Simple question:Does the NIE contain DIRECT reference to Plame? Yes or No?

[rpgamerd00d]

Anyone?
Link?

Thanks.

[mdmc]

1. I don't know

[Windy]

2. If it didn't , why would Libby mention it in defense of the Plame

Investigation?

[converted_democrat]

10. On edit- Good point, but we won't know until it's declassified will

we? If I was a betting women, and I am, I'd bet there is direct linkage..

[Windy]

11. Well wait....Bush declassified it now didn't he...so msm..what does it say

[moobu2]

3. no

[berni_mccoy]

7. We do NOT know what the NIE contains yet... but it DOES NOT MATTER

Read this: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=865748&mesg_id=865748

[MADem]

4. Well, until it is DECLASSIFIED, how will we know???

Bottom line, we don't see Scotty McThreeChins handing out copies to the WH Press Corps, do we?

[berni_mccoy]

5. It DOES NOT MATTER. Read this =====>

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=865748&mesg_id=865748

[htuttle]

6. You'll have to ask Jeff Gannon or Judy Miller

None of us has been able to see it.

[bush_is_wacko]

8. Since we don't know the entire contents of that document due to

selective de-classification, how can we know the answer to that? My guess is that whatever was "officially" declassified doesn't contain that information but that doesn't mean Libby didn't leak information that led straight to her!

This administration is really good at covering their asses. I suspect they have done that in this instance too.

[HereSince1628]

9. IIRC it does in the context that Fitz asserted Defendant didn't need doc.s

that had to do with the outing that initiated the investigation because Libby is only charged with perjury and obstruction of justice.

[Karmakaze]

12. From what I have read of the testimony...

no.

In fact you are all falling into a Bush Cabal trap. You are going to keep yelling about illegal leaks etc, only to have it proved that Libby did not leak anything from the NIE that he wasnt authorised to, and that Bush had the legal right to authorise that disclosure.

You are being conned again.

[stop the bleeding]

14. The point is that Fibby leaked as authorized by * for political gain/

protection and that is wrong, this is about leaks but not about Plame and the NIE - at least not yet.

[Karmakaze]

15. Exactly!!! Stop arguing that it is illegal!

Because all that will do is make US look stupid!

Don't fall into their trap!

[converted_democrat]

19. Last night John Dean said that he wasn't convinced that it was legal..

The president can declassify info, but he has to go through a number of steps to do it.. John said that he didn't believe that the proper steps were taken.

[Karmakaze]

21. That would be a guess, as he wouldnt know...

All he is going on is the same testimony the rest of us can read. He doesn't know what went on behind the scenes.

Even then, I feel that if this was genuine and NOT a trap, Libby would have never said a thing. He doesnt have to, he is not charged with leaking, he is charged with lying to investigators. This testimony really has nothing to do with the charges against him and as such my feeling is that there is more to this than meets the eye.

So, it would just be prudent to NOT argue that line until it is absolutely indisputable that Bush broke the law. In fact it would be even stronger if you could say "We gave him the benefit of the doubt, and it turns out it WAS illegal!"

[converted_democrat]

22. I understand what you're saying, but he explained the declassification

processes, and there are only a couple of ways of doing it.. He also claimed that if it had been done properly there would have been some "paper trail" "telltale" signs that it had been done, and there are none.. According to him, and he gave a couple of examples, and in the most plausible scenario George Tenant would've been involved, and Tenant is saying that he knew nothing about any of it.. I should have recorded Oblermann last night, that was the show he was on.. Dean, for whatever reason, was convinced that the right steps were not taken, and even questioned out loud if we are still living in a democracy.. Go look at Crooks and Liars, or Can o' Fun to see if you can find the Olbermann video, it was on last night.. It was a very informative interview, I just wish I would've had the for thought to record it.. I'm not saying that he for sure broke the law, but I think there is good reason to suspect he did, and Dean spoke on no uncertain terms.. He made his position very clear.. They lie about everything, and think they are above the law, to the point that they don't do anything by the book.. Why would one think this would be any different?

[Karmakaze]

25. If so, all the better...

But consider this - this could be the most powerful ammo against Bush, OR it could destroy the Dem's credibility coming into the election. Don't you think it just makes sense to back off the hardcore allegations until there is more than just speculation and opinion?

Wait until AFTER the election and the Dems, by the signs of it, will be in control of at least one house of Congress. But if the Dems start pushing this "it was illegal" line and then it turns out it wasn't (say Bush produces the paper trail) then the Dems may very well lose the coming elections.

I believe the Dems should push the "trust" line - Bush betrayed the public's trust in him (regardless of whether he broke the law), as so many other Republicans are being exposed as having done. The Republicans CAN'T disprove that, so nothing they do can make the Dems look bad for pointing it out. If solid evidence emerges that he DID break the law then the Dems can say it was even worse than they feared, and STILL come out on top.

[stop the bleeding]

13. I'll try to keep it short, but here you go

Feb 02 there was mock up on Iraq War Intel and Plame's name was first noted in memo's from these/this meeting.

Fast forward, out of these memo's there became one that was called the INR memo that was essentially notes from that meeting along with other Iraq Intel. (summer 2003)This is the memo that was on AF1 that was being passed around by Ari, Powell, Rice ect... This is the same memo that was handled by Armitage that he gave to Powell by request before that AF1 Africa flight.

