Capitol Hill Blue RETRACTS Wilkinson Story (!!!!!!!!!!!!!)

[WilliamPitt]

Mother FUCKERS.

:grr:

Conned big time
By DOUG THOMPSON
Jul 9, 2003, 18:05

http://www.capitolhillblue.com/artman/publish/article_2529.shtml

Damn, I hate it when I've been had and I've been had big time.
In 1982, while I was working for Congressman Manuel Lujan of New Mexico, a man came up to a me during a gathering in Albuquerque and introduced himself as Terrance J. Wilkinson. He said he was a security consultant and gave me a business card with his name and just a Los Angeles phone number.

A few weeks later, he called my Washington office and asked to meet for lunch. He seemed to know a lot about the nuclear labs in New Mexico and said he had conducted "security profiles" for both Los Alamos and Sandia National Labs. Lujan served on the committee with oversight on both labs and he offered his services if we ever needed briefings.

We already had nuclear experts on the committee, on loan from the Department of Energy, and we never used Wilkinson for briefings but we kept in touch over the years. He said he had served in Vietnam with Army Special Force, worked for Air America, later for the FBI and as a consultant for the CIA. He said he had helped other Republican members of Congress I called some friends in other GOP offices and they said yes, they knew Terry Wilkinson.

"You can trust him, he's one of the good guys," one chief of staff told me. When I left politics and returned to journalism, Wilkinson became a willing, but always unnamed, source.

EDITED BY ADMIN: COPYRIGHT

[Rose Siding]

1. He was able to piece together

a pretty convincing personal history for this guy within a days time. Having staked so much on him, could none of that been discovered before hand?

[Walt Starr]

2. This was a KKKarl Rove setup, BIG TIME!

Don't worry, more info will come out.

On top of that, there is probably a much better angle to this whole thing. If we use nothing other than the words out the mouths of Bush* and his minions, then they have already built a bigger case than will ever be built upon the lying angle, Will.

I'm talking, of course, about the hugest admission of absolute incompetence in political history. It's all there from Condaleeza Rice's "bowels of the CIA" comment to Bush*'s "In my mind" comments. Go with incompetence because the next natural step (since the fools even ADMIT incompetence) is to link that incompetence with 9/11.

I read somewhere the Bill Clinton is welcoming the opportunity to be deposed by the 9/11 investigation committee. He knows what the intelligence was in his administration and what was passed on to this lot of incompetent fools. These bastards have built the case against them. Connect the dots, Will. It's all FUCKING THERE!!!

[DS1]

of course, Karl Rove's been at it since 1982

You'd think the man was more capable than god himself by the rantings and accusations flying around here.

[DS1]

19. of course, Karl Rove's been at it since 1982

You'd think the man was more capable than god himself by the rantings and accusations flying around here.

[devarsi]

109. whoa...deja vu

didn't you just say that?

[diamond14]

3. this is too much...knows a guy for 20 years, then in two days

decides that everything is bogus....hard to believe any of this...the retraction is really a ridiculous piece...no names given at all, who exactly are all these "friends" and "one chief of staff"..something really stinks about this whole thing...

a bigger question is what kind of pressure was put on Capital Hills Blue to retract this story...

on edit: that "bowels of the White House" comment by Condi was really bizarre...and it got repeated in the Congress hearings with rummy/frank...the "bowels of the intelligence community"....that's the arrogant bushies view: just figure that government civil servants are all just the "sh*t" coming from the "bowels...."....
they may be surpised to find out what's down there...real American Patriots who serve their country...

[liberalhistorian]

4. I totally agree, something just doesn't seem right here,

it's all just too pat and too easy. Either too much pressure was put on him to retract the story from the criminal goons who've currently taken over the WH, or it was all just a set-up.

[Rose Siding]

6. Look at Thompsons history

snip>
Thompson took a sabbatical from newspapers in 1981 and moved to Washington and work on Capitol Hill, where he served as press secretary to two members of Congress, Chief of Staff to a third and then Special Assistant to the Ranking Member of the House Space, Science and Technology Committee.

The committee worked with the National Science Foundation to bring the Internet into the private sector and Thompson saw the tremendous potential of the 'Net as a communications tool. He used that foresight to start a web hosting and design company in 1994 and that same year launched Capitol Hill Blue as the web's first political news site.

http://www.capitolhillblue.com/dtbio.asp

I'm having trouble believing that he was conned for all those years and just broke it all open since last night.

[WilliamPitt]

9. Makes sense to me

Got a professional bullshit artist to be a deep background source for years...as soon as he is the main source, he's blown.

[ward919]

15. Keep your heads! It still doesn't mean Bush didn't lie!!!

This is a major attempt to shift the focus on Bush's actual lies.
He still misled the nation and cost many lives.

[Walt Starr]

17. Lying isn't the issue

They've already admitted to incompetence. We know they left information in the bowels of the CIA prior to 9/11 and this incident proves they have changed nothing, pertinnet important intelligence is simply left in the bowels of the CIA.

How much information about the nuclear threat from North Korea is sitting in the bowels of the CIA right now, and why doesn't Bush have that?

My gosh, the ignorant fool ADMITTED TODAY that he used five year old intelligence in his decision to GO TO FUCKING WAR!!!!

These people are demonstrating criminal incompetence, not lying.

[WilliamPitt]

20. No it isn't

This never got off the web, and won't now. None of the heavies ran with it, so it is contained. Just a small bullshit explosion.

My eye is on the ball. Ask Thielmann and Wilson and McGovern about the lies. This just pisses me off.

[diamond14]

46. it's a real simple tactic...shoot the messenger...nt

.

[Bandit]

120. I think you hit upon the answer

Scrub Scrub Scrub and dissappear the troublemaker. This guy is gone. There is no record of his ever being. Bush* is safe now. Back to business running the world.

[julka]

27. why didn't they WAIT awhile to blow the cover?

riddle me this, Batman.

as of a few hours ago, his name was still not on google, and has this story been picked up anywhere besides Japan Today?

it was not on any of the cable shows today.

Surely Begala would have mentioned it, if he thought there was anything to it.

what do the insiders know about this?

and when did THEY know it?

[KoKo]

41. This stinks! How could Thompson have not had more sources to verify this?

You don't put a story out this big saying Wilkerson was in a meeting with the President....without it being verified....even if you've known the guy for 20 years.

Washington is a "small town" in many ways and these people all know each other........

This is too odd to believe that it's Karl Rove, or that the guy was a Repug plant, or CIA, or whatever plant.

I had high hopes for this story blowing the lid off all of the lies.........just as we all did.

Something's just not right about this explanation.

[ElsewheresDaughter]

11. wil (kin) son.....Wilson

:shrug:

[blm]

33. Story planted by Rove to discredit Wilson, Beers

and any other insider who comes out. They followed that same pattern with FORBIDDEN TRUTH. They rushed out another "French" book that was similar with wild claims to confuse the public on the real stories.

