Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

New filing in Libby case clarifies Plame's role at CIA

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU
 
leveymg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-20-06 01:19 PM
Original message
New filing in Libby case clarifies Plame's role at CIA
Edited on Mon Mar-20-06 01:48 PM by leveymg
Did Plame's Outing Disrupt CIA Efforts Against Pakistani Nuclear Proliferation?

A court filing in the Libby case indicates that a former Agency counterrorism officer in Pakistan revealed Plame's undercover role to I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby. This outing may have crippled work that was being done by the CIA to track and contain the spread of nuclear technologies by Pakistanis. See, http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/031906Z.shtml; also see, the 39-page filing, http://talkleft.com/libbydiscov317.pdf

Mr. Libby has been indicted for perjury and obstruction of justice related to a coordinated White House operation that revealed Ms. Plame's identity to reporters. The 39-page filing submitted by defense lawyers indicates that Robert Grenier, a recently-retired former head of CIA counter-terrorism, may have been the source for some details of Libby's knowledge about Plame, an undercover CIA counterproliferation expert. Appointed head of counterrorism in 2004, Grenier was Chief of Station is Islamabad, and had been working in Pakistan for many years. According to a February Washington Post report printed at the time of Grenier's departure from the Agency in February, Grenier had been recalled from Pakistan to headquarters and been tasked to head the Iraq Issues Group in anticipation of the U.S. invasion. According to The Post: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/02/07/AR2006020700016.html

Robert Grenier, who spent most of his career undercover overseas, took charge of the Counterterrorism Center about a year ago after a series of senior jobs at the center of the Bush administration's national security agenda.

When al Qaeda struck the World Trade Center and the Pentagon on Sept. 11, 2001, Grenier was station chief in Islamabad, Pakistan. Among the agency's most experienced officers in southwest Asia, Grenier helped plan the covert campaign that preceded the U.S. military ouster of al Qaeda and its Taliban allies from Afghanistan.

By the summer of 2002, with President Bush heading toward war in Iraq, then-Director of Central Intelligence George J. Tenet recalled Grenier to headquarters and promoted him to chief of a newly created Iraq Issues Group. His staff ballooned as the administration planned and launched the invasion in March 2003.


It is unknown whether Grenier became acquainted with Plame during his stint at CIA headquarters, or whether they had previously worked on matters in South Asia.

Either way, this filing sheds new light on how the CIA's nuclear counterproliferation activities were connected to counter-terrorism operations, and Plame's role within them.

If Grenier's knowledge of Plame's role was gained during the run-up to the Iraq invasion, it would indicate that Plame and Grenier were both working on questions related to Iraq's suspected WMD program. On the other hand, if Grenier had been working with Plame earlier, this would have much broader implications for Plame's role within the Agency and might suggest possible additional motives for the White House Iraq Group (WHIG) to ruin her career.

Last week, Rawstory carried coverage from a pair of Asian news outlets alleging terrorist activities in Pakistan had been deleted from the 9/11 Commission report at the behest of lobbyists working for Pakistan. http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/3/14/133330/930. If these reports are accurate, it points to the possibility that Plame and Grenier may have shared some insider's knowledge of what the CIA knew about A.Q. Khan's nuclear proliferation network, and the international funding network that sustained it. The 9/11 Commission report redacted 27 pages of material reportedly related to Saudi funding for terrorism. The reports from Asia now say that the similar material related to Pakistan were also omitted from the final draft of the Report issued in 2004.

How would CIA people working on Pakistan/UBL issues know about Plame?

This raises an interesting question. Why would Grenier, who had been working in Pakistan for years in the Clandestine Service, the unnamed former head of CIA Counter-Terrorism Center (CTC), know who Valerie Plame was? This would seem to lend additional credance to speculation that Plame, an NOC counter-proliferation expert, was working on the A.Q. Khan account when she was outed. This makes complete sense for the following reason.

