portland independent media center  
images audio video
newswire article reposts global

government | imperialism & war | media criticism

Conned, BIG TIME.

an inside source--whom the publisher of Capitol Hill Blue knew for over 20 years--has *miraculously vanished* from the face of the Earth . . . within 24 hours of their running a story with insider corroboration to Bu$h's knowledge of the Niger-Iraq uranium falsehood (later claiming that Iraq bought nukes in his January 'State of The Union' speech).

this is the publisher's MUST READ retraction and apology . . . can you say 'covert ops'? I knew you could . . .
Conned big time

Jul 9, 2003, 18:05

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.

Over the last couple of years, Wilkinson served as either a primary or secondary source on a number of stories that have appeared in Capitol Hill Blue regarding intelligence activities. In early stories, I checked his information with at least one more source. His information usually proved accurate and, over time, I came to depend on him as a source without additional backup.

On Tuesday, we ran a story headlined "White House admits Bush wrong about Iraqi nukes." For the first time, Wilkinson said he was willing to go on the record and told a story about being present, as a CIA contract consultant, at two briefings with Bush. He said he was retired now and was fed up and wanted to go public.

"He (Bush) said that if the current operatives working for the CIA couldn't prove the story was true, then the agency had better find some who could," Wilkinson said in our story. "He said he knew the story was true and so would the world after American troops secured the country."

After the story ran, we received a number of emails or phone calls that (1) either claimed Wilkinson was lying or (2) doubted his existence. I quickly dismissed the claims. After all, I had known this guy for 20+ years and had no doubt about his credibility. Some people wanted to talk to him, so I forwarded those requests on to him via email. He didn't answer my emails, which I found odd. I should have listened to a bell that should have been going off in my ear.

Today, a White House source I know and trust said visitor logs don't have any record of anyone named Terrance J. Wilkinson ever being present at a meeting with the President. Then a CIA source I trust said the agency had no record of a contract consultant with that name. "Nobody, and I mean nobody, has ever heard of this guy," my source said.

I tried calling Terry's phone number. I got a recorded message from a wireless phone provider saying the number was no longer in service. I tried a second phone number I had for him. Same result.

Then a friend from the Hill called.

"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."

Both of his phone numbers have Los Angeles area codes but an identity check through Know-X today revealed no record of anyone named Terrance J. Wilkinson ever having lived in LA or surrounding communities.

His email address turns out to be a blind forward to a free email service where anyone can sign up and get an email account. Because it was not one of the usual "free" services like Hotmail, Yahoo or such, I did not recognize it as one (although you'd think that someone like me would have known better).

The bottom line is that someone has been running a con on me for 20 some years and I fell for it like a little old lady in a pigeon drop scheme. I've spent the last two hours going through the database of Capitol Hill Blue stories and removing any that were based on information from Wilkinson (or whoever he is). I've also removed his name, quotes and claims from Tuesday's story about the White House and the uranium claims.

Erasing the stories doesn't erase the fact that we ran articles containing information that, given the source, was probably inaccurate. And it doesn't erase the sad fact that my own arrogance allowed me to be conned.

It will be a long time (and perhaps never) before I trust someone else who comes forward and offers inside information. The next one who does had better be prepared to produce a birth certificate, a driver's license and his grandmother's maiden name.

Any news publication exists on the trust of its readers. Because I depended on a source that was not credible, I violated the trust that the readers of Capitol Hill Blue placed in me.

I was wrong. I'm sorry.

Copyright 2003 by Capitol Hill Blue

homepage: homepage: http://www.capitolhillblue.com/artman/publish/article_2529.shtml
address: address: Capitol Hill Blue

Great 'covert ops', But Do You Mean the Man in the Story, or The Story Itself? 10.Jul.2003 01:16


I posted this man's (Wilkinson) claim last night; one that I found in a Japanese online journal. A journalist that knew a man 20 years ought to be able to track him down and ask him a few questions. Does Wilkinson have a covert plan, or is the plan to discredit Wilkinson?

'905'-- 10.Jul.2003 01:27

could be BOTH. (?)

here's an interesting comment by Converse Murdoch:

Dear Mr. Thompson:
Converse Murdoch 11:57pm Wed Jul 9 '03

Your retraction is rather tangential. You have deftly avoided the pivotal issue as to Bush knowingly lying. Just because you don't know who this joker is doesn't mean what he told you wasn't true.

I'm reading between the lines here, but it sounds like you ran an anti-Bush article and you are under duress to retract it. Is somebody holding a gun to your head ?