[shance]

55. How do we know that Wilkinson even exists?

Has anyone actually met the guy?

[David Zephyr]

50. I'm With You On This, Amen1234

The "bowels of the White House" comment is the biggest indicator that Condi knew. I enjoyed watching Senator Levin repeat the "bowels of the White House" line over and over.

This whole thing smells.

[diamond14]

73. LOL...."the whole thing smells".. from the "bowels of the WH" and

shrub better be prepared for a lot more crap to come up in his face from OUR Civil Servants...shrub and his minions are rotten to the core and arrogant to boot....


I cry for OUR country...


BOOT BUSH in 2004

Re-Defeat bush

will be down at the big "Celebrate Bastille" Democratic event in DC this week (close to the WH)...organizing to Re-Defeat shrub in 2004...time to get working, avoid the draft, vote Democratic....

lets all organize in our communities, sign up now....if we all work together, we can take back OUR Country and be PROUD Patriots again....

[prolesunited]

5. So, what's your theory

about this Wilkinson guy? I would be curious as to who he really is. Do you think he was doing this as an ego thing, kind of like those guys who lie about their military history? Do you think "they" knew about this guy and paid him off to lie?

Just like with the NYT, it destroys credibility and people think they can no longer believe anyone or perhaps with the info flying so fast these days, people won't be able to separate the lies from the confusion.

[ShaneGR]

7. Ummmm, case in point

He said he had helped other Republican members of Congress I called some friends in other GOP offices and they said yes, they knew Terry Wilkinson.

"You can trust him, he's one of the good guys," one chief of staff told me. When I left politics and returned to journalism, Wilkinson became a willing, but always unnamed, source.





UHHHHHHHH, who are these chief of staff's?

WTF?

[Cocoa]

8. the story is Thompson

that retraction is probably all b.s.

Remember, this guy admits he spread stories about Clinton's sexual assaults. I don't think any of those stories panned out, and the fact that he was party to that attempted coup automatically makes Thompson one of the bad guys.

[w4rma]

10. Definitely have to be careful dealing with politics (n/t)

[Ilsa]

12. Immediately after I emailed

his Wilkinson story to some friends yesterday, I sent out an apology and retraction for lack of corroboration. Someone in the thread questioned the accuracy of the report. Sucks. figured it was bound to happen eventually, though.

[shirlden]

13. This is a set-up

The Katherine Harris story right next to Bev Harris'story on scoop. Now this one on CHB. We are being set up and I don't think that we need to look for our reflection in a tinfoil hat to know it. Why are we surprised ??? We have been waiting for the trolls to attack, whoever they may be. We get foolish because we know that Chimp is mentally challanged, but it is obvious that someone (can you say Rove ?)is now moving into our sphere.
I take that as a compliment and a challange. They must believe that we are a danger to them. They chose Will Pitt and Bev Harris for their first take-down. That should tell us something.

Need to be aware and cautious.

:mad: :grr:

[Merlin]

31. Not Will Pitt. Doug Thompson of Capitol Hill Blue. But you're right...

it was surely a set-up.

And you're right, that we can expect more of it as the other side panics over Shrubbie's plunging image.

I don't see this causing that much harm. It seems kind of amateurish of them to have burned a 20-year set-up for this little pay-off.

[ibegurpard]

14. Check out this thread for some additional insights.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=102&topic_id=5558&mesg_id=5558&page=

I found BLM's reply to be of particular interest.

Her angle is they are starting to plant bullshit stories to try to discredit everything.

[dpbrown]

16. If they're throwing out this many red herrings

There's a piece of real dirt they're trying to make sure we miss in all the dust.

Stay alert. There is something significant here.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

18. Oh yeah the CIA is going to take a call from some Gadfly and release

confidential information on their staff. He claims he "knew" the guy for 20 years. Define KNEW! Thompson is a gadfly. I don't ever trust anything from his site until confirmed elsewhere.

If this is the case then more likely than not mystery man Wilkinson IS FROM the CIA and is in charge of planting deliberate DISINFO in order to set up the Bushies for "plausible deniability."

I still wouldn't place stock in Thompson.

[grasswire]

22. the story was picked up by google

....from Japan Times.

http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&edition=usa&q=White+House+Admits+Bush+Lied+about+Nukes&btnG=Search+News

Japan Times got it from Truthout.

[WilliamPitt]

23. Already pulled it, running the retraction tomorrow

:grr:

[clar]

21. Sorry this happened but

as I said in an earlier thread, I had my doubts. Why go to CHB rather than the Nation, for example? I really believe we have to be careful about falling hook line and sinker for stories we want to be true.

[grasswire]

24. how many times....

....has this happened?

Rove throws something out that is bogus so that the whole water is muddied and further questions and/or accusations are neutralized.

It's the default play.

[grasswire]

25. Will....

...you'd better keep tabs on the freerepublic thread. They are out for revenge now. They're desperately trying to pressure Thompson to produce info that will ID the guy.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/943260/posts?q=1&&page=101

[charlie]

26. Ba-fucking-loney

He levels these charges against a sitting president (a dangerous endeavour, no matter who's in office) and doesn't check out his source's bonafides before publishing? Riiiight...

To: trick question

QUOTE:
______________________________________________________

Which brings back up the other part of my post. It would be very nice to have some way to verify any part of what Terry said. Names, dates, anything
______________________________________________________

When I am able to verify additional information (and I will) , I will write a story on it.

Doug

posted on 07/08/2003 5:25 PM PDT by Doug Thompson

BTW, he runs another "true stories" site. Care for a lurid, salacious tale of pedophilia?:

D.C. DarkSide examines this darkness in a frank, often brutal, way. The stories you find here are true, the facts verified as best we can. In some cases, people allow us to use their names. In others, they don't. It's their choice.

She Had to Have Him

Link NOT SAFE FOR WORK

[grasswire]

28. another post from Thompson

I'm someone who has been answering a ton of emails, dealing with a problem on my own bulletin board and trying to run a business and a web site.

I will track this guy down. I've turned everything over to my attorney, who is setting up meeting with the FBI. We intend to use the legal system against this clown.

I'll keep folks posted and we will, of course, run stories on Capitol Hill Blue.

Thanks for the kind words from many of you. As for those with less than kind things to say, I understand your anger. I pissed as well.

Doug


197 posted on 07/09/2003 5:58 PM PDT by Doug Thompson
< Post Reply | Private Reply | To 182 | View Replies >

[grasswire]

30. it's working with the freepers

Many of them are confusing the Wilkinson info with the Wilson info. They think that many many news stories about the Niger info have been based on the WILKINSON story!!

And so it works. The base now thinks the Wilson story is fraudulent because of the scam Wilkinson story.

[Merlin]

35. Very good point.

That may explain why they did this. There is no group of people more easily confused by detail than the media. This will no doubt cause much of the 4th estate (or as they are now know, the fifth wheel) to call off the dogs on Shrubbie.