At the time the 9/11 hijackers entered the US, the former Sudan Chief of Station, Cofer Black, was in charge of CTC. Black relates a story about a run-in he had with UBL in Khartoum just before both men left that country for other places that makes it seem more than possible that Black was UBL's case officer in Sudan. Since 1995, CTC and a separate bin Laden unit had focused on al-Qaeda. Last summer, the FBI IG report on 9/11 revealed that Black had been part of chain of command at CTC that ordered the FBI liason to withhold a cable to John O'Neil's FBI National Security Office in NY when CTC observed the Flt. 77 hijackers enter the US on 01/15/00 following their attendance at a Kuala Lumpur planning summit. The CIA had monitored them there planning the 9/11 and USS Cole attacks with Mohamed Atta's roommate and a dozen other al-Qaeda operatives. The reason that order was given to withhold notification to the FBI was because the surveillance of the 9/11 hijackers was just part of a much larger compartmentalized CIA operation that involved illegal warrantless wiretapping inside the US. http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0310/S00257.htm

What do the 9/11 hijackers have to do with Pakistan's nuclear program? They were both parts of the same funding network that extended from big banks in Riyadh to Chicago to the Northern Virginia suburbs to accounts managed by the President's brother at Riggs Bank in Washington, DC. There was such a degree of overlap that it made sense to place all related matters under commonly-directed working groups at the Agency. That was the function that CTC was supposed to play. Grenier, who had long worked on counter-terrorism in Pakistan, would thus have had some contact with Plame, who worked on nuclear proliferation operations running through the same country supported by the same funders in Saudi Arabia and the U.S. This was among the most politically sensitive operation the CIA was working on, given the role that some prominent Americans had in allowing Pakistan to develop its nuclear arsenal and the two-way exchange of large amounts of money, much of which ended up in GOP and al-Qaeda coffers. See, http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/1/3/10145/56290

Interesting, how all of these scandals are leading back to the same circles. By the summer of 2001, something truly bizarre was going on within the Agency. The near-obsession that Tenet had with bin Laden, and the smoke seen coming from his hair during the months before the attack, can be explained by his overview of these issues. I suspect that once these counter-terrorism guys start talking about the Plame outing, and the counter-proliferation people can speak to Saudi and Pakistani financial networks, the American public is going to learn a lot more than they've been told in the mass media about 9/11 and the invasion of Iraq.

2006. Mark G. Levey




Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
BR_Parkway Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-20-06 01:26 PM
Response to Original message
1. Good info, but one majorly wrong thing in the second paragraph -
Mr. Libby has been indicted for revealing Ms. Plame's identity to reporters.

Libby has not been indicted for that at all, he's indicted for 2 felony counts of perjury, 2 felony counts of lying to FBI investigators and 1 felony count of obstruction of justice.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leveymg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-20-06 01:30 PM
Response to Reply #1
3.  I was going to fix that - thanks for catching it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rodeodance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-20-06 01:32 PM
Response to Reply #1
4. yes, it is a big snaffuu
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
napi21 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-20-06 01:27 PM
Response to Original message
2. This info still doesn't get Libby off the hook.
No matter who he heard it from, receiving confidential info doesn't give you authorization to tell others who are NOT cleared to know it!

Besides, Libby is under indictment for LYING under oath! I guess he just doesn't want to suffer alone!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-20-06 01:33 PM
Response to Original message
5. Just as many of us concluded - Plame familiar with AQ Khan dealings which
Edited on Mon Mar-20-06 01:41 PM by blm
means she was in the position to know the origin of his financiers > House of Bush and House of Saud and UAE and Pakistan > BCCI.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seemslikeadream Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-20-06 01:35 PM
Response to Reply #5
7. Cheney - American Judas
Dick Cheney exposed Valerie Plame to cover up his association with A.Q. Khan's Nuclear Walmart. Read about it here: http://s93118771.onlinehome.us/DU/AMERICANJUDAS.pdf

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x2178477#2180220
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leveymg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-20-06 01:37 PM
Response to Reply #5
8. Add Saudi bankers and you have the major ingredients.
The fact that Grover Norquist and Abramoff were tapping into the same funding network to build GOP slushfunds, and you get to a very large additional reason for wanting uncooperative elements out of CIA counter-proliferation.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-20-06 01:42 PM
Response to Reply #8
11. Norquist and Rohrabacher have always been red flags to me.
BTW - I made my post more accurate. Thanks.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Minnesota_Lib Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-20-06 02:17 PM
Response to Reply #5
20. House of Bush and House of Saud=seems to hint at the Carlyle Group as well
Just fishing....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HereSince1628 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-20-06 01:34 PM
Response to Original message
6.  large amounts of money...ended up in GOP ... ? Um, anyone, HELP!
What the hell is being talked about here?