Notwithstanding your source's identity crisis do you believe Bush knowingly lied ? Yes or no ??

Also, see:

by Anti-Fascist 2:01am Thu Jul 10 '03

This is PsyOps. Just today that following came out:


This other article has not been discredited. However, anyone reading the Doug Thompson may unknowingly equate the two stories, as they are similar. Thus, planting seeds of doubt in inside sources exposing Bush will assist Bush by causing the population to dismiss the real story found in the Guardian.

Thompson is probably on the level. However, he has been played and he has been played for a reason. We know the reason and we know the players: the Bush Regime is waging psychological warfare on Americans in order to maintain power.

'905'--more on Guardian UK article 10.Jul.2003 01:33

and your Japan Today article has VANISHED.

the Japan Today article is no longer accessible by your link  http://www.japantoday.com/e/?content=news&cat=8&id=265801

brief excerpt from Guardian UK article:

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.

Mr Thielmannn [sic] said yesterday: "I believe the Bush administration did not provide an accurate picture to the American people of the military threat posed by Iraq."

Wow! No Wonder the Trolls are Panicking! 10.Jul.2003 01:48


I wonder if the Guardian has looked into this Wilkinson cat?

More Japan Today- So Long Chimpy 10.Jul.2003 02:57


The insiders are coming out


William Rivers Pitt

For many, many months now, we in the United States have endured what is known in the common political lexicon as an "Imperial Presidency." The term denotes an administration that keeps its secrets, says nothing to the press worth reporting, lies with impunity beneath the veil of those secrets, and threatens retaliation against anyone who might stand in the way. When done properly, an Imperial Presidency becomes a powerful, unstoppable force. When an Imperial Presidency is guarded in Congress by political allies who hold the majority, it becomes almost completely unassailable.

Think about it. When was the last time we got a straight answer out of the Bush administration? When was the last time anyone with real power demanded answers from the folks in the White House? In the vacuum, we wind up getting answers like the one Don Rumsfeld delivered on Feb 12, 2002 when faced with pointed press questions about terrorism:

"As we know, there are known knowns. There are things we know we know. We also know there are known unknowns. That is to say we know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns, the ones we don't know we don't know."

These boys could give lessons to Orwell. Without anyone in Congress slinging subpoenas, and with a press cowed by the threat of removal from the White House beat, there is no way to take an Imperial Presidency to task for its actions when deliberate gibberish is the rule of the news day.

There is no way.unless the White House insiders come out and start talking. Suddenly, that is exactly what is happening.

On June 26, I conducted an interview with 27-year CIA veteran Ray McGovern. McGovern served every president from Kennedy to Bush Sr, and delivered a wide spectrum of insight and data regarding both the Sept 11 attacks and the second Iraq war. One key question McGovern answered dealt with the rapidly expanding scandal surrounding Bush administration tampering with evidence of Iraqi weapons.

The story has been taking a slow boil for months now, ever since the end of the war. The justification for attacking Iraq, as presented by the administration, was that Saddam Hussein had thousands of tons of deadly weapons practically falling out of his ears. Day after day came the dire reports from Bush, from Cheney, from Rumsfeld, from Rice, from Powell before the U.N., from dozens of hired administration guns who saturated the airwaves with stories of looming doom in the shadow of Sept 11.

The weapons never showed up. Stories began to swirl about Vice President Cheney taking unprecedented trips to CIA headquarters for the purpose of leaning on the intelligence analysts so he would get the damning Iraq weapons reports the administration needed to justify combat. Stories began to swirl about obviously forged evidence of an Iraqi nuclear program that was deliberately used by Bush to justify war, despite the fact that everyone in the White House knew the evidence had been crudely faked. To counteract these stories, the Imperial Presidency laid blame for all of this on the CIA.

When I questioned McGovern on the impact these developments were having on the American intelligence community, McGovern made a prescient prediction:

"To the degree that esprit de corps exists, and I know it does among the folks we talk to, there is great, great turmoil there. In the coming weeks, we're going to be seeing folks coming out and coming forth with what they know, and it is going to be very embarrassing for the Bush administration."

A New York Times article from Sunday July 6 quoted former U.S. ambassador Joseph Wilson as saying, "Based on my experience with the administration in the months leading up to the war, I have little choice but to conclude that some of the intelligence related to Iraq's nuclear weapons program was twisted to exaggerate the Iraqi threat."

Wilson was the man sent to Niger in February of 2002 to assess the validity of documentary evidence that claimed to describe an attempt by Iraq to procure materials for the development of a nuclear weapons platform. "It did not take long to conclude that it was highly doubtful that any such transaction had ever taken place," said Wilson in the Times.

Wilson certainly reported his findings to the White House, because he was asked to make the Niger trip by none other than Dick Cheney. Despite this fact, the faked Niger evidence was used dramatically by George W Bush in a speech that directly connected September 11 to the alleged Iraqi weapons:

"We have experienced the horror of Sept 11. We have seen that those who hate America are willing to crash airplanes into buildings full of innocent people. Our enemies would be no less willing in fact they would be eager to use a biological, or chemical, or a nuclear weapon. Knowing these realities, America must not ignore the threat gathering against us. Facing clear evidence of peril, we cannot wait for the final proof the smoking gun that could come in the form of a mushroom cloud."

The "mushroom cloud" comment was appalling to another administration insider. Greg Thielmann, director of the Office of Strategic, Proliferation, and Military Issues in the State Department, told Newsweek at the beginning of June 2003 that the State Department's Bureau of Intelligence and Research had concluded the documents were "garbage."

"When I saw that, it really blew me away," Thielmann told Newsweek. When Thielmann found out that Bush had used the faked Niger evidence to justify war to the American people, he said, "Not that stupid piece of garbage. My thought was, how did that get into the speech?"

Another White House insider has come out in spectacular fashion. Rand Beers served the Bush administration on the National Security Council at the White House as a special assistant to the president for combating terrorism. Beers served in government for more than 30 years working in international narcotics and law enforcement affairs, intelligence, and counter-terrorism. He worked for the National Security Council under presidents Reagan, Bush Sr, Clinton. Beer's service to his country began with two tours in Vietnam with the Marine Corps.

In a June 25 2003 interview with Ted Koppel on "Nightline," Beers reported that the administration was failing dramatically to defend the United States against terrorism. According to Beers, al-Qaida presented a far greater threat to America than Hussein and Iraq, and that the Iraq war was a terrible and unnecessary distraction from what was truly needed to keep the nation safe.

In his "Nightline" interview, Beers said, "Well, I think, firstly, there is an inadequate amount of funding. There was a report about the House passing the fiscal year 2004 budget, yesterday. And the main point of the article is that most everybody, expect for the administration, believes that there was an inadequate funding level in that budget. People voted for it because the alternative was not acceptable, to have no budget. That has been, to my knowledge, a continuous perspective that the administration has had. They've been unable or unwilling to ask for sufficient funds to actually do the job.

"And then, they haven't followed through with the programs that actually would turn that money into activities in as rapid and forceful a fashion as I think that it should. One of the phrases that is used often within Washington is 'business as usual.' And I'm really concerned that this administration, despite its rhetoric, has given the homeland security function a 'business as usual' mantra."

Beers' position as special assistant to the president for combating terrorism meant he saw everything and knew everything. He was on Nightline for one reason: He quit his job, walked out the door, and joined the John Kerry for President campaign as National Security Advisor.

Today, everything Beers knows about the manner in which the administration acted toward Iraq, toward Afghanistan, toward Sept 11, is also known by a senator from Massachusetts who is running for president on a very large and public stage.

Ray McGovern was right. The insiders are coming out, and the trickle has become a flood.

William Rivers Pitt

Doug Thompson on indymedia????? 10.Jul.2003 07:48


I didn't know Indymedia had become the new home of corporate media writers????

Hey Doug! Have you fixed your problem at American Blue with your ultra right wing moderators who chase anyone away who isn't a fascist supporting jingoist?

'Steve'--obviously NOT a 'greenarchist' (whatever) 10.Jul.2003 11:49

"Steve", are you by any chance, a DISINFORMATIONALIST TROLL?

"American Blue with your ultra right wing moderators"

--the name of the publication is Capitol Hill Blue.

Doug Thompson actually tends to be kind of on the "liberal" (whatever that means) side of things--

"Thompson went on to join the staff of The Roanoke Times where he covered the police beat, emerging racial turmoil in the city and tackled other tough subjects. His story about a young girl who obtained an abortion (illegal at the time) won the top feature writing award from the Virginia Press Association. . ."

Actually. the story Japan Today ran came FROM Capital Hill Blue... 13.Jul.2003 14:01

Some Guy

... the article was picked up from CHB by truthout.org, and Japan TOday got it from them. SAme story - same source.