OMG, that's just brilliant! So, do you really think the forgeries were around before 9-11, or were the bushies just trying to stir up a rumor and when it didn't take, and 9-11 happened, they figured they could send around forgeries and they'd get away with it? It would certainly explain the concerted campaign to discredit anything French, so if they spoke up, regular Americans wouldn't listen to them.

Sheesh, it's like trying to find a black hole by observing minute fluctuations in the space around them! You're really amazing, eriposte!

skeptical imqierer:

¿Quo bono?
Irony
does not make the cut
Good try

Iamcoyote,

I guess I can't take any credit for Chouet's statements...I'm just reporting them here.

That said, I am thinking of a follow-up post to examine Chouet's credibility a little more closely. This is an important set of allegations and I want to look at them some more.

eriposte, you're also building a case, if anyone has the ability, at some point, to make it. But that would be my next question, "how credible is Chouet?" You've already found corroborating evidence, I thought. Still. My feeling is that the comment that the US had the forgeries "for a year" meaning before 9-11, (am I correct in assuming that?) is the least supported statement he makes. So, I look forward to your next installment.

Well he does have some credibility...and that's why I published this and provided links to some corroborating evidence. It's just that I am hearing that maybe he's not necessarily being totally honest in his description of the events...so, we'll see.

At the same time, the other parties in this affair have far worse credibility, esp. the Bush and Berlusconi administrations. So, this is a game that is being played and since much of the media is largely uninterestd in getting to the bottom of it, we're left to do the work of sorting things out.

eR,

Okay, you sold me. In fact, I think I may have some corroborating evidence for you. I'll post more later.

A couple more interesting pieces to throw into this mix (just to keep events synchronized). The CIA request to the French came AFTER Joe Wilson came back with his report - and the French report confirmed the story he brought back. So the CIA tried to confirm this story (because Cheney really, really, really wanted it confirmed) through four channels: the then-ambassador to Niger, Barbro Owens-Kirkpatrick, Gen. Carlton W. Fulford Jr. who met with the Niger President in Feb 2002 and checked into this claim, Joe Wilson in Feb 2002 AND the French in April-May 2002.

The other event to fit into this piece is the fact that Dick Cheney made his most explosive charges about Saddam's nuclear program AFTER the four investigations all proved that the Niger charge was false and AFTER the CIA found out the Niger documents were forgeries.

The noose is tightening around Cheney's lies.

What a great summary, eRiposte.

Mary, you are right about the fact that so many people had gone through and investigated this crap that the Bushies wanted to peddle and every one turned out with no evidence for the original claims. You can imagine the pressure the CIA must have been under to peddle this...