Is this REALLY known? Why isn't someone going up in front of a magistrate?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seemslikeadream Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-20-06 01:38 PM
Response to Reply #6
9. Cheney - Amercian Judas
Known to Democratic Underground for 1 1/2 years now

Sun Aug-08-04 05:23 PM

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x2178477#2180220
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HereSince1628 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-20-06 01:51 PM
Response to Reply #9
13. Isn't this primarily about money to Cheney/Halliburton?
I remember reading these. Glancing through them again I see plenty of references to Cheney in his various roles in the 80's to present. Which is basically how I remember it.

Among all this is there really a specific reference to a Republican Party connection?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leveymg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-20-06 01:54 PM
Response to Reply #13
15. No, I believe that point's my contribution.
Although Robert may have touched on it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
robertpaulsen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-20-06 03:39 PM
Response to Reply #15
26. It's a great point.
I didn't really go into any direct GOP connection, unless you count the Riggs Bank connection with BCCI. But the whole Abramoff/Norquist angle is definitely worth exploring. Great contribution!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leveymg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-20-06 03:57 PM
Response to Reply #26
30. Thank you for your work, Robert!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leveymg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-20-06 01:41 PM
Response to Reply #6
10. Here's an article about that.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/1/3/10145/56290
Abramoff Plea May Mask Bigger Crime: GOP Foreign Influence Peddling
by leveymg
Tue Jan 03, 2006 at 08:14:05 AM PDT
A plea agreement has been reached between the Bush Justice Department and attorneys representing GOP fundraiser Jack Abramoff.

This reportedly promises to implicate some 20 Congressmen in a elaborate scheme to funnel slush fund money syphoned from Indian tribes and fraud in the purchase of a cruise line to favored lawmakers. However, there is another side to the Abramoff influence-peddling operation that the Indian tribes lobbying fraud and SunCruz probes do not touch, and which major papers, such as The New York Times and The Washington Post, have virtually ignored.

That is the money that Abramoff and fellow GOP fixer, Grover Norquist,have syphoned from Islamic banks and groups known to have financial ties to terrorist organizations, including al-Qaeda.

MORE BELOW . . .

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HereSince1628 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-20-06 01:57 PM
Response to Reply #10
16. Thanks, I need to read all this again and put the pieces together, again..
I have no doubt Cheney/Halliburton are guilty up to their eyeballs. I just need to go thru and convince myself these are all pieces of the same picture or fragments from various sides of the same cube.

A trouble with being old is that somedays old things seem to be brand new. A good thing about being old is that somedays you can see things as though they are brand new.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leveymg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-20-06 07:11 PM
Response to Reply #10
33. Here's a better one that focuses on Islamic Banks-Norquist-Abramoff
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2005/10/17/122311/72

Abramoff Scandal Links GOP to Islamic Banks and Tyco Scandals
by leveymg
Mon Oct 17, 2005 at 10:23:10 AM PDT
The other shoe is about to drop on the Republican leadership, now reeling from the indictment of House Republican Leader Tom DeLay and the imminent indictments coming down from the Plame Grand Jury.

Abramoff's influence-peddling operation out of the Greenberg & Traurig law firm are connected to multiple Washington scandals, the nexus of which is lobbying that either illegally benefited Republicans or which allegedly cheated that law firm's clients.

What is less well understood is that Abramoff also served as the registered Washington lobbyist for the Government of Pakistan and is a fixer for Saudi moneymen tied to al-Qaeda and other terrorist groups. Abramoff is further implicated in the financial looting of giant Tyco International, a case that has ties to the Bush Justice Department.

---MORE BELOW THE FOLD---

leveymg's diary :: ::
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lala_rawraw Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-20-06 01:48 PM
Response to Original message
12. Just to be clear
Plame's role did not focus on Pakistan, even if the CIA's role did.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leveymg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-20-06 01:52 PM
Response to Reply #12
14. But, her work on Counter-proliferation would have made her familiar
with the details of A.Q. Khan's network, which originated in Pakistan before it metasticized with US technology and Saudi money to places as varied as North Korea and Iran.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lala_rawraw Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-20-06 02:13 PM
Response to Reply #14
18. That is correct and other networks too... but
Tracking them as tenacles in / out of Iran, not other countries.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leveymg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-20-06 03:53 PM
Response to Reply #18
28. I'd like to find out how closely compartmentalized the WMD analysts
Edited on Mon Mar-20-06 04:01 PM by leveymg
really were. I'd say that within CIA departments they do sit around a table on a frequent basis and compare findings. The Iran desk officer talks to the Iraq officer who talk to . . .etc.

