"As Agency officers current and former (officials) have made clear, those charges are false," the CIA statement said, noting that the White House and relevant British intelligence officials have also repudiated Suskind's charges.

"Those denials are powerful in and of themselves," the CIA said. "But they are also backed by a thorough, time-consuming records search within CIA and by interviews with other officers--senior and junior alike--who were directly involved in Iraq operations."

"At this point, the origins of the forgery, like the whereabouts of Habbush himself, remain unclear," the CIA said. "But this much is certain: Suskind is off the mark."

"To characterize it right, I would say, right: it came to us, George had a raised eyebrow, and basically we passed it on--it was to--and passed this on into the organization. You know, it was: 'Okay, we gotta do this, but make it go away.' To be honest with you, I don't want to make it sound--I for sure don't want to portray this as George jumping: 'Okay, this has gotta happen.' As I remember it--and, again, it's still vague, so I'll be very straight with you on this--is it wasn't that important. It was: 'This is unbelievable. This is just like all the other garbage we get about . . . I mean Mohammad Atta and links to al Qaeda. 'Rob,' you know, 'do something with this.' I think it was more like that than: 'Get this done.'"

Child's file shows that in her OSS application, she included a note expressing regret she left an earlier department store job hastily because she did not get along with her boss, said William Cunliffe, an archivist who has worked extensively with the OSS records at the National Archives.

Russia's punishing attack on Georgia has already harvested bitter fruit beyond the Black Sea.

On Thursday U.S. and Polish officials reached agreement to install a battery of American  missiles in Poland, a plan sure to infuriate Russia and escalate tensions with its former  puppet states in Eastern and Central Europe.

Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk said the deal includes a "mutual commitment" between the two nations -- outside of the NATO alliance -- to come to each other's assistance in case of danger.

With a wary eye on Russia's lightening attack on Georgia, Tusk said NATO would be too slow to act if it was threatened by Moscow, according to an A.P. report from Warsaw.

"Poland and the Poles do not want to be in alliances in which assistance comes at some point later -- it is no good when assistance comes to dead people. Poland wants to be in alliances where assistance comes in the very first hours of -- knock on wood -- any possible conflict," Tusk said.

Russia, meanwhile, has positioned ballistic missile launchers in Georgia, WIRED's Noah Shachtman reported Thursday, based on a transcipt of a little noticed briefing by Deputy National Security Advisor Jim Jeffrey and other Bush administration officials earlier in the week.

"The President was informed immediately on Friday, when we received news of the first two SS-21 Russian missile launchers into Georgian territory," Jeffrey said.

On Capitol Hill, some Republicans think they can use Russian aggression in Georgia to bludgeon the Democrats into supporting the deployment of an American "missile shield" in Eastern Europe, according to a story by CQ's enterprising Josh Rogin:

In September, lawmakers will resume their debate over the missile sites -- this time amid fresh concerns over Russian threats to U.S. allies in eastern Europe. Though the administration has presented the missiles sites as a defense against Iranian attack, missile defense advocates say they now plan to cite the Russian threat as a way to get Democrats to let construction begin...

"Russia's actions represent compelling data that should be convincing to Democrats that we don't want to delay this thing," said Rep. Trent Franks, R-Ariz., a leading missile defense champion.

"This is not just about missile defense; this is about demonstrating to Russia that America is still a nation of resolve . . . and we're not going to let Russian expansionism intimidate everyone."

But some key congressional Democrats aren't budging from their opposition to the plan, Rogin reports.

Rob Richer, the former CIA official at the center of  sensational charges that the White House ordered the spy agency to fabricate a document tying Iraq to the 9/11 attacks, repeated today that author Ron Suskind gravely misrepresented their interview on the subject.

The legitimacy of a web site that popped up Saturday, Aug. 8,  with Richer's formal statement denying Suskind's charges, has come under attack in recent days as possibly a fabrication itself.