The NIE - this is a document that traditionally takes up to 3 months to prepare and is always customary before our Country does big events like a war per say. Now according to Firedoglake, the WH wasn't even gonna have an NIE until Dick Durbin asked for one and the WH reluctantly complied and did it in 20 days or so vs the usual 3 months.

Now here is the fun part, the INR memo that has Plame's status all throughout it, was included as a footnote in the NIE but not in the White Paper of the NIE that went to Congress as requested. In addition to the INR footnote it completely contradicted what portions of the NIE was saying about yellow cake - important ommission IMO.

Now based on that the INR does contain Plame's name, as far as the NIE solely on it's own - well we will have to wait until it is "declassified" - oops it already is - silly me.

Lastly my bet is that the NIE does mention Plame and her Husband since they had been on the radar for quite some time. Also keep in mind that I have given you a watered down version of what went on based on my memory from reading countless articles/blogs and reports.



more on the INR and NIE here at

http://72.14.203.104/search?q=cache:_mjOsVbkl6AJ:firedoglake.blogspot.com/2006_02_05_firedoglake_archive.html+Could+Cheney+Declassify+the+NIE+plame+inr+firedoglake&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=1

I you have to scroll down at least a 5th of the page you'll see,

and also this on how the INR came into being by Roger Morris

http://72.14.203.104/search?q=cache:RajaUXFaeDcJ:www.counterpunch.org/morris07272005.html+counterpunch+rice+INR+NIE+plame&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=1

[carolinalady]

16. Yep-here is a link referencing the footnote and the timeline of the

NIE compilation.

http://www.cfr.org/publication.html?id=7758#6

<snip>

Were there any footnotes in the Iraq NIE?
Yes. Two have come to public attention. In one, the State Department's INR bureau dissented from the intelligence community's majority view that Baghdad was reconstituting its nuclear weapons program, saying there was not enough evidence to reach that conclusion. In particular, it raised doubts about whether a large shipment of aluminum tubes sought by Iraq was intended for centrifuges to enrich nuclear fuel, as asserted by other agencies. In another footnote, the U.S. Air Force's director for intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance questioned whether the unmanned aerial vehicles being developed by Iraq were "probably" intended to deliver biological agents. Instead, he said that would be an unlikely mission for such aircraft. This footnote was left out of the declassified version.

[stop the bleeding]

17. thank you - you may want to read these

Now here's something - the INR memo that became a footnote in the NIE was based on a Feb 02 meeting that discussed Plame and her status, this is the same memo that was later drawn up and then pulled by Armitage as requested by Powell that was passed around on AF1 on the trip to Africa - this INR memo had the Yellowcake claims as bogus but even more it had Plame's job/status all through it and marked as "Secret".

So there are few things to take into account here.


more on the INR and NIE here at

http://72.14.203.104/search?q=cache:_mjOsVbkl6AJ:firedoglake.blogspot.com/2006_02_05_firedoglake_archive.html+Could+Cheney+Declassify+the+NIE+plame+inr+firedoglake&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=1

I you have to scroll down at least a 5th of the page you'll see,

and also this on how the INR came into being by Roger Morris

http://72.14.203.104/search?q=cache:RajaUXFaeDcJ:www.counterpunch.org/morris07272005.html+counterpunch+rice+INR+NIE+plame&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=1

[Igel]

18. I've been looking around, and I can't

find an actual assertion (in a quick perusal of your links, or in numerous others) that the INR dissent in the 10/02 NIE contained information about Plame's identity.

This is the assertion that's crucial to make explicit, because many have it as a presumption. I can live with claims that are likely true but not definitively shown to be true but I treat such claims completely differently from claims I consider proven (although I leave open the possibility of revisiting 'proven' claims).

There was a 2/02 meeting, notes resulted from it, Wilson's trip resulted from it, and, as expected, from Wilson's trip documents resulted. It's clear the notes would probably include Plame's ID, and it's possible that the documents resulting from Wilson's trip might discuss Plame if she had such a minor role, unless they contained an exhaustive accounting of how his trip arose; this seems unlikely to me, but possible.

What I haven't seen is anybody actually substantiating the claim that the notes containing her ID were copied into the NIE (that seems highly unlikely, IMHO), or that any intervening reports containing her name were copied into the NIE. There was an INR dissent. There seems to be a presumption that the 6/03 INR document is the same as the INR dissent in the 10/02 NIE. But they have different purposes, and therefore foci.

Is there a reliable source for the 6/03 document's being identical to the INR dissent, or supporting the assertion that the INR dissenting footnote contained Plame's name/ID?

[stop the bleeding]

20. That is what I have been trying to nail down myself - so far this is all

that I can piece together - this is why I am throwing this out to see if DU can do some better detective work to address your questions about the 06/03 AF1 INR(marked Secret with Plame's status) and NIE footnote INR.

There is scant information on these Documents but they are super critical as you already know.

see this thread on the NIE being declassified to Snooty Miller in 09/02????

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x867128

[warrens]

23. mymymy, only declassified the parts that helped him, eh?

This is going to just get better and better.

[Neil Lisst]

24. If you get caught leaking classified, hide it by declassify it in a bushel

of other materials