Also, my understanding is that Plame was a generalist rather than a nuclear scientist by training. That tells me that she probably was approaching the task of analyzing her target country's nuclear program (was it Iran?) from a political and economic standpoint, rather than determining the type of centrifuge that left a particular uranium-235 trace. That would be someone else's job. It does seem possible that she might know more about common Khan-Bin Laden funding ties than the Bush Admin. might be comfortable with, and vis-a-versa.

But, I can also see how if she was the Iran desk officer in her unit the neocons would want her out simply because she was unwilling to falsify her reports.

Finally, since the guy who put the finger on her (perhaps quite innocently) for Scooter was a Pakistan expert, I still have to think there's some kind of connection there --and Khan is the likely common tie.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Garbo 2004 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-20-06 06:10 PM
Response to Reply #28
31. You're assuming it was Grenier who "fingered" Plame. Based on Libby's
motion, it may not have been. Libby's motion is a fishing expedition and part of the game they're playing. According to the motion it may have been either Grenier or McLaughlin? Poor Scooter can't remember which? (His faulty memory, yanno. Which is why he was so confused about how and when he first learned of Plame's identity and named Russert as his original source for the Plame info.)

Libby didn't really need a senior at the CIA to "finger" Wilson's wife. He'd been beating the bushes since at least May (if not indeed earlier) for info on Wilson. He had gotten info from State (remember the INR info memo was originally drafted in May) and even Cheney had told him that Wilson's wife worked in the Counterproliferation Division, which both Cheney and Libby would know was part of the Directorate of Operations. Later on, Libby tells Judy Miller that Wilson's wife works at WINPAC, which is not on the covert side.

Perhaps Grenier indeed met and spoke of Plame with Libby. If so, would it be completely remarkable that he would by that time be aware that Plame worked at the CIA? According to the motion, the senior official told Libby that it was her idea to send Wilson to Niger. This was the claim that Libby and others pushed to discredit Wilson. But the CIA wasn't the only source for that claim (INR memo attachment which had come from State), but it was inaccurate. Apparently, Grenier (or McLaughlin) were misinformed about Plame's actual role in Wilson's trip. Funny, that. Poor Libby, the victim of bad intel again.

Grenier's an interesting fellow, of course. But Libby's motion is more obfuscating than revealing, IMO.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leveymg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-20-06 06:46 PM
Response to Reply #31
32. Good points! But, IMHO it's worth chasing this one down.
Edited on Mon Mar-20-06 06:52 PM by leveymg
I was thinking about entitling this article, "New Filing In Libby Case Raises Question about Plame Role". But, that seemed a bit too far in the other direction.

I make no claim that this is the one and only true version, but merely that this is a possible path for potential follow-up, when and if we get more information.

Thanks.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Catrina Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-20-06 02:11 PM
Response to Reply #12
17. Didn't A.Q. Khan end up in Pakistan? Maybe that's why someone felt
he would be safe there, if so.

I'm puzzled by Tenet's role in all this. I remember seeing him before Congress many times and being frustrated by what seemed like contradictory testimony from him regarding Iraq. Sometimes I thought he was honest and telling the truth, other times I felt disappointed by him, as he appeared to retract, or qualify what he may have said in the past.

In his position he must have known a lot about what was going on in the months leading up to 9/11 ~ surely he knew about the warnings that were ignored by this WH? Of all the people involved in this mess, he is the most puzzling to me.

He and Colin Powell could have stopped the war in Iraq, imo, had they simply quit. But instead, they appear to have had reservations, but in the end, went along with what they must have known was a huge lie. Imo, that makes them even worse than the idealogues, because there's no expectation of honesty or accountability from them. Tenet and Colin Powell don't seem to have been a part of the neocon/war machine crowd, so why did they go along?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lala_rawraw Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-20-06 02:15 PM
Response to Reply #17
19. Kahn would not have known per se, but there was a very
Powerful report that resulted in the resignation of the head of ISI which implicated him in funding at least one of the hijackers, Atta.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leveymg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-20-06 02:23 PM
Response to Reply #19
21. Yes, but CIA knew about Khan and his network for
a quarter century before Musharraf was finally told, in no uncertain terms after 9/11, to put him back in the bottle. A very confortable bottle.