But in a brief telephone interview today, Richer reaffirmed that the statement on the controversial Web site, headlined "Richer Response," was indeed his.

"It's mine," he said. 

But the Web site, he said, wasn't.

"I did not create the Web site," he said, joking "I wouldn't know how."

Richer said he didn't know who created the Web site, guessing that it was someone who wanted to give wider circulation to his categorical denials earlier in the week that statements and views attributed to him by Suskind in his book, The Way of the World, were false.

Close observers of the controversy have grown increasingly skeptical of the accuracy of  Suskind's interviews with CIA officials, who are portrayed as telling the author that the White House ordered the CIA to fabricate a "captured document" that would show former Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein conspiring with al Qaeda and importing uranium from Africa.

Adding to the mystery, the document did surface in a number of stories in conservative media outlets in  Dec. 2003, but U.S. intelligence officials dismissed it as a forgery.        

"I would say that we mostly were focused elsewhere, unlike during the Cold War, when we'd see a single Soviet armor battalion move. So, yes, the size and scope of the Russian move has come as something of a surprise."

"Far from being comfortable" with his quotations, as Suskind maintains, Richer says he "told Mr. Suskind that many of the things he wrote about what I did and said were wrong."

"Mr. Suskind has now released an edited transcript of an apparent conversation between us that he alleges supports one of the central themes in his book.  It does not," Richer writes. 

"I stand by my earlier statement and my absolute belief that the charges outlined in Mr. Suskind's book regarding Agency involvement in forging documents are not true."

"I never received direction from George Tenet or anyone else in my chain of command to fabricate a document from [Saddam Hussein's intelligence director, Tahir Jalil] Habbush [al-Tikiriti] as outlined in Mr. Suskind's book."  For the record, no one outside my chain of command directed me to do so either."

Former top CIA official Rob Richer said that orders to fabricate a letter showing that Saddam Hussein played a role in the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks probably came from the office of Vice president Dick Cheney, according to an interview transcript author Ron Suskind released today.

"(A)lmost all that stuff came from one place only: Scooter Libby and the shop around the vice president," says Richer, the agency's former deputy chief of clandestine operations, in the transcript.

"But he didn't say that specifically," says Richer.

Then again, the CIA man adds:

 "I would naturally--I would probably stand on my, basically, my reputation and say it came from the vice president."

Richer had denied earlier in the week that he ever "received direction from George Tenet or anyone else in my chain of command to fabricate a document ... as outlined in Mr. Suskind's book."

Suskind told SpyTalk Thursday night (see below) he was releasing portions of the transcript to defend himself against accusations by Richer and another CIA official, John Maguire, that he had misinterpreted their remarks in his new book, The Way of the World: A Story of Truth and Hope in an Age of Extremism.

But, as with Richer's remarks about Cheney and Libby, the transcript falls far short of clearing up who said what to whom on the main issue: White House involvement in a clandestine plot to manipulate public opinion on the invasion of Iraq.

To add even more mystery to the affair, Richer suggests the target "wasn't so much to influence America--that's illegal--but it was kinda like a covert, a way to influence Iraqis."

Still left unclear is exactly what the CIA was supposed to do with the letter, allegedly provided by the White House, purporting to show that Saddam Hussein had conspired with al Qaeda on 9/11 and obtained uranium from Niger.

Here's Richer, on Suskind's transcript:

"To characterize it right, I would say, right: it came to us, George had a raised eyebrow, and basically we passed it on--it was to--and passed this on into the organization. You know, it was: 'Okay, we gotta do this, but make it go away.' To be honest with you, I don't want to make it sound--I for sure don't want to portray this as George jumping: 'Okay, this has gotta happen.' As I remember it--and, again, it's still vague, so I'll be very straight with you on this--is it wasn't that important. It was: 'This is unbelievable. This is just like all the other garbage we get about . . . I mean Mohammad Atta and links to al Qaeda. 'Rob,' you know, 'do something with this.' I think it was more like that than: 'Get this done.'   

