A lot has happened on the Niger front since I wrote my piece this morning. La Repubblica has published a follow-up account; Josh Marshall gives both the gist and his analysis.
Laura Rozen also takes a very helpful look at the matter. Rozen was able to confirm a key contention made by the Italian newspaper -- that Bush's Deputy National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley met with SISMI head Nicolo Pollari on September 9, 2002. At that time, Pollari had some Niger docs that he wanted to palm off on BushCo. Roughly eleven months earlier, Pollari had already told Washington about Iraq's alleged devious doings in Africa. The documents seemed to confirm this earlier warning.
(Clever, eh? Pollari used one lie to "confirm" a later, more elaborate lie...)
Can we reconcile this new data with previous claims that the hoax originated with Ledeen and two former CIA officers? I believe so. La Repubblica traces the plot back to SISMI officer Antonio Nucera. But the actual origin point remains cloudy; in a forgery case, one always likes to know the name of the actual forger. Do not dismiss the earlier report that Ledeen, Clarridge and Wolf were the ultimate masterminds.
Perhaps the most startling aspect of this spy tale is the chronology. The forgery conspiracy seems to date back to 1999 -- which means the plot to foment war in the Middle East began well before 9/11.
Yet Pollari waited until shortly after the tragedy to put the plot into motion.
Did SISMI as an institution try to mislead the Bush administration into war? Sure seems that way -- but only on the surface.
SISMI head Pollari did not merely meet with Hadley. He did not merely pass the forgeries along. He had warned the Bushites about the Niger "revelation" as early in October, 2001. A short while later, he offered Cheney's office transcripts of the documents; later still, he handed over the documents themselves. In all, he spent a year cultivating the ground for war.
Question: Why on earth would SISMI want to goad the U.S. into invading Iraq?
Answer: They wouldn't.
Someone else was using Pollari, Nucera and so forth. Italian intelligence gained nothing from an American invasion. Besides, if this were truly a job conducted by SISMI (or any other professional intelligence agency), the fakes would have been of a higher quality.
Therefore, we must be dealing with an ad hoc group operating both inside and outside SISMI. Ideology and personal loyalty binds these individuals together.
There is precedent for the existence of such a group: "Super SISMI" of P2 fame. That group networked with interests outside Italy -- in particular, with what Joseph Trento calls the "rogue CIA."
I have now reconsidered the attractive-but-fanciful scenario (outlined below) that the CIA intentionally used these documents to embarrass the Bush administration. A cute idea -- but impossible. We now know that the plot pre-dates this administration.
No, we are dealing with a long-range plan to use American military might to remake the Middle East. The lie that led to war was not a SISMI plot per se, although key participants did belong to that agency. Neither was this a CIA plot per se, although the American participants do have backgrounds with American intelligence. Neither can we say that this a Bush/Cheney plot, since the scheme predates the administration.
One of the frustrating things about this international network is that we cannot put a name to it. The tired and not-really-accurate "neocon" label is the only nomenclature we have; for now, it will have to do.
I suspect that La Repubblica acquired this information from a leaks within the Berlusconi government, desinged to forestall Fitzgerald's revealtion.
Note: I wrote an earlier version of this story under the impression that Berlusconi owned La Repubblica. I remembered having read that he had purchased the larger concern which owned the newspaper. But I forgot the most important part of the story: The editorial staff successfully revolted against him. The paper is now the leading critical voice against Berlusconi.
There's an old Russian proverb: Memory is a crazy old woman who picks up scattered bits of discarded cloth while ignoring diamonds. My memory usually isn't that bad, thank god. Now, however, I must beg the readers' forgiveness for a serious lapse. I've had several significant "memory errors" since I started blogging, but this one is the most absurd and humiliating.
6 comments:
Joe. Of course the plans to invade Iraq and Afghanistan pre-date 9/11. We know from various doucments PNAC puiblished during the Clinton era that remaking the geopolitical map of the Middle East and the Caspian basin was a priority. We also know that Cheney's Energy Task Force group had a map drawn dividing up Iraq's oil spoils in March 2001. All of which helps to explain spme of the motives behind 9/11.Part of the trap that many fall into is trying to decide the cui bono question in the singlular. In fact it can be argued that many diverse interests overlapped in the 9/11 spectacular inclujding but not limited to international money laundering, the narcotics traffic, Likud desires for a great Israel, and the arms industry. A more difficult question is who had the capability to orchestrate such a diverse set of plays. For some of the answers to that question see Webster Tarpley's 9/11 Synthetic Terrorism (2005). I expect Peter Dale Scott's forthcoming book on 9/11 to also build on his earlier pioneering analysis of the "deep politics" behind current events.
The refusal of the mainstream media to explore the real nature of 9/11 is the same reason they will discuss the truth about the JFK assassination. To do so would expose too much of the dark underbelly of who rules America and the lengths they will go to to preserve that power.
La Repubblica is of course not owned by Berlusconi. Note that the original article discusses Ledeen's role too.
Repubblica is a left-of-center newspaper not owned or controlled by Berlusconi.
You're right. I remembered reading somewhere that Belusconi had purchased the larger concern which owned the paper. But I forgot the most important part of the story: The editorial staff successfully revolted. I still think the current stories could not be out there unless there were a semi-approved leak. I'll update my pieces.
The odd thing here is that the Niger hoax -- regardless of who was spooking whom -- was completely unnecessary from the point of view of BushCo.
We know BushCo was more than ready to make virtually any claim -- mushroom clouds, mobile laboratories, tons of supposed lethal WMDs, "there is no doubt Iraq is constituting its nuclear weapons.... -- with no documents at all, and with millions of Americans prepared to believe them.
The Niger forgeries were at most a side-show, and a completely unnecessary one, as far as BushCo was concerned. These people would have gone to war based on a candy wrapper.
Odd, how the small things do people in. Hoping, of course, that it *does* do them in...
Ah, Anon 8:18, you have me laughing heartily over the candy wrapper idea. I can see Bush now, "Saddam Hussein recently tried to purchase Snickers from Africa!" That is an awesome analogy and you may consider it stolen.
I, too, marvel at the fact that this of all this, is what's done them in. I somehow cannot help but wonder if a few members of their organization are happy that the Bush crew is going down over this before other--more damaging--secrets can be revealed.
Post a Comment