The Agency had his network mapped out, along with Bin Laden's network, and put tremendous resources into monitoring both (particularly where they overlapped), but did nothing to break up either until after 9/11. Why is that?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-20-06 03:08 PM
Response to Reply #21
23. Also important to remember is that Clinton and the prez of Pakistan had
been working together on a plan to get Bin Laden, it was Musharaff who led the coup againstthe elected prez then. Theeffort to trap Bin Laden was immediately stopped.

What's also significant is that in 2000, Bush called Musharaff a good man who would be helpful in that region. Uh...that "good" man just overthrew the democratically elected president of Pakistan and stopped joint efforts with the US to target Bin Laden.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lala_rawraw Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-20-06 08:55 PM
Response to Reply #21
34. SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO, KO and Shuster
Just went down the list of Libby potential witnesses AND who did they just happen to leave out???? WTF is going on???
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Garbo 2004 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-21-06 12:46 AM
Response to Reply #34
36. I thought Shuster gave an extremely bizarre report. It was all
Edited on Tue Mar-21-06 12:50 AM by Garbo 2004
over the place.

Has anyone even remotely suggested that Armitage told Cooper, Russert (?!), Miller, etc about Plame? That Libby's defense might be that Armitage was a source for these folks and they were simply "mistaken" when they said they spoke with Libby about Plame; that they simply forgot it was actually Armitage who told them about Plame???? That's so nuts, even Libby doesn't claim that. (And Russert says his conversation with Libby had nothing to do with the Wilson matter which is why Libby's charged with lying about his conversation with Russert.) What orifice did Shuster pull all that out of????? Very bizarre.

The WH got "bad info" and agencies were blaming each other? How about both State and CIA had been saying the Niger info was bad since before Wilson went to Niger and the WH simply dismissed what didn't serve their purpose and went with what they wanted to say, regardless of reports to the contrary? It wasn't at all a matter of finger pointing about who was responsible for the bad info, as if it were simply an honest mistake. They all knew what went down, why, and at whose bidding.

Shuster said Libby was trying to "correct" the record about Joe Wilson? As if Wilson needed to be corrected? Perhaps what Shuster left out of the report was that what Libby supposedly wanted to "correct" was the inference some made (or claimed that Wilson claimed) that Cheney had sent Wilson to Niger. Wilson never claimed that Cheney sent him. He did say that the CIA sent him in response to Cheney's inquiries for information. And surely that small matter could have been "corrected" without naming Wilson's wife.

Very strange bizarro report by Shuster IMO. Given all the bizarre statements/speculation in his report, not specifically mentioning Hadley as a potential witness might be viewed as a minor omission in comparison. ;) (I just saw the report in rerun to confirm I hadn't imagined what I saw the first time.)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
H2O Man Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-21-06 06:33 AM
Response to Reply #34
39. "A conspiracy of silence
speaks louder than words." -- John Lennon
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lala_rawraw Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-20-06 08:57 PM
Response to Reply #21
35. You are asking the wrong question...
Think about it... when did they really put pressure on Pakistan??
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leveymg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-21-06 06:27 AM
Response to Reply #35
38. Khan was put under house arrest in March 2001.
Edited on Tue Mar-21-06 07:25 AM by leveymg
But, almost immediately, there were complaints heard from the American side that Khan was still communicating with his network, and that Pakistan was just going through the motions. Not until October, November 2003 were Khan and his lieutenants placed under closer supervision, and even then the terms of house arrest were described as "informal". According to the Center for Nonproliferation Studies, Khan's relationship with Iran was longstanding, but ended in 1995. http://cns.miis.edu/pubs/week/040223.htm

By the end of the 1980s, after Khan Research Labs (KRL) acquired the wherewithal to produce highly-enriched uranium for a nuclear weapons program, it reversed course and began vending its services to other clients in the international system. KRL and Khan's first client was Iran (or possibly China even earlier); but the list gradually expanded to include North Korea and Libya. Starting in the late 1980s, Khan and some of his top associates began offering a one-stop shop for countries that wished to acquire nuclear technologies for a weapons program. Khan's key innovation was to integrate what was earlier a disaggregated market place for such technologies, design, engineering, and consultancy services; and in the process offer clients the option of telescoping the time required to develop a nuclear weapons capability.