Not confused enough? There's more ambiguity on Suskind's web page. 

Author Ron Suskind says he will release transcripts of his interviews with a top CIA official that will confirm his story that in 2003 the White House ordered the agency to fabricate a phony document linking Iraq to the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks on New York and Washington, D.C.

The letter, written by an Iraqi intelligence official under the control of the CIA, according to Suskind, was concocted to mislead the public into believing that Saddam Hussein conspired with Osama Bin Laden in the attacks, and had gotten uranium from Niger to make nuclear weapons, thus justifying the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq.

Then-CIA Director George Tenet directed agency officials to carry out the subterfuge under orders from the White House, Suskind writes in a new book, The Way of the World: A Story of Truth and Hope in an Age of Extremism.

One of the CIA officials involved, Robert Richer, the agency's then-deputy director of clandestine operations, issued a statement this week denying Suskind's allegations.

"I never received direction from George Tenet (CIA director at the time) or anyone else in my chain of command to fabricate a document ... as outlined in Mr. Suskind's book,"  Richer said in a statement that was initially released by the White House .

But in a telephone interview this evening, Suskind said he is planning to release transcripts of his on-the-record interviews with Richer to back up his story.

"There are lots of transcripts, lots of tapes," Suskind told me. "In the next couple days the transcripts will be coming out."

Suskind said he will probably post them on his own Web site.

The author, a former Wall Street Journal reporter and Pulitzer Prize winner, said he had no plans at present to post transcripts of his on-the-record interviews with another CIA official caught up in the imbroglio, John Maguire.

Maguire, who oversaw the agency's Iraq Operations Group in 2003, also denied complicity in the alleged forgery operation, via a statement issued through Richer.

"I never received any instruction from then Chief/NE Rob Richer or any other officer in my chain of command instructing me to fabricate such a letter," Maguire said. "Further, I have no knowledge to the origins of the letter and as to how it circulated in Iraq."

Suskind says that Richer had pledged to him that he would not deny his quotes when the book came out.

"He said, 'I will stand tall.'"

Suskind says he "felt great sympathy" for both men, who he'd warned that "the heat will be white hot" when the book came out.

But Suskind said he would not release transcripts of his "hours and hours" of interviews with Maguire, "at least at this point,  because "he hasn't had a chance to read the book yet."

Maguire is said to be traveling in the Middle East and could not be reached for comment.   

"I'm prepared to post some transcripts (of interviews) with Richer," he said, "so people can judge for themselves."

"This is a battle between truth and power," Suskind said, "which is what the whole book is about." 

The FBI Wednesday dumped a load of documents on the family of Dr. Bruce E. Ivins, supposedly showing that the late Army bioweapons researcher was behind the deadly anthrax mailings of 2001.

It's the latest step that should leave a bigger stain on the government than Ivins' suffering kin and friends.

Hardly a month had passed since Steven Hatfill won a $5.8 million slander suit against the Justice Department that the government began leaking details on its case against Ivins, which, by many accounts, probably drove him over the edge.  Even after his suicide, the leaks continued.

For what purpose? To convince the public that the feds really -- no, really, cross-my-heart-and-hope-to-die -- had a case against him?

Whatever happened to due process? Even the dead should be allowed that.

I have no idea whether Ivins was guilty, but the point is that he, unlike Hatfill, will never get a his day in court, and his family must bear the brunt of the government's cowardly, anonymous accusations forever.

UPDATE: 

Democratic Rep. Rush Holt, who represents the central New Jersey area when the anthrax envelopes evidently were mailed, issued similar sentiments after a private briefing Wednesday by FBI Director Mueller.

"I am pleased the FBI finally has begun to answer the questions that the families of the victims have had for nearly seven years," Holt said in a statement.

