Unmasking of Qaeda Mole a U.S. Security Blunder-Experts

Reuters ^ | Auguat 7, 2004 | Peter Graff

[windchime]

"This is a bogus story."

I agree, but the MSM will still run with it. Loftus usually appears on FNC on Sunday mornings with Eric Shaun...I will try to watch.

Evan Kohlman, terrorism expert, just confirmed on Fox that there are a lot of leaks within Pakistani intelligence. He and Bill Cowan were discussing the pros and cons of the mole being exposed.

[windchime]

"I called FOX, yesterday after Jim Angle made his bogus statement regarding the Elliot retraction."

Aha! So it was you. I noticed that it had been corrected on the late edition.

[windchime]

Thanks! Will do.

[Eva]

If you make the call, have the original article in front of you and read the paragraph that states that the source was Pakistani. I read from the Elliott affadavit, where it was filed, the state and county, etc. and added that Krainish was a paid operative of the Kerry campaign and was making a fool of the news commentators.

[Just mythoughts]

"Last Sunday, U.S. officials told reporters that someone held secretly by Pakistan was the source of the bulk of the information justifying the alert. The New York Times obtained Khan's name independently, and U.S. officials confirmed it when it appeared in the paper the next morning."


No news report yet has identified the "LEAK" coming from any part of the Bush Administration. Words used thus far on the initial "LEAK" have been "U.S. officials" and intelligence officials and this would include any elected Congress critter.

Thus far the first responder to the announcement of raising the alert was Howie Dean, of the JFKerry campaign, and he claimed the "alert" was a political act.

Now seems as though Howei Dean was a decoy to send the "media whores" sniffing out every one they could find with the question whether it was a political move.

All the while the NYTimes is leaking "INTEL" that requires a yes or no response and the Bush Administration cannot allowed themselves to be accused of "LYING" or covering up.

Looks like these dims and the NYTimes are still giving comfort and "INTEL" to the terrorists.

[Grampa Dave]

When we calm down and read the articles, they note that a Pakky intel officer was the one who did the original outing.

[Nexus]

Here is the passage from Ridge's last Sunday press conference in which you're referencing:

QUESTION: Were the recent arrests in Pakistan a key contributing factor to the information flow that you're getting now?

RIDGE: Well, we will not comment on the specific sources, but let me just go back again and say the coalition that we have built, and the alliances we have built, have been instrumental and very much a part of our intelligence-gathering operation.

It was a media folk which asked him the damn question, and he responded about as ambiguously as humanly possible. Ridge DID NOT point out anything. The only dots being laid out were by the media, friend...

Transcript: Ridge Raises Threat Level

[OldFriend]

It's my observation that Jane's has gone over to the dark side. They do a lot of criticizing of this administration. Sometimes subtle sometimes quite overt.

[True Capitalist]

Nexus, thanks for the transcript. Here is the direct quote from Ridge's announcement (prior to the Q&A):

But we must understand that the kind of information available to us today is the result of the president's leadership in the war against terror, the reports that have led to this alert are the result of offensive intelligence and military operations overseas, as well as strong partnerships with our allies around the world, such as Pakistan. Such operations and partnerships give us insight into the enemy, so we can better target our defensive measures here and away from home.

We should assume the NYT will commit treason if given the opportunity and we can't control what officials in foreign governments leak, but our government should be more careful about giving too much information to our enemies. It wasn't just the NYT that quickly picked up on Ridge's mention of intel from Pakistan, it was the entire worldwide press. Yes we may not have had Kahn's name until the NYT put it in print on Tuesday, but the terrorists already knew his name. By naming the specific targets and pointing to Pakistan, they could have concluded that somebody in Pakistan, i.e. Kahn, had been compromised. My point is this mole's cover may have been blown prior to his name being printed in the NYT.

[weegee]

The left will always be more outraged over Joe Wilson's wife.

[e_castillo]

My point is this mole's cover may have been blown prior to his name being printed in the NYT.

I agree, The odds of Ridge making a mistake like whats described in the article are slim and none. The Paks have been deep in Al-Queda since day one and the only ones we need to get help from are the Pak Intel follks.

Your assumption about the NYT committing treason are right on as well. I don't think they can give you the definition of treason even of they had the dictionary in front of them. Hey, why let a little thing like national security get in the way of a good selling story.

[windchime]

Thanks for your good info, Eva!

The 'Inside Scoop with John Loftus' is on Fox between 11:00 a.m. and 11:30 a.m. on Sundays.

Eric Shawn is ususally thorough in interviews. I sent him the relevant links with my comments.

[GEC]

Well, maybe if this administration wasn't forced to justify every action they take by both the major media and the Democrats, this mole would still be masked.

You're exactly correct.

I would also add that the initial story on this guy was that they "caught" him in July and it took at least two weeks to break the code.

If this guy really was a mole, this may have been a cover story.

I would submit, however, that another reason he may have been "announced" and the reason for the threat announcement was the new information that the cell was about to swing into action.

These specific buildings were able to increase their surveillance and security.

Al-Qaeda does not like to improvise.

[True Capitalist]

The 'Inside Scoop with John Loftus' is on Fox between 11:00 a.m. and 11:30 a.m. on Sundays.

I don't have a TV, but would appreciate it if someone would give me a concise summary re Loftus.

[windchime]

Most of the discussion was about the new explosions near a school in Karachi.

Loftus seems to have backed off his 'White House outed' comment A BIT. He said Khan was a great Pakistani intel coup. He said the New York Times outed Khan Monday. He said the NY Times and MAYBE the White House released the information too early. Shawn and Loftus concluded the interview with agreement that the U.S. and Pakistan needed each other in the WOT.

IMO, Loftus was still trying to link the loss of a mole in Al Queda to the White House, but there was no time to follow up on that aspect of the discussion.....even if Shawn had been so inclined.

[Chad Fairbanks]

WHomever at the new york slimes made the decision to publically name the "mole" should be taken out and shot. That is an act of treason, imho...

[True Capitalist]

Thanks for the update windchime!

[windchime]

You're welcome!

[Redbob]

"...his value in that regard was destroyed by making his name public."

And wasn't that the NYT's plan all along?

[Redbob]

"Suspects were dragged out of shops in daylight and caught in a high speed car chase, instead of the usual procedure of catching them at home in the early morning while they can offer less resistance."

I personally look forward to hearing of al Qaeda suspects offering resistance to arrest...

Save us a lot of money in legal fees.