Khan's sales of nuclear rechnology to Iran must have been well-understood at CIA. If Plame's focus was indeed Iran, as your sources say, then she would have also had developed an intimate understanding of the operation of Khan's network. When Plame was outed in July 2003, Khan was still actively pursuing his enterprise. But, according to CNS, after 1995, KRL was engaged with other clients:

But despite existing gaps, there is evidence that nuclear transfers to Iran from Pakistan occurred during 1989-1995.<1> According to Pakistani government sources, North Korea obtained similar assistance between the years 1997-2001.<2> However, US intelligence agencies believe that strategic trade between Pyongyang and Islamabad continued as late as August 2002.<3> Khan also began cooperating with Libya in 1997and such cooperation continued until fall 2003.<4>

All three countries - Iran, North Korea, and Libya - obtained blueprints, technical design data, specifications, components, machinery, enrichment equipment, models, and notes related to KRL's first generation P-1 and the next generation P-2 centrifuges.
Cooperation between Pakistan and Iran most likely began in 1987 after the two countries signed a secret agreement on nuclear cooperation for peaceful purposes. Apparently, Khan sold "disused" P-1 centrifuges and what he describes as outmoded equipment to Iran along with the drawings and technical specifications and possibly components or complete assemblies of the more advanced P-2 model.<5> Initial deliveries were made during the years 1989-1991; but evidence has surfaced that transfers continued as late as 1995.<6> Pakistani investigators believe that some of the shipments were probably transported over land through a Karachi-based businessman. Other shipments were routed through Dubai.

Similarly, Khan and his associates supplied Pyongyang with centrifuge and enrichment machines, and depleted uranium hexaflouride gas (UF6).<7> Orders for the North Korean contract were placed in 1997 and deliveries continued until 1999. KRL also rendered further technical assistance to Pyongyang during 1999-2001.<8> Some of the shipments to North Korea were flown directly from Pakistan using chartered and Pakistan Air Force transports.<9>


So, if your sources are right and the CNS information is accurate, then Plame's work related to the Khan network may have been primarily historical. One can speculate that others within Brewster Jennings may have had a more direct focus on Pakistan. When she was outed by the White House, her whole unit effectively lost its cover, and coverage of Khan and related networks was sabotaged.

***

The main point I'm making is that the financial network that supported al-Qaeda and Khan overlapped, but was left virtually untouched, in some cases for many months after 9/11. There doesn't seem to have been any effort made to cut off the money flow that was going abroad from money centers in Chicago and New York -- in fact, there was an historic spike in currency outflows in July and August 2001 that haven't been explained --and no cessation to the money coming in from the Gulf and Pakistan that was going to the UBL cells here. Why didn't they roll that up?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leveymg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-21-06 07:41 AM
Response to Reply #38
42. Correction: Khan was removed as Director of his Gov't post in 3/01, but
wasn't placed under house arrest until 2/04, after Khadafi released the details of Khan's transfers to Libya in December 2003.

There's an interesting account originally in the LA Times here: http://www.brothersjudd.com/blog/archives/2005/09/typhoid_abdul.html

On Dec. 19, 2003, after months of secret negotiations with British and U.S. officials, Kadafi agreed to abandon his chemical, biological and nuclear programs. As part of the deal, Libya turned over records that directly tied Khan to the sale of nuclear technology and a warhead design.

Musharraf negotiated Khan's final surrender: The scientist would confess on television to unspecified proliferation in exchange for keeping his wealth and strict confinement to his home.

Mir, the journalist, met the defeated scientist at his government office a few days before he began his house arrest in February 2004. Khan railed that U.S. and Pakistani intelligence had caused his troubles, and he lashed out at Musharraf, predicting that he would do the Americans' bidding again by turning over Osama bin Laden just before the U.S. elections in November of that year.

"He thought that nobody could touch him because he is a hero," Mir said. "It was beyond his expectations that Musharraf could arrest him.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Catrina Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-21-06 01:28 AM
Response to Reply #19
37. Wasn't he the one who was with Bush Sr. and a Bin Laden brother on 9/11
Edited on Tue Mar-21-06 01:53 AM by Catrina
at a meeting in DC?

BLM just reminded me of something also ~ the coup d'etat by Musharaff which stopped Clinton from getting Bin Laden ~ the previous president of Pakistan was cooperating with Clinton. Was Tenet CIA chief at that time? I know that Musharaff refused to cooperate once he took over. That should have made him an enemy of the US. I remember being puzzled when Bush said he was an ally, and then, Musharaff, contrary to his previous position, he appeared to be 'helping' with the terror problem. But we still don't have Osama Bin Laden ~ could this all have been pre-planned to protect Bin Laden?