"While the circumstantial evidence pointing to Dr. Ivins that the Department of Justice released today is compelling, a number of important questions remain unanswered, such as why investigators remained focused on Dr. Hatfill long after they had begun to suspect Dr. Ivins of the crime and why investigators are so certain that Ivins acted alone. In addition, there are important policy questions for handling any future incidents of bioterrorism.  I will continue to conduct additional oversight on this issue over the course of the next several months."

"I never received direction from George Tenet or anyone else in my chain of command to fabricate a document from Habbush as outlined in Mr. Suskind's book," Richer said in an e-mail.

 "I have no knowledge to the origins of the letter," Maguire said in the same statement. 

Rob Richer, the CIA's Near East Division chief in 2003, and John Maguire, who oversaw the agency's Iraq Operations Group, are on the record confirming the existence of a fake, backdated letter purported to have been written by Saddam Hussein's intelligence chief linking Iraq to the 9/11 attacks and Niger uranium.

The allegations -- angrily dismisssed by the White House and  former CIA Director George Tenet -- are contained in The Way of the World: A Story of Truth and Hope in an Age of Extremism, by Ron Suskind, a Pulitzer Prize-winning former reporter for the Wall Street Journal.

Suskind also quotes Alan Foley, the head of WMD analysis for the CIA at the time, as saying, "It is, in my opinion, true that the administration, for whatever reason, was determined to have a showdown with Iraq that predated this whole WMD stuff."

The authors of an authoritative book on the Niger uranium affair, meanwhile, were skeptical of Suskind's charges.  

"I find it hard to believe that CIA would ceate such a forgery just to please the White House," said former Newsday reporter Knut Royce, another Pulitzer winner and co-author of The Italian Letter: How the Bush Administration Used a Fake Letter to Build the Case for War,  

"I don't find it hard to believe that the White House asked for it." 

His co-author, former Washington Post editor Peter Eisner, said, "What would be better is proof of the forged letter, allegedly produced by the CIA. How can Suskind show that this is true? We don't know."

For more details go here.

A lawyer for 38 American victims of a quarter century old Libyan terrorist attack says he's not joining the celebration over a Senate bill that seemed to open the door to a restoration of full diplomatic and business relations between Washington and the erstwhile rogue state.

Attorney Thomas  Fay, who represents victims of the La Belle discotheque attack carried out against GIs in West Germany by Libyan agents in 1986, says he will not remove the liens he filed against American companies who have budding business relations with the North African police state ruled by Muammar Qaddafi.

Last week Congress unanimously approved legislation, enthusiastically backed by the White House and an organization representing families of the 180 Americans killed in 1989 by Libyan agents' sabotage of PanAm Flight 103, which would establish a universal settlement mechanism to resolve all U.S. cases of Libya's terrorism.    

Kara Weipz, spokesperson for the Families of the Victims of Pan Am 103, applauded the legislation as "a final step toward resolving the last payment by Libya.  The Pan Am 103 families urge Secretary Rice to act swiftly and finalize an agreement with Libya that fairly resolves all claims against Libya."    

But Fay, who represents 38 of the La Belle victims, denounced a statement by Washington  superlawyer Jacob Stein, another lawyer representing Libyan victims, that seemed to speak for all the La Belle families as well as the PanAm 103 victims.

"Stein had no authority from my clients to make an announcement in which they purported to speak for all of the La Belle victims," Fay told me.

He added, "No liens will be released until all of our clients are paid."

In March, Fay filed liens that put such as firms as Blank & Rome, the Livingston Group and White & Case on notice that assets from Libyan contracts could be seized to compensate victims of terrorist attacks that have been linked to their new client, Libya.  
   

The Islamic Army is the core of the coalition of 'nationalist-jihadist' insurgency factions which have expressed interest in joining the political process (the Reform and Jihad Front, the Political Council of the Iraqi Resistance) and is one of the key factions believed to have joined up with the Awakenings Councils / Sons of Iraq in force.  Its public break with [al Qaeda in Iraq] in April 2007 was probably the most important turning point in the transformation of the Sunni insurgency.