[charlie]

39. Yes

Nice how that's working out, isn't it? This stinks...

[Jack Rabbit]

114. We have a job to do then

The only thing that has been discredited is Mr. Wilkinson's story that he was present when Bush was informed that the Niger document was a forgery. So far, no one has been able to say that Bush was personally warned of this.

Overall, the exposure of the Wilkinson story as false doesn't damage the case against Bush and his dirty little war any more than did the fact that initial reports that Wolfowitz said in a speech that oil was the reason for the invasion turned out to be erroneous.

So, our task is to move on, discounting this report. It won't be that difficult.

The Niger document was a crude forgery. That has been established beyond question. Bush really doesn't have an out. He should have known it was a forgery. Even now, knowing that it is, what is he doing about those who lied to him? Are heads rolling? If Bush were an honest man, he would be outraged at the deception. He would be demanding the resignations of Rumsfeld and Rice, to say the least. On the contrary, Bush seems unconcerned about the matter. Whether he knew the Niger document was a forgery or not, he seems to believe that using that false information in his state of the union message was right and proper. What was important to him in January was going to war, not whether the war was justified.

[Merlin]

132. Agreed. The damage was minimal. It's still a live issue.

Actually it's several issues. Who forged the documents? Under who's direction? Why? When? After they were proven to be forgeries, why did they get recirculated back into both British and US Chief of State inboxes?

Actually, we probably know the answer to the last question. The answer is because they were desparate to put some "proof" on the table after Bush and Blair had thrown their "Iraq has WMDs" hats over the wall. They grabbed at this just like they grabbed at the old, pre-1995 inventories of Iraqi WMDs, just like Powell grabbed at the dubious claim of weapon's labs in US monitored no-fly zones, just like they grabbed at the artillery weather balloon trailers as mobile weapons labs.

Each of these things is connected to legitimacy by only the slenderest of threads. That's why a single smoking gun report, like Wilkinsons, is so powerful. Because very little is needed to cut through one of those threads.

The forged documents are, imo, the most potent. But since the forgery was almost certainly done by an intelligence agency, and although it was a sloppy job, it will probably be very hard to pin on anybody.

So we are left with Wilson. But he acknowledges never having personally seen any of the 4 reports, and so his story doesn't equate to "Bush knew."

[Merlin]

29. This is a classic disinformation technique.

It was used countless times against JFK assassination researchers.

Wilkinson was a sleeper who cultivated media contacts over the years waiting for an opportunity to use them.

By sucking in Thompson, who has a megaphone in the media, with a story that was over-the-top, he drew Bush's opposition into a paper bag which blew up in their (our) faces.

Here's what happens: The lead stories will now announce: "Previous Reports that President Bush knew about WMDs in Iraq have been Proven False." For Joe Sixpack, who doesn't pay close attention to anything except the price of beer, that comes across as "Bush Is Right On WMDs. Critics Proven Wrong."

This kind of big-time sleeper operation (20 years sucking up to Doug Thompson) can only be financed by major league players. It's the kind of thing the CIA maintains everywhere, even here in the USA. (For example, the CIA has countless secret contracts with professors at universities around the country, many paid to write books and articles with the slant they want. In 1978, Harvard sued the CIA to require the disclose these arrangements with its employee professors, and Harvard lost.) It's the way the 22 other US gov intelligence agencies operates also.

In this case, the rough facts suggest that the guy probably was a stringer all these years for the intelligence people loyal to the Bush and Perle crowds, and they decided to spend his accrued credibility to see if they could stop the bleeding on the WMD issue by burning WH critics.

[charlie]

32. That's providing Wilkinson exists

which Thompson hasn't been able to prove.

[Merlin]

40. He doesn't have to exist as a real person. He was a set-up all along.

The Wilkinson moniker was just one of the identities he inhabited, and it's the one he used to relate to Thompson over the years.

By the way, somebody else noted a very interesting point. Maybe the reason they chose to use this guy this way is because of the similarity of his name to Wilson--the guy whose story IS a bombshell, though slightly less so than the fake story. It will cause confusion, and perhaps kill any further press on the Wilson story.

[WilliamPitt]

43. I think you're all making too much of this

I just talked to Thompson. He seems genuinely pissed. If he's known this guy for 20 years, than your theory would require that he knew a story about a 'Wilson' was going to come up, and he'd have to be there to fuck it up at just the precise moment.

Nah. Just a stinking scam.

[Merlin]

56. There are people known as "Sleepers" who deliberately cultivate

relationships with media people and politicians for eventual future use, especially in planting stories.

Maybe I just don't get what you mean by "Just a stinking scam."

If he knew the guy for 20 years, and the guy contacts him AFTER Sunday's show and tells him this lie, and then the guy evaporates, how can there be any other conclusion than that he was a sleeper all along?

ON EDIT:

Charlie just opened my eyes to something. He says he's looking at Thompson as the scammer. Is that what you're saying, too?

[WilliamPitt]

61. So he's been sleeping since 1982

because he knew there'd be a war in 2003, and they'd need a person with a Wilson-homonym name?

[Walt Starr]

68. Do you know Thompson well?

Because he's the one lying, from the sounds of things.

[WilliamPitt]

70. I don't

But right now, here is how things stand: The author of the article has fully and completely destroyed the credibility of both the article and the source. Until someone does some digging to find out what the deal is with Mr. Wilkinson (I am), the story is deader than yesterday.

[Az]

78. A more completely destroyed story

I have never seen. Thompson evicerated his own story. Burned it to the ground. I do have to agree that something is rotten in Denmark though. Why did the source surface for the first time on this story.

[Merlin]

99. This is why I don't think Thompson is the liar.

I think maybe Thompson isn't telling the entire truth. But this deal crucifies Thompson more than anybody. His cred is shot to hell.

[charlie]

105. Chances are just as good

that he's in on the dupe as not.

Contrast this column, where the administration's lack of evidence doesn't faze his zeal for pounding hell out of everyone that might threaten the US:

OK. I’m convinced. Warm up the B-52s, fire up the Stealths, unleash the smart bombs. Time to nuke Iraq until it glows and then shoot Saddam in the dark.

...

Powell provided that documentation. As predicted on this web site on Tuesday, he didn’t have hard, fast, proof that Saddam is playing footsies with Osama, but he provided the usual suspected links between Iraq and terrorism at large and that’s reason enough to rain down hellfire and damnation.

Feb 6 2003

with this one:

Bush told a nervous nation that Saddam had the missile capability to lob a rocket full of chemical weapons on the U.S. and spread disease and mayhem on a global scale. So far, searches of Iraq have failed to turn up a delivery system that could lob a canister of gas into the Euphrates, much less another continent.

And now some of those intelligence professionals who were supposed to be telling Bush they had proof of such weapons are saying they didn’t really have the proof but they still felt sure the weapons were there. Bush, doing his part to put gut feeling above solid intel, responded that it didn’t matter. He knew the weapons were there too and that was good enough for him.

So about the only thing we know for sure is that the President of the United States was so determined to go to war with Iraq that nobody – not the United Nations, not world opinion and certainly not a lack of solid intelligence – was going to stop him.

...

The last time we looked, Diogenes was not standing outside the gates of 1600 Penn and screaming “my search is over!”

June 19 2003

where he frames the charges as so much naivete -- what, a president lied, that's news?

Then three weeks later he's outraged enough to try to cripple Bush with an insider bombshell?

Regarding the damage to his cred, look at this column:

Mar 14 2003

It's a swansong. He's getting out of the game and gonna travel the country with the missus, collecting photos and stories for another web project.

One more column quote, for laffs:

I’m a newspaperman, which means I don’t trust anyone, not a living soul. Trust is for wide-eyed virgins on a first date, not for educated adults who know most elected and appointed officials are greedy, agenda-driven despots who couldn’t care less for the people they represent or the Constitution they swore to uphold.

As a professional skeptic, I don’t much care for elected officials of any political stripe, ideology or philosophy. Tom Daschle is a whiny nerd. Dick Gephardt reminds of a cross between Opie and Alfred E. Neumann. Both raise questions about the pending war with Iraq not because of any love of country but because it serves their political agendas and pending campaigns for President.

Feb 25 2003

[Merlin]

101. No. That's not how it works.

You put a sleeper in position for a lot of reasons. He cultivates many contacts. Usually, when he's playing the press, it's because he can remain in a position to feed them stories and background info--true or false--that his sponsoring organization want hyped.

Normally, of course, they don't plan to blow off the relationship. But here the opportunity was so rich, and the stakes so high, and the irony so wonderful, they felt it was worth it.

They did it because some clever guy in whatever organization has been paying for "Wilkinson's" work over the years came up with the ruse and it just sounded too perfect; too delicious.

I don't think they planned on Thompson getting wise so quickly. I think they hoped the phony story would stay afloat for a few more days before the lights came on.

Again I ask you, if Wilkinson wasn't a sleeper, how else do you explain his evaporation? Unless it's Thompson who is the con man.

On Edit.

The problem with Thompson being the con man is that this really, really damages him more than anybody. His cred is shot.

[Ouabache]

106. Thompson could be the con-man easily, not caring about his cred at all

because he got PAID HUGE bucks to blow all his credibility at this time? Don't think they don't have the $$ to do that.

[Merlin]

108. Ok, that's possible. I admit I know nothing about the guy.

But his site seems fairly well developed. But that means nothing.

I will say that anybody who uses a flashing red ad on their site is something of a jerk to begin with. Not to mention a vain one, noting that he's got his pic right up there, though little to be vain about.

[Ready4Change]

121. Howabout this explanation?

"If he knew the guy for 20 years, and the guy contacts him AFTER Sunday's show and tells him this lie, and then the guy evaporates, how can there be any other conclusion than that he was a sleeper all along?"

The guy (Wilkinson) contacts Thompon after Sundays show and tells his story. "THEY" don't like the story, find out how to locate Wilkinson, and "remove" him, both physically, and by having more logically existing "trusted sources" in this administration call and say he never existed in the first place.

This explanation doesn't require some 20 year plot, follows the timeline of calls to Thompson in order to "question" his source, and can be implemented with resources which would be readily at hand to this administration.

[Merlin]

127. But then why put out his story at all?

If Thompson's part of "THEY" then why wouldn't he just bury the guy's story? Why publish it and then have to retract it?

[Ready4Change]

136. Because Thompson doesn't know.

In my tinfoil hatted theory, Thompson isn't part of "Them." He's just a reporter.

In this theory both he and Wilkinson are legit. Thompson gets the story from Wilkinson. "They" find out from Thompson how to find Wilkinson. Suddenly, all trace of Wilkinson seems to vanish, and multiple people of supposed reliability call up Thompson to say "Wilkinson never existed. Just a fabrication of a ne'er-do-well. Sorry you got duped."

Thompson has a choice of 2 things to believe. 1) He's been duped by someone who has claimed for 20 years to be someone he wasn't, or 2) Believe that Wilkinson was telling the truth, but has now been "vanished."

If 1) is true, then retracting his story is the responsible thing to do. If 2) is true then retracting his story may be the WISE thing to do, in terms of self preservation.

What are WE to think? Is Thompson a crock? Is Wilkinson a crock? Was Wilkinson planted as part of a masterfull CIA plan?

Who knows? The Shadow? :shrug:

[Cocoa]

72. he published stories of Clinton's "sexual assaults"

why don't you accept the possibility that he is lying? That that in fact is his profession?

[charlie]

47. Until he can offer some evidence

that there was a Wilkinson or whoever, my hairy eyeball is gonna stayed pointed at Thompson.

[Merlin]

57. Okay. Now I understand.

You're right. I didn't look at it from that point of view.

[DS1]

74. megaphone in the media?

I'd never even heard of this guy until today.

[Merlin]

104. The BBC picked up his story. So did ABC. So did USA Today.

He must have had some cred. Not any more.

[Jack Rabbit]

113. Could you link to examples?

A search of the BBC Online for "Terrence Wilkinson" comes up empty.

[Merlin]

128. A worthy exercise.

Here's one.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/3056626.stm

On rereading, I see it does not mention Wilkinson by name. It refers to "a CIA official" and says he "told the BBC" meaning directly, not via Thompson's web rag.

But the story is identical to Wilkinson's. For example:

"But the CIA official has said that a former US diplomat had already established the claim was false in March 2002 - and that the information had been passed on to government departments, including the White House, well before Mr Bush mentioned it in the speech."

and

"Now the CIA official has told the BBC that Mr Wilson's findings had been passed onto the White House as early as March 2002."

So maybe this butresses Thompson's claim; e.g. maybe Wilkinson was scamming BBC too?

Do you agree it's probably Wilkinson's story? What's your take?

[Jack Rabbit]

135. I think it's Thielmann rather than Wilkinson

From the Guardian of London
Dated Thursday July 10

White House 'lied about Saddam threat'
By Julien Borger in Washington

A former US intelligence official who served under the Bush administration in the build-up to the Iraq war accused the White House yesterday of lying about the threat posed by Saddam Hussein.
The claims came as the Bush administration was fighting to shore up its credibility among a series of anonymous government leaks over its distortion of US intelligence to manufacture a case against Saddam.
This was the first time an administration official has put his name to specific claims. The whistleblower, Gregory Thielmann, served as a director in the state department's bureau of intelligence until his retirement in September, and had access to the classified reports which formed the basis for the US case against Saddam, spelled out by President Bush and his aides.

Read more.

[Merlin]

137. I don't think so. Thielmann didn't discuss the Niger document.

His focus, as reported everywhere so far, is strictly on the aluminum tubes, Scuds, and the general misreading of intel info.

The bbc story is specific as to the uranium claim.

Plus, Thielmann was State, not CIA.

Thielmann also somewhat hoists himself when he makes a claim about what was known in March of 2003, though he retired in 2002.

But overall, Thielmann is a courageous, outspoken voice at exactly the right moment. Makes the sting of this sting a little easier to bear.

[Merlin]

129. Correction about ABC and USA today. They did NOT pick this up.

Sorry for this misinfo. On reading more precisely, neither the USA Today article nor the Nightline intro, both found on other threads, directly mentions Wilkinson's story. It is other posters in the thread who refer to Wilkinson.

The BBC story does not use Wilkinson's name, but refers to a "CIA agent" who told BBC the same information Wilkinson purportedly fed to Thompson.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/3056626.stm

[birdman]

122. Excuse me ?

Let me get this straight.

Some "major league players" started paying the fraudulent
Mr. Wilkinson 20 years ago to cultivate an association and
build up credibility with one Doug Thompson who at the time
was a Congressional staffer for a little known New Mexico
congressman. They did this on the chance that some day Mr.
Thompson would gain control of a significant media outlet
so they could someday blow up a big anti-Bush story in the
face of Bush critics.

So this guy called Thompson a couple of times a year to give
him stories waiting for just this moment and was on the payroll
for all those years. Must have been a great job.

And it's amazing that these guys gambled right that Thompson would someday be in charge of a media conglomerate like Capitol Hill Blue.

[Merlin]

131. You're excused.

You achieve your pretense at ridicule by suggesting that coddling up to Thompson is the only thing the guy had to do for 20 years, and that this story is the only reason he could have had for maintaining contact with Thompson.

I'm not going to use up a lot of deodorant trying to persuade you that such sleeper operatives exist.

I acknowledge my theory is only a supposition. I don't know it to be fact, but it certainly fits the facts, and no other scenario presented so far does fit the facts.

When an sleeper is set up, first of all, they use several different identities. Second, they don't necessarily "target" everybody they cultivate. Instead, they do what most people do, they mix in appropriate circles and then take advantage of opportunities that present themselves. One assumes that there was some sort of a chance meeting or conversation between these two 20 years ago that then perhaps became more of a deliberate contact once the sleeper notices the guy he bumped into earlier is moving up the ladder. Third, this function may be only an incidental part of their job.

This is not snipe hunting. It's fishing. You don't just go looking for one specific snipe if you're one of these operatives. You put the hook out for lots and lots of potential connections.

It's identical to the practice of "networking" in business. When opportunities later present themselves, you're in a position to take advantage of the "contacts" you've built up over the years.

It's not really that hard to understand.

If you were into planting misinformation, orchestrating news stories, and leading or misleading media people in the direction you want to take them, how else would you do it? This is the same thing PR agencies do.

[birdman]

139. What's wrong with Thompsons explanation ?

That the guy's a long-time fraud who ingratiated himself
with a number of DC people by pretending to have inside knowledge
of defense and intelligence issues and simply overreached on
this one.

Why does it have to be part of some weird scenario where the guy is a
sleeper ? If you're going to plant a false story to try to discredit
"Bush lied" stories do you think you would plant it in Capitol Hill
Blue where it will be seen mostly politically oriented internet
junkies? And one story blowing up is not going to discredit
the other stories about Bush's deceptions which are still going
strong today despite the crash of the bogus Mr. Wilkinson.

Why do people have to take something that has a simple explanation
and turn it into a plot ? A couple of days ago some people were
claiming that the "Katherine Harris is dead" story was planted
on the Scoop site to discredit the Back Box story. That is
beyond ridiculous. The Scoop site makes it clear that it
does no fact checking leaves it to the reader to decide whether
its stories are credible or not. So you're likely to read about
Elvis working in a New Zealand diner on a site like this. (You would
think Ms. Harris would have chosen a more reputable venue for her
story).

Everything is not some kind of plot. Sometimes the obvious explanations are the best.

[qanda]

34. Question...

Was this story picked up by the major media? I have only heard about the Wilkinson story online. And as far as I know CHB is not read by most people-- I hadn't even heard of it prior to this particular story.

[Skittles]

36. I don't understand

I've never heard of Wilkinson. Has he been an "unnamed source"?

[plurality]

37. Anybody think this guy was just 'erased' for saying the wrong thing.

Or do you think someone who's been feeding the capitol hills blues guy lies for 20 years just all of a sudden knew this was going to be the story that would expose him as the liar so he preemptively disconnected all his phones and cut town.

[julka]

51. it's more likely, to me, that Thompson is the plant

given his past history of bringing up WJC assaultees

let's see how this plays out

what were the NAMES of these women?

are they recognizable?

if not, WHY?

Doug from Upland would certainly have been trumpeting their names to the skies, and you KNOW they'd have gotten tabloid coverage, regardless of how lame their accusations were.

think clinton love child.

[the_sam]

38. Doesn't really change anything

Shrub still knowingly lied about the uranium from Africa, and tried to pass it off as fact to the UN. Even if it wasn't Wilkinson who told him that the uranium claims her false, we know that someone did.

[neuvocat]

79. Case in point:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=16597&mesg_id=16597&page=

[juajen]

42. God, this is infuriating!

I must have told ten people this story today, now I'll have to retract. The volatility of this information certainly should have made him check his facts a bit more thoroughly. I assumed "known him for 20 years" meant more than a passing acquaintance. Will, what do you think are "Terry's" motives?

[RichM]

44. IF it was a set-up where they "spent" 20 yrs of cultivating a false ID

for this guy, it implies they're significantly frightened.

[Imajika]

59. Who is they?

"IF it was a set-up where they "spent" 20 yrs of cultivating a false ID"

Come on, why is it so unbelievable that it was just a scam?

They, them, dark conspiracies, Rove's fingerprints....

"for this guy, it implies they're significantly frightened."

No, I think what it implies is that Doug Thompson got scammed. People then wanted to believe what they read in CHB and invested personal time, energy and credibility into the article by forwarding it everywhere without waiting to see if it was verified anywhere else first.

Geeze. Who the hell reads Capital Hill Blue anyway. Sometimes it is a good idea not to put a tremendous amount of stock into a marginal at best news outlet.

That is one of the problems with "alternative" media. Stories are very often not sourced and fact checked reliably - sometimes not at all as we saw with Scoop New Zealand running their "K. Harris dead" story.

Everything that happens in politics and life is not a Rove plot.

Some stories will turn out to be bogus, some will turn out to be half-truths, some reveal just the tip of an iceburg and some are completely accurate.

People are giving the Bush administration way, way too much credit when they believe they everything negative that comes our way is somehow the fault of Rove and Company.

Imajika

[preciousdove]

90. A 20 year scam?

Either he was a sleeper or he was erased..or with this crowd probably both.

[HFishbine]

123. Erased

He was a trusted source for the reporter for 20 years, then the White House says he's not on the visitors list, his phones are diconnected and his e-mails go un-answered. There's definitley more here than we yet know.

