Reverend Blair said:
See below, Christpher Hitchens-- about as left as left can get.
Hitchens has never been left. Even when he was at the Nation, most considered him the token Conservative. Not sure what you're trying to spin here.
There is evidence of White House spin in the outing of Valerie Plame as well. Somebody in the White House leaked information to a reporter known to be friendly to the Bush administration. That's White House involvement right there. Bush did all he could to not investigate that leak even though he has gone after other leaks doggedly. Whoever leaked the information broke US federal law about revealing the identity of CIA agents.
I'm going to have to ask for a direct link to whatever you have saying that Wilson admits to Saddam buying nuclear material, Researchok. It better be about yellowcake from Nigeria too because that's what he investigated, what he found to be a hoax, and what the Bush White House chose to lie about.
You mean you won't take my word for it? That seems to work a lot around here!
Just kidding. Here's a quote and a few links.
"It was Saddam Hussein's information minister, Mohammed Saeed Sahhaf, often referred to in the Western press as "Baghdad Bob," who approached an official of the African nation of Niger in 1999 to discuss trade -- an overture the official saw as a possible effort to buy uranium.
That's according to a new book Joseph C. Wilson IV, a former ambassador who was sent to Niger by the CIA in 2002 to investigate reports that Iraq had been trying to buy enriched "yellowcake" uranium. Wilson wrote that he did not learn the identity of the Iraqi official until this January, when he talked again with his Niger source."
Here's a site with further links, WP etc.
http://www.porphyrogenitus.net/archives/cat_iraq.html
I'm not crazy about his politics. but he's usually pretty solid on his research.
As for Hitchens, he was ALWAYS a lefty before 9/11. Yes he was idiosyncratic but he was a lefty.
http://archive.salon.com/news/feature/2002/10/29/hitchens/
Also, Bush DID go after white House leaks the WP has a couple of archived stories on that. There were JD interviews as I recall. As for characterizing a WH leaker as WH 'involvement', wouldn't that same standard then apply to Hillary Clinton's Rose Law firm records found in her study, FBI files, Kathleen Willey, etc etc? By your logic, that too, would imply WH involvement and thus WH culpability. My point is, the misdeeds of an individual in the WH doesnt NECESSARILY mean WH involvement.
I do wish though, that Bob Novak WOULD come clean on who the leaker was. It's been too much of a distraction. Of there was WH involvement, lets get to the bottom of it-- if not, let it go.