recent transfer to counterproliferation) whom Foley had personally never met or interacted with. Kind of like Jeffrey Skilling not knowing the junior comptroller in charge of auditing the energy trading business.
Everything we learn about this case screams out that Plame was not very important at the agency and certainly was not working late (wasn't she spending her evenings leading post-partum depression counseling, and didn't she say that her duties as a mother were more taxing than her duties at the agency?).
Wilson is a natural hype-himself con man personality, and no doubt he hyped to the press the stature of his "secret agent" wife. Yes, she may have suggested to someone important his name for the Niger "mission" and may have introduced him at a meeting. And then went to get the coffee and call for lunch (I mean figuratively). She was not the organizing force for that trip, and was not the person who green-lighted the mis-chosen Wilson amd allowed him not to sign a non-disclosure agreement or to make a written report of his trip. In fact, the latter two facts also lend themselves to the interpretation that whoever approved the trip may have considered it not very important and expected it highly likely to yield nothing of import ("okay, you can send the former ambassador who claims to know everyone who is anyone in Niger, and who knows, maybe a blind pig will find an acorn").
What is the relationship of WINPAC to CPD? Are they parallel organizational creations, in that WINPAC is a sort of interdeparmental clearinghouse for information, drawing on people from CPD as well as other departments?
Well now, just hold on a bit. I am checking my past FR posts becuase I am sure I posted it back then, but I've got a lot of my own fascinating posts to scroll through, ha ha ha.
It seems there is a long list of people that Fitz DARE NOT put under oath, if he ever expects to get a SC seat. Right?
Im pretty sure there is no Valerie Plame.....
Who hired Craig Livingstone?
This is just more stark evidence that the MSM is hopelessly biased wwwaaayyy to the Left. They have no interest in any aspect of this story unless they can spin it into getting Dick Cheney or Carl Rove behind bars.
To the best of my knowledge,CPD is part of the Directorate of Operations. WINPAC is part of the Directorate of Intelligence. The DO is where the cloak and daggers operate, the DI is where the analysts work.
Yes but her group did jump through the hoops to turn on a Secret Clearance for him before the trip.
There was article written by Pincus that detiled a few media types enjoying a 4th of July party at the Plame residence a week before Novak's story hit. No one has ever followed up on how the media was invited to their home before the socalled outing.
Here's something else the media never reported much on:The May 2, 2003 Senate Democratic Policy Conference where Wilson spoke . It was there he was first interviewed by the NYT's Kristof. There is a funny circumlocution about the story which always reports Kristof had breakfast there with Wilson and "his wife" leaving it unclear if "his wife" was Kristof's wife or Plame.
Even more interesting, while the SDPC meetings are all online..the May 2 one is nowhere to be found (not even cached).The following meeting of the SDPC starred the Wilsonista gang the Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity and Rockefeller used that occasion to make an anti-Administration speech. The VIPS actively encourages intelligence officers to leak to the press.
Yep...and then you have Wilson's speeches he gave before being courted by the Dems and the VIPs. He was against the war because he feared massive US casualties from WMD that Saddam would use when cornered. He changed his tune later.
The whole thing is a scripted play.
If this country is going to survive, the CIA needs a lot more Jack Bauer and a lot less Valerie Plame.
The results of Wilson's trip were a big non-event -- any serious CIA executive with responsibility for analyzing proliferation of yellocake out of Niger would have concluded that the results of Wilson's trip added next to nothing to the total mix of information.
It appears that in the late winter or early spring of 2003, Wilson became involved in the Kerry campaign. Wilson (of the enormous ego) wanted to finagle a high-ranking foreign policy post, and in turn Kerry (or his campaign people) became aware that Wilson had information that could be hyped out of context to bash Bush with over the SOTU uranium statement and perhaps on other fronts as well.
It appears that during this period Wilson began making an increasing number of media interviews on background, becoming more and more critical of the Bush administration, and becoming more open as to his identity, as we get into May and June.
And during this time when Wilson becomes involved with the Kerry campaign, it appears Wilson becomes much closer to the VIPS nuts and their media sympathizers like Pincus. Wasn't Larry Johnson at that July 4 barbecue at Wilson's house? Perhaps everyone at that party was kissing up to Wilson thinking that if Kerry actually pulls off a win, Wilson might actually end up as somebody quite important.
If our major media organs were objective, penetrating news seekers and reporters instead of leftwing propaganda peddlers, both the Wilson trip to Niger and his out-of-context politically-motivated criticism of the Bush administration would have been reported for what they were -- a big nothing.
That's Karl with a K. Get it right or he will hatch one of his evil plots to get back at you ; )
Actually, this is old news:
Oct 2005 - The Associated Press reports that Judith Miller's notes from one of her conversations with Lewis Libby are wrong, and that the error may help Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald in his probe.
More (and associated lefty conspiracy theories) at:
Another possibility is that she was "on loan", something that could have been a result of the Aldrich Ames outing of her status previously that would prevent her from doing the work that she normally would do.
Bump!!!
Well, I am truly an insightful genius, ha ha ha. Hundreds of posts-replies, etc. I am back to Aug 2004, but still no luck. I also searched the LAT web site. This is likely the article I read about Plame and Foley:
Washington Abuzz Over a New Kind of Scandal
Los Angeles Times - Los Angeles, Calif.
Author: Doyle McManus and Bob Drogin
Date: Oct 1, 2003
Start Page: A.1
I tried to purchase it, but even though I am registered it would not let me for some reason. I will continue looking tomorrow, but can not spend more time on it today.
Only interested in nailing the President? Ya think?
On July 16, two days after Novak's column appeared, Alan Foley, `then-director` of the CIA's intelligence, nonproliferation and arms control center, told Senate intelligence committee members that he had insisted the White House remove a reference to Niger and uranium from the State of the Union address. The White House maintained there was never any specific reference to Niger in drafts of the speech, nor, it said, had the CIA expressed any objection to referring to reports Iraq had attempted to buy uranium in Africa.
Foley later told the committee staff he may have been confused, according to a Senate committee report on Iraq intelligence released this year. The Senate report determined that Foley's original testimony had been incorrect and that the CIA had not raised concerns about the `Iraq-Niger` reporting in the speech.
Is this true? Was this ever reported in the MSM? I know...dumb question and all that jazz : )
Yeah, Like a person isn't going to remember "chopping" a speech for the POTUS over such an issue....I tell ya this whole story is liberal fairy tale.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.