[lynndew2]

98. Right on the nose Imajika

We all seem to be obsessed and ready to jump at any news we consider good. I think they see that and try to use it. This one worked -(. Reporters get dupped all the time and this time it was BIG and BAD. But I dont think a 20 year conspiracy is believable as I dont think any of us can see 20 years ahead in politics. Accept it as it is, A bogus report from someone who enjoyed throwing sugar in the gas tank inside a time-release capsule. He got one over this time, hopefully next time it will end differantly.

[9215]

45. So who is the Oakland Tribune's Wilkinson???

From a June 20th New York Times story on searching for Saddam Hussein(via the Oakland Tribune reprint of the story:

<http://www.oaklandtribune.com/Stories/0,1413,82~1865~1467084,00.html>

"It has been known that Task Force 20 has led the hunt for chemical and biological weapons. But the unit's role in trying to determine the fate of Saddam has not been previously disclosed. Some officials have suggested that the efforts are linked and that he or his sons left power with a precise knowledge of Iraq's weapons program."

"Task Force 20, the military organization that defense officials said had been charged with conducting the search, reports to the Central Command and its leader, Gen. Tommy R. Franks. The Central Command has only recently acknowledged the existence of Task Force 20, and and a spokesman for the U.S. Central Command, James Wilkinson, said he would not comment on the special military team or its mission. But other United States officials said the team was being supported by several intelligence agencies, including the CIA, and was organized to allow it to act quickly on intelligence gathered by satellites and electronic eavesdropping." "J. (James) Wilkinson", in Iraq, linked (by the story at least) to the CIA and the hunt for WMD. Could this be the same guy?


Here is a topic on Wilkinsin by Will Pitt then he, as I predicted, "disappears". Chekc near the bottom of the topic 25, 26, etc.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=13198&mesg_id=13198&page=1

[julka]

53. doesn't matter; he's too young

he'd have been 12 when he first met Thompson

only link is the J+Wilkinson

[9215]

62. If Thompson is telling the truth

yea, but that is a big if.

Two Wilkinsons working for CIA involved in Iraq issue?

[jfxgillis]

48. It was OBVIOUS from the original "story"

Capitol Hill Blue is not now and never has been a reliable source.

What IS it with people who can perfectly well see that if the "information" being offered goes against their ideological preconceptions but not when it suits them?

CHB flat-out MADE STUFF UP about Clinton during the Lewinsky Scandal. I knew he was crap then when a FREEPER, for God's sake, warned me off CHB (albiet, a smart and honest Freeper, even if a somewhat loopy).

It's the same thing with Scott Ritter. The man returns from Iraq and trashes Clinton and Albright (to great huzzahs from the looney-right Senate caucus) on grounds exactly opposite the grounds he now trashes Bush and Rumsfeld. So why do people believe this crap from a DEMONSTRABLY unreliable source?

The anti-war/anti-Bush forces would be far better served putting Doug Thompson and Scott Ritter in long-term storage.

[Merlin]

110. So how do you explain BBC picking it up?

Are they just idiots?

[Cocoa]

115. do you have a link to BBC or anyone else picking this up?

My whole basis for doubting the story started with my not being able to confirm it in ONE news source other than his.

[Merlin]

133. Jack Rabbit asked the same thing above. Here's my response.

Here's one.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/3056626.stm

On rereading, I see it does not mention Wilkinson by name. It refers to "a CIA official" and says he "told the BBC" meaning directly, not via Thompson's web rag.

But the story is identical to Wilkinson's. For example:

"But the CIA official has said that a former US diplomat had already established the claim was false in March 2002 - and that the information had been passed on to government departments, including the White House, well before Mr Bush mentioned it in the speech."

and

"Now the CIA official has told the BBC that Mr Wilson's findings had been passed onto the White House as early as March 2002."

So maybe this butresses Thompson's claim; e.g. maybe Wilkinson was scamming BBC too?

Do you agree it's probably Wilkinson's story? What's your take?

[Merlin]

49. "Wilson" vs. "Wilkinson" -- Maybe it was brilliant after all !

I now agree with the observations first noted by elsewheresdaughter and shirlden above that the reason they pulled this caper off in this manner was because of the similarity of the name Wilkinson to Wilson.

What they wanted to do was to discredit the big Wilson story that broke Sunday on MTP. Since they couldn't find a point of attack, they set up a really clever ruse.

Knowing the press is very poor with details (not to mention the public), they have now set up a situation where headlines can read:

"Wilkinson's Story--Critical of Bush on WMDs--Is Proven False."

Most will think they're referring to Wilson.

Some neocon counter-intelligence guru is laughing his ass off tonight.

[Must_B_Free]

107. Tuttle or Buttle

?

[David Zephyr]

52. WTF!

I am stunned. I just read your post, William and am truly sitting here numb.

There are some very, very evil men and women in the White House and they are working this issue this hard because they must know how criminal their behavior has been.

Unbelievable!

:argh: :argh: :argh: :argh: :argh: :argh:

[julka]

58. absolutely!

THIS should be the story now.

WHO is behind the set up?

turn the heat up on Thompson.

if there ever ARE hearings, he should be hung out to dry.

can you imagine what would be happening now if this was the year 2000, and it happened under WJC, with a pug congress?

oh, for a change in the senate in 2004.

[T Roosevelt]

54. Malloy talking on this now

Questioning Thompson's sources saying the guy doesn't exist. Hmmm...

[Az]

60. That was me

<--Robert from Detroit.

[T Roosevelt]

63. Excellent! Now Will Pitt is on!

On edit: changed subject line (very cool)

[Az]

64. Malloy's take on the issue

He suspects that there is enough corroborating data. I am not convinced. The corroboration is not from individuals present at the meetings. This leaves Bush and crew wiggle room to claim plausible deniability. They can pin the blame back to the CIA still.

[neuvocat]

76. Just one thing about that:

the CIA from what I recall has already said it warned Bush that the data was faulty.

[Zan_of_Texas]

66. Wilkinson / Wilson ~ B. Harris / K. Harris

Okay, put on your coincidence hat, folks.

Wilson - big story.