Regarding A.Q.Khan, I realize that Valerie Plame was probably more involved with tracking Iranian arms dealers ~ Are you saying she might NOT have known or been interested in, A.Q Khan? Or maybe she was not assigned to tracking him, someone else was. And Tenet would have known all of this, including what her mission was. Could he have been one of Novak's sources? Is the CIA chief considered to be a WH official?

Fitzgerald is said to have asked the Italians for some documents regarding the Niger forgeries ~ and as I recall, wasn't Judith Miller involved in that also?

If Valerie Plame was tracking Iranian arms dealers, and she stumbled on the weapons meant for Iraq, Cheney would definitely have had in interest in stopping her if that was the case.

Valerie Plame/The Pentagon Spy Case/Forged Niger Documents ~ I think they are all connected ~ and Fitzgerald knows ~ way more than we do by now.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Garbo 2004 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-21-06 06:59 AM
Response to Reply #37
40. The "report" that allegedly Fitz requested, as reported by antiwar.com
and I think also later a UPI reporter, apparently simply did not exist. I recall reading that at Laura Rozen's site. Looks like there was a lot of disinformation going about and that included the claims that such a Parliamentary report existed and that Fitz had requested and received a copy of it.

Yup, after a search, here's a link to her article: http://www.warandpiece.com/blogdirs/002983.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Catrina Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-21-06 07:02 PM
Response to Reply #40
44. Thank you, I wondered about that since I never really saw any proof
of it either ~
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-22-06 01:10 PM
Response to Reply #37
45. This DU gang of BFEE watchers are anxiously awaiting Fitzgerald's report
on all of this, that's for sure.

You asked some good questions. I have to hope that Fitz is, too.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seemslikeadream Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-20-06 03:16 PM
Response to Reply #17
24. under Bush security restrictions, the inquiry was stymied
Edited on Mon Mar-20-06 03:19 PM by seemslikeadream
http://www.gregpalast.com/detail.cfm?artid=312&row=0

If this planet blows to pieces this year, thank Khan Labs' and Bush

You may never have heard of Khan Laboratories, but if this planet blows to pieces this year, it will be thanks to Khan Labs' creating nuclear warheads for Pakistan's military. Because investigators had been tracking the funding for this so-called "Islamic Bomb" back to Saudi Arabia, under Bush security restrictions, the inquiry was stymied. (The restrictions were lifted, the agent told me without a hint of dark humor, on September 11.)

Noam Chomsky, who read the story on page one of the Times of India, has wondered, "Why wasn't it all over US papers?

.. A top-level CIA operative who spoke with us on condition of strictest anonymity said that, after Bush took office, "There was a major policy shift" at the National Security Agency. Investigators were ordered to "back off" from any inquiries into Saudi Arabian financing of terror networks, especially if they touched on Saudi royals and their retainers. That put the Bin Ladens, a family worth a reported $12 billion and a virtual arm of the Saudi royal household, off limits for investigation.

I probed our CIA contact for specifics of investigations that were hampered by orders to back off of the Saudis. He told us that Khan Laboratories investigation had been effectively put on hold.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-21-06 11:07 AM
Response to Reply #24
43. Gee - just like his daddy's tactics on BCCI - thwart EVERY investigation
into the actual funding of the terrorists and their global financial networks.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
H2O Man Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-20-06 03:21 PM
Response to Reply #12
25. Right.
It's important to stay focused on the specific roles of the main players involved. Going to Pakistan is a tangent, so far as the Plame scandal goes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leveymg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-20-06 03:40 PM
Response to Reply #25
27. Some of the most interesting parts of any journey are the side-trips.
It can be awfully hard to follow the main narrative unless you read the sidebars.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
H2O Man Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-20-06 03:56 PM
Response to Reply #27
29. Sure.
No question about that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
texpatriot2004 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-20-06 03:05 PM
Response to Original message
22. Wow. Thanks for this post leyeymg nm
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stop the bleeding Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-21-06 07:26 AM
Response to Original message
41. Thanks leveymg
I am posting so that I can come back and read thread in a little bit once my work gets caught up.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Dec 26th 2024, 10:10 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC