Tony's Surprise Visit

by emptywheel

Digby and Robert George remind us that the Plame leak didn't happen in one dimension--at precisely the same time as Bush's top advisors were plotting to out a spy, Tony Blair's government was leaking the identity of David Kelly. George does a good job of showing how intertwined the events of those Two Tense Weeks were. (As I mentioned in this comment, I considered whether the information on Iraqi acquisition of uranium that Fitzgerald subpoenaed from Judy might have to do with David Kelly; but Kelly's intelligence expertise--and the dispute over the British dossier--related to BW and CW.)

So while we're discussing Transatlantic scandals, I'd like to direct attention back to what I believe to be a last-minute visit by Tony Blair on July 17 2003.

Now I don't have any proof that it was a last minute visit (got right back on that speculative rocker, didn't I?). But there are several reasons I think the visit was put together as a response to the intertwined scandals.The visit was first announced less than a week earlier, on July 11. And, in spite of the fact that the official announcement of the visit came from Ari's office, he was not informed of the news.

Q: Ari, Prime Minister Blair is coming next week, is that correct?

MR. FLEISCHER: I don't think that's correct.

Q: I've heard -- I thought I heard from somebody at the White House --

MR. FLEISCHER: -- saying I'm paying a little less attention to events after Monday than I used to, but I don't --

Q: I heard he's giving a joint address to Congress --

MR. FLEISCHER: I'll have to look. I don't know.

Perhaps they just didn't tell Ari because he was a has-been by this point (his last day would be the 14th, 3 days before the visit). Can't blame them for that. But it'd be hard to keep Ari in the dark unless it was dreamt up after Ari left on Air Force One to go to Africa. That is, after Rove and Libby started ratcheting up their campaign against Wilson.

We know that Blair and Bush had used face to face meetings previously to strategize how to win PR campaigns, as when Blair visited Bush's ranch in March 2002.

The rewards from your visit to Crawford will be few.  The risks are high, both for you and for the Government.

And details about the same visit tell us Bush looked to Blair for guidance on such issues.

Bush will want to pick your brains. He will also want to hear whether he can expect coalition support.

No doubt we need to keep a sense of perspective. But my talks with Condi convinced me that Bush wants to hear you [sic] views on Iraq before taking decisions.

But just because Bush and Blair had had big pow-wows in person in the past doesn't mean they were here. Publicly, the visit seems to have been an opportunity to make speeches reinforcing their belief they were doing the right thing in Iraq, and reiterating their confidence they would find WMDs. Perhaps that's all it was, a joint press conference, an attempt to find strength in unity.

But here's a question I'd like to ask. Was Blair's visit in response to the Wilson op-ed? If it was, wouldn't that suggest Bush and Blair were intimately involved in strategizing a response? If so, how far would their knowledge extend?

Robert George asks:

WHO is the “member of [David Kelly’s] fan club” in a position to tell Judy Miller that “things went well for” him in his testimony on July 16th?

Me, I want to know what Blair and Bush had to say to each other about their dual scandals--and what that reveals about their active involvement in the response.

Update: antonetteg reminds me the truly important part of Blair's visit:

"JD Guckert was busy entertaining the Prime Minister of Great Britain (not a joke)."

And in the story Gannon filed, he seems to have been present at the Blair / Bush news conference, and possibly even their "private meeting."

So two questions. What do Bush and Blair know? And does JimmyJeff have any proof of the, um, intimacy of their knowledge?

Comments

[antonetteg]

Wasn't that the same meeting Jeff Gannon was supposed to have "attended" in some way? The notes from the fraternity where he was an alumn make reference to Jeff Guckert entertaining the prime minister of england.

[emptywheel]

Indeed it was, Antonette, indeed it was.

Thanks for the reminder.

[eriposte]

EW,

If you want to understand what was happening in the UK on the specific topic of the uranium from Africa claim, I invite you to peruse through my detailed analysis of the Butler Report and what was not covered in the Butler Report.
http://www.theleftcoaster.com/archives/004909.php

At a 10,000 foot level, you have to remember that Bush was depending on Blair to bail him out because his SOTU claim was "The British Government has learned..." It was critically important that, therefore, any British parliamentary report on the Niger/Africa claim be written in a way that made the British claim appear valid and thus provide backup to Bush. After all, once the Bushies realized they were losing the PR battle here, they resorted to "Bush only said the British claimed it and the British still believe their claim is valid". If you review my analysis you will see how the British claim not only crumbles, but is linked to the same forged Niger documents. I also demonstrate that Bush's reference to the British was false, in itself.

The British produced the Taylor report in Sep 2003 and the Butler Report in summer 2004. The wording used in both reports was intended to deliberately mislead and obfuscate. I cover both in the link above. Take a look.

P.S. I haven't spent much time on the David Kelly incident or the other British WMD claims, but their uranium claim was an epitome for their fakery.

[John Lopresti]

How about Rove meeting his match in extempore jawboning with Bush providing one attaboy. Blair can debate, and he had a pretty good foreign minister. Even the US congress decorum is going continental these days, just last week the lower chamber resounded with cries of shame, shame, and the Minority Leader gave a long speech about delaying voting for jawboning in that house. Excellent you should remind us of the strange though very predictable alliance which resulted from those meetings. The Rove most desired outcome to topple Blair unattainable for the US pamphleteer. Wonder what Goss thinks of UK intelligence service; has to cooperate; it is a complex universe

[obsessed]

ew - not to stray from the immediate topic, but you might be interested in this Judy retropspective in Salon

[Pat]

In Libys letter to Judy, he mentioned 'SUICIDE "BOMBERS, AND STORIES TO "COVER" could the suicude be a reference to David Kelly?

[obsessed]

could the suicide be a reference to David Kelly?

yikes ... you're creeping me out!

[antiaristo]

emptywheel,
I'm delighted that people are beginning to notice that the British Government was used to launder dirty information. Do you know about the meeting between Stephen Hadley and Alan Foley of the CIA?
This from the Sunday Mail (mid-market), no longer linkable.
Judy is certain Kelly was offed. Today anyone with a brain agrees, but Judy said this the day after he was found dead.

DARK ACTORS PLAYING GAMES

How suicide scientist described tormentors in final email to friend; DEATH OF A FALL GUY

Jamie Macaskill
20 July 2003

SUICIDE scientist Dr David Kelly warned a friend that "dark actors" were working against him just hours before his death.
Dr Kelly revealed his fears shortly before killing himself after being dragged into the row over the Government's justification for war in Iraq.
In an email to American author Judy Miller, sent just before he left his home for the last time, he referred to "many dark actors playing games".
But, according to Miller, Dr Kelly gave no indication he was depressed or planning to take his own life.
He told her he would wait "until the end of the week" before deciding his next move following his traumatic appearance before a House of Commons select committee.
Yesterday, Miller said she believed the "dark forces" Dr Kelly was referring to were in the secret services and Ministry of Defence.
They have already been accused of using Dr Kelly as a "scapegoat" in a bitter row between the Government, whose offensive was led by Tony Blair's spin doctor Alastair Campbell, and the BBC.
Miller, who lives in New York, said: "Based on earlier conversations with Dr Kelly, the words seemed to refer to people within the Ministry of Defence and Britain's intelligence agencies with whom he had often sparred over interpretations of intelligence reports."
Snip…

It was in the last few hours before he set off on a walk from his home in Southmoor, near Abingdon, telling his wife that he was "stretching his legs", that he sent his final emails.
In one, to Professor Alastair Hay, he said he was looking forward to returning to Baghdad where he worked as a weapons inspector.
The email said: "Many thanks for your support. Hopefully it will soon pass and I can get to Baghdad and get on with the real job."
Another associate, who received an email from Dr Kelly shortly before he left the house, said the message was "combative".
He had told the friend he was determined to overcome the scandal and again spoke enthusiastically about returning to Iraq.
And to Ms Miller, who he helped write a book on the threat of biological weapons, he sent the email mentioning "dark players", which gives damning evidence to the scandal he had been embroiled in.
Snip…..
And he is believed to have told a colleague that the Government claim that Saddam could deploy weapons of mass destruction in 45 minutes was totally inaccurate, as it would take handlers the same time to even start filling shells with biological compounds.
Yesterday, the judicial inquiry announced by Tony Blair hours after being told of Dr Kelly's death was branded a delaying tactic intended to postpone the "blame game".
The tactic of announcing an inquiry to stall further discussion on embarrassing issues has been tried several times by governments desperate to sweep something under the carpet..

[emptywheel]

antiaristo

Which meeting between Foley and Hadley are you talking about?

[antiaristo]

emptywheel,
A few days before the SOTU the CIA were still resisting the use of uranium from Niger. So Condi and Tenet arranged for the lead CIA analyst (Alan Foley) to meet with Stephen Hadley and resolve the matter.
When they met Hadley put forward all the propaganda and Foley shot it down piece by piece. Finally, at the end of the meeting Hadley put forward the form of words used in the SOTU. That "The BRITISH GOVERNMENT has learned....". Foley could not counter this without the big no-no: he could not say the British Government was lying, could he? That sort of thing would be way above Foley's pay grade.
That's why they used that formulation. It was a lie, but technically it could not be proven to be a lie.
Same old story. The burden of proof where it should not be.

[emptywheel]

Oh, yeah, I cover that, from a different perspective, here.

[antiaristo]

emptywheel,
I'm not sure. My recollection is that Foley met Hadley on this. I'll keep looking, but in the meantime there is this:

Here's how it went down: according to Alan Foley, a proliferation expert at the CIA, he was questioned by Robert G. Joseph, a nuclear proliferation expert at the National Security Council, about the use of the uranium claim in a draft of the State of the Union address. Foley (CIA) objected to the use of the claim because the intelligence was weak and had been essentially discredited. Joseph (NSC) then cited the British report. Foley countered that the CIA did not believe the report was correct. Joseph then asked Foley to at least confirm that the British had indeed made such a report. Foley confirmed that this was true, the British had issued such a report. End of discussion.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/articles/03/07/16_blame.html

[antiaristo]

emptywheel,
Yes, you are correct. It WAS Joseph (a crony of Richard Perle, so Fitz should know all about him from Hollinger),
Here is Gary Leupp's take.

Throughout this period, the Office of Special Plans seems to have enjoyed the upper hand, although it skirmished with the State Department and CIA from time to time over the utility of specific intelligence. The key exchange occurred just before President Bush delivered his State of the Union speech January 28, when one Robert G. Joseph, director for nonproliferation at the National Security Council, asked Alan Foley, a C.I.A. expert on weapons of mass destruction, whether the president's address could include a reference to Iraq's seeking uranium from Niger. Foley recommended that the reference be removed, since the intelligence was of uncertain credibility. Joseph then asked if it would be accurate to cite the British white paper as the source of the information. Foley replied that the CIA had actually informed British intelligence that it doubted the Niger materials, but he apparently agreed that it would be technically accurate to say that the British had a report that Iraq had attempted to purchase uranium from Africa. Hence the infamous line in the January 28 address: "The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa.'' (The quality of British intelligence came under scrutiny when, in early February, 10 Downing Street issued the paper, "Iraq: Its Infrastructure of Concealment, Deception, and Intimidation." The article was supposedly based on high-level British intelligence, but at least 11 of the 16 pages were lifted, verbatim, from two articles published in the September 2002 edition of Middle East Review of International Affairs, an Israeli journal.)
http://www.counterpunch.org/leupp07262003.html

It comes back to the same thing. They used the British Government to launder lies. They must have been REALLY nervous of Kelly leaking more. Look how quickly Tenet apologised!

[emptywheel]

I think you meant I was incorrect, antiaristo, that it was Hadley instead of Joseph.

And one important point about the laundering through England bit.

On July 15, a report came out that Niger was the only source of the White Paper. Which meant, in the middle of this week, while BushCo was claiming there were other sources behind the Africa claim, it became clear they were lying.

[antiaristo]

emptywheel,
Let me give you a heads up on this when it comes to ANYTHING official coming out of the UK. This is the Treason Felony Act of 1848.

3. Offences herein mentioned declared to be felonies
...If any person whatsoever shall, within the United Kingdom or without, compass, imagine, invent, devise or to deprive or depose our Most Gracious Lady the Queen, ...from the style, honour, or royal name of the imperial crown of the United Kingdom, or of any other of her Majesty's dominions and countries, or to levy war against her Majesty, ...within any part of the United Kingdom, in order by force or constraint to compel her... to change her... measures of counsels, or in order to put any force or constraint upon her or in order to intimidate or overawe both Houses or either House of Parliament, or to move or stir any foreigner or stranger with force to invade the United Kingdom or any other of her Majesty's dominions or countries under the obeisance of her Majesty... and such compassings, imaginations, inventions, devices, or intentions, or any of them, shall express, utter, or declare, by publishing any printing or writing, ...or by any overt act or deed, every person so offending shall be guilty of felony, and being convicted thereof shall be liable, ...to be transported beyond the seas for the term of his or her natural life.

As an example, this law was invoked to REVERSE the attorney general's opinion on the legality of invading Iraq.

[lysias]

antiaristo,

So transporation is still in effect as the penalty for a valid law of the UK?

I wonder where violators of that act would now get transported to. The Falklands?

[lysias]

antiaristo,

So transporation is still in effect as the penalty for a valid law of the UK?

I wonder where violators of that act would now get transported to. The Falklands?