Wilkinson - fake story.

~~~~~~

Bev Harris - big story.

Katherine Harris - fake story.

[Walt Starr]

65. Why would this administration work so hard to destroy this issue?

There can really be only one conclusion, they are covering up something even worse.

The fact probably is, Bush* himself probably ordered a fabricated report and ordered it be included in the SOTU.

Until there is proof for that, I will be pushing the incompetence angle. They've admitted to incompetence and it can be used against them big time. Admitting to incompetence mean s there is a level of horrific complicity in something that is an obvious crime.

Incompetence means they will not get elected on '04 and the only way to retain power will be to cheat or worse. It's the angle to push hard right now until somebody somewhere can dig up the REAL TRUTH.

[TeeYiYi]

67. IMO, Terrance J. Wilkinson is Doug Thompson's alter ego. . . . n/t

TYY

[Nihil]

117. Sometimes the truth is right under your nose?

Top of the article:

> Conned big time
> By DOUG THOMPSON

Just a thought ...

[Q]

69. Say it isn't so!

- Whew. Looks like my batting record is a bit better than yours.

- This is just the beginning. The BUSH*LIED story/issue/scandal will be picked apart, diffused, neutralized and nullified in no time at all. It will be suffocated and sent down the Memory Hole with the dozens of Bush* crimes already forgotten.

- I remember the Watergate Hearings. Government was screwed up in the 70s...but the Dem party back then breathed fire and ate Nixon Republicans for breakfast. The gutsy Dems are a dying breed...replaced by Republicans pretending to be Democrats.

- I hope I'm wrong...but I just don't see this scandal as being the 'one' that brings Bush* down. Lord knows it should...but there's not enough fire in the currect Dem leadership to pull it off.

[anamandujano]

112. it ain't so--there's a matter of a lot of dead soldiers and

their survivors and all the sitting ducks still on duty in the phoney war that Bush started with his lies. The press will go this route without a doubt. The dems will most likely also go this route. The high level military (Tommy Franks for example) will help with the obfuscation.

Our soldiers have been HAD. I suspect they will have their say. It involves the whole rest of the world and they will have their say.

[Khephra]

71. I feel your pain, Bro

Shit...

Sigh...

:grr:

[grasswire]

75. Will....

....would it be possible for you to urge Thompson to correct the impression freepers are under? They think his retraction makes all of the "WH Admits Bush wrong in SOTU" bogus. They think Wilson has been debunked. They're blaming Thompson for the proliferation of the stories on SOTU containing wrong info.

He's made a huge mess, inadvertent or not.

He needs to be clear with them that Wilkinson is not Wilson.

[WilliamPitt]

77. I'll try

but that's now MY fucking job for tomorrow. :grr:

[charlie]

81. I'll bet you a box of donuts

Thompson won't do it.

A half-year ago, he was warning us:

Dems Plan to Undermine America to Beat Bush

Why didn't he say to Wilkinson -- begone Democrat, I'll not have you undermining America for partisan gain! -- and publish an I-told-you-so followup on the depravity of Bush-hating Democrats?

[WilliamPitt]

82. Well *that's* an eye-opener

:grr:

[Walt Starr]

83. Like I said, Thompson is the one lying from all indications

He's been a rightwing shill for years now.

[molly]

80. Noone gets conned for 20 years - bullshit!

something is very rotten in Denmark. Name a source here....

"You've been had," she said. "I know about this guy. He's been around for years, claiming to have been in Special Forces, with the CIA, with NSA. He hasn't worked for any of them and his name is not Terrance Wilkinson."

This is not what really happened. Think about it tomorrow with a clear head.

Let me know if I can help.

[grasswire]

84. Will, they're trying to loop you into this...

The freepers have been following all sorts of angles to see if truthout could be part of the con. Now there's a new thread you'd better read:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/943322/posts

Here's part of it where McKinley writes to Japan Times

3) The story you ran did NOT originate with truthout.org. It originated on Capitol Hill Blue at 0129 EDT on July 8. It was at this URL: http://www.capitolhillblue.com/artman/publish/article_2518.shtml That URL now has a modified version of the story- the changes are he backed off the assertion that Bush admitted lying, and he removed the part of the story about Wilkinson. A copy of the story was posted on Free Republic at 1442 EDT July 8: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/942434/posts This copy is identical to the one Truthout.org sold to you. You published something that Truthout, a leftist propaganda outfit, plagiarized.



4) Not only was it plagiarized, it turns out it was also containing completely false information. There is no Terrance J. Wilkinson. Does your paper have an ombudsman? Maybe he should take a look at this.



5) If you go to the Truthout.org website, you will find that they don't even have the story up. They were using you to publish a false story.



6) If you search on a phrase from the story, their search engine will find it and show a brief excerpt of it. But if you click on the link to go to it, it now takes you to a completely different story. They are trying to hide that they ever had it up, since their plagiarism was discovered. You can find the details of what they did on this Free Republic thread: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/943322/posts.



I appreciate that you want to get a retraction from Truthout.org, but you are acting as if they are an honorable organization. They are not. They stole an article, and as it turns out they got caught because through a twist of fate the article they stole was in the process of being proven to contain fraudulent information.

[Walt Starr]

85. WILL PITT!!! HERE'S THE REAL DEAL!!!!!

Posted in LBN here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=102&topic_id=5774&mesg_id=5774&page=

Gregory Thielmann is the guy you REALLY want to talk to!

Guardian story here:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,995188,00.html

This is the REAL DEAL!!! Now I know why Thompson made up Wilkerson, they FUCKING KNEW THIELMANN WAS TURNING ON THEM!!!! Faith Based Intelligence indeed!

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

87. Good one and he's for real

http://www.grinnell.edu/offices/ce/news/102320021/jnl/

also listed as a federal employee in Namebase.org

LOL "this administration has had a faith based intelligence attitude...'We know the answers - give us the intelligence to support those answers'."

[Az]

88. Doesn't put him in the room with Bushie

Its not proof yet. Bush can still declare plausible deniability. We need a link that shows incontrovertibly that Bush knew when he gave the SOTU speech that the Niger link was bad. He can still plead stupidity and in case you haven't noticed the pukes have stopped nominating candidates with IQs over room temp ever since Nixon.

[WilliamPitt]

91. Already got it. I've been talking about Thielmann for weeks

Thanks.

[Jack Rabbit]

86. I'm sorry, Will

This must hurt. I know you were relying on the veracity of the CapitolHillBlue piece.

It must be a real disappointment. I feel it, too.

[bitchkitty]

89. Holy damn crap!

WTF? I can't take much more of this. I don't believe it, not a word of it. He's lying his ass off, IMO, they got to him.

[grasswire]

92. who, BK?

Thompson?

[bitchkitty]

93. Yes, LOL

Did you think I meant Will? Sorry, when one's mind snaps, context sometimes gets lost.

I'm so depressed.

[grasswire]

100. ha, not will

I thought maybe you meant Wilkinson.

[Best_man23]

94. This thing smells like month old lunchmeat.

IMO, I think Thompson is receiving pressure (or money) from somewhere to "bury" this story. A source that has supposedly been reliable for 21 years is now suddenly lying and can't be located? Give me a break. If this guy was BSing about this, then Thompson better check all the other stories he's produced using this guy's information, as he may have a lot more retractions to make.

Over time, any reporter or writer worth his or her craft develops a "sixth sense" that tends to go off whenever a source or source material is likely BS (I'm sure Will knows what I'm talking about here). I'm not familiar with Thompson's work, but if he's been reporting for any length of time, he should be able to tell in many cases when someone is feeding him a line of crap.

I don't see this as being a Rove trick, it leaves too much room. If another source appears, then the WH is back in the same (or worse) position and Thompson would have to start giving thought to managing a McDonalds, because he will lose any remaining credibility as a reporter.

[Oilwellian]

95. Let's refocus on WILSON's words

"The next morning, I met with Ambassador Owens-Kirkpatrick at the embassy. For reasons that are understandable, the embassy staff has always kept a close eye on Niger's uranium business. I was not surprised, then, when the ambassador told me that she knew about the allegations of uranium sales to Iraq — and that she felt she had already debunked them in her reports to Washington. Nevertheless, she and I agreed that my time would be best spent interviewing people who had been in government when the deal supposedly took place, which was before her arrival."

And this:

"Though I did not file a written report, there should be at least four documents in United States government archives confirming my mission. The documents should include the ambassador's report of my debriefing in Niamey, a separate report written by the embassy staff, a C.I.A. report summing up my trip, and a specific answer from the agency to the office of the vice president (this may have been delivered orally). While I have not seen any of these reports, I have spent enough time in government to know that this is standard operating procedure."

Let's put Ambassador Owens-Kirkpatrick on the stand to tell us about her"reports to Washington." :D

[Merlin]

111. She's a Clinton appointee. Maybe she'll come clean.

Barbro Owens-Kirkpatrick was sworn in as U.S. Ambassador to the Republic of Niger on September 10, 1999. Prior to this appointment, from 1997-98, she was Director of the Office of European Security and Political Affairs (EUR/RPM) in the State Department.
Ambassador Owens-Kirkpatrick was Minister Counselor for Political Affairs at the U.S. Embassy in Mexico City from 1994-97, a crucial period in Mexico’s transition from authoritarian government to democracy, and the start-up of the Chiapas rebellion. Prior to Mexico, from 1993-94, she was Director of Inter-American Affairs at the National Security Council, focusing on Cuba, the Haiti crisis, Central and South America. From 1992-93, she was Deputy Director of the Office of International Security Operations (PM/ISO) in the Political-Military Bureau at State. Her team participated in establishing U.S. policy and coordinating global crisis management with DOD counterparts, including in Bosnia, northern Iraq, and Somalia. Ms. Owens-Kirkpatrick was promoted from this job into the Senior Foreign Service in 1993.

http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/biog/8179.htm

[ljm2002]

96. Just a thought here...

Whatever the specific story is behind this, one thing's for sure: someone is worried enough to do some elaborate lying: either Wilkinson (if he even exists), in which case it may be the CIA "using up" the spook capital of one of its operatives because they saw an opportunity for confusion that was too good to pass up; or Thompson, in which case someone is using him to orchestrate confusion, and he's willing to play along or is being paid to do it or ... who knows. Either way, we know who benefits most from the confusion: Bush and the Cabal. The really interesting point here is the elaborateness of the scam. It means someone is worried for whatever reasons. It means you're getting wwaaarrrrmmmmm...

[madfloridian]

97. Will Pitt, truthout mailing just came....excellent job!

Well-done, and with a proper amount of suspicion. Good work.
This is all such a shame. However, I think the best is to let it out that we all are suspicious of these things.

[Dover]

102. Didn't Wilkinson say he is or did work for Kerry in that article?

Seems like that would be easy to check.

[Oilwellian]

103. You're confusing him

with Rand Beers.

[tomp]

116. any thoughts on why thompson is deleting the articles?

i personally would like to know which stories this wilkinson character was involved with. it might tell us something about who he is, or who he works for, or shed some light on the issues themselves.

[Loonman]

118. Remember what happened to Scott Ritter?

Same thing could be happening with this guy.

Never underestimate the BFEEs propensity for dirty tricks.

[Cocoa]

119. this guy is BFEE

he was part of the Clinton impeachment for chrissakes.

[peterh]

124. This story or lack of….is a non-issue…move on

I don’t see where the release of this story and subsequent retraction helped or hurt either side. It was carried on “one” two-bit web site and was discussed on a few message boards. It never made it into the mainstream. For the most part, the general public was completely unaware that someone out there was playing a game. So again, who did it help and who did it hurt. It might only have hurt “Capital Hill Blue”, but so what. I believe their politics are Libertarian anyway. The idiot-in-chief has enough credible stuff ready to hit him already. It’s just getting the right people in power to move it along.

[julka]

125. interesting developments from capitol grilling

http://www.capitolgrilling.com/cgi-bin/ubbcgi/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=1&t=010415

amongst which, Thompson is a registered freeper

Will's Japan Today connection is discussed, with his response at the very end........

[ElementaryPenguin]

126. Orginal story may not be publishable - but that doesn't make it false!

"Wilkinson" doesn't exist because the BFEE White House says he doesn't?? Well, that's solid proof!! "Wilkinson" is a not real CIA because Google doesn't provide a blow by blow description of his life story as a CIA spook? This story could well be Thompson's complete fabrication, but it could also be a legitimate one - and such a smoking gun that the White House moved to squash it immediately. Imagine if John Dean had been CIA - how quickly the Nixon gang would have moved to discredit him - even denied his existence! The 20 year scam angle sounds like complete bullshit, and I don't see where any Bushistas, Freeps, or Repukes in general gain anything from planting such an incriminating story - especially when the shit is hitting the fan on so many fronts for the wounded Chimp right now. Thompson's initial defense of the article - makes even less sense. The fact is, people don't read the retractions - not nearly to the same degree - and no one knows this better than the lying Rovian BFEE mob!

[julka]

130. I've given up on following this thread anymore....too confusing

but, what's the deal with the allegations of plagiarism, regarding the unattributed used of capblue in the Japan Today story?

has this been discussed here at all?

no offense, but I'd like to know how something like that works

and why the rush to 'print' with this story in the first place?

there was lots of skepticism re: Wilkinson/Thompson at the outset, as I recall

[Merlin]

134. Elad gave me a clue on how to do it.

You click on the clock icon "Mark" at the top of the forum page. It resets the color of all icons in the forum to gray. Any new posts after that have yellow icons. Just found this out today, and it works like a charm.

p.s. If you don't have a "Mark" (clock) icon at the top of the forum page, you need to change your preferences.

[DoctorMyEyes]

138. Thank you everyone for posting here!

I cannot even tell you how grateful I was this morning to be able to refer to the info and links in this thread in order to put down a mild insurrection on a "freeper-lite" discussion board!

You all saved me hours of wasted time, research and argument that would have been required to show the light to two or three dim bulbs!

[DifferentStrokes]

140. Freeper links

In case this hasn't already been posted elsewhere.

It's seems that a Freeper named William McKinley did the initial discrediting and Thompson jumped on board.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/943260/posts
Thompson article

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/943322/posts
McKinley article

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/941820/posts
And a suggestion that people make extra large contributions to FR in honor of Mr. McKinley. Amazing that this coincided with the latest Freepathon.