I hope you are right.
Sans your scenario, we have a sell-out in a trusted position.
If a sell out, a sell-out for what?
$100 from the NY Slimes?
More likely, this is being leaked to protect the real mole, who is still in deep cover. Khan may have given us good information, but if he agreed to work undercover, there's no WAY his name would have been leaked to the press. That's the kind of opportunity that comes once in a blue moon, I imagine.
Loftus blamed the 'white house' for leaking to the New York Times. Now I ask you, how likely is that scenario.
It's certainly possible that we did. However, I agree that it is not farfetched that al Qaeda figured out that we have infiltrated their organization, and we offered up this guy when it's really someone else.
I agree.
Um, overall, there comes a time where a mole is only that, a mole. And leaving him in place MAY have provided additional info, but by leaving him in place, bad guys are left to their own devices which may or may not be known to the mole.
Either way, once the NYT blows a cover, it's a moot point. Notice, however, none of the bad guys (that we DID know about) escaped..
"There's no way we screwed up this bad."
Umm....
- We're one step away from code red in DC and NYC.
- The military has SAM batteries around the Capitol.
- The same people who hit the WTC the first time hit it again, bragging all the way inbetween.
- Those in the Chain of Succession regularly visit secret bunkers.
- No one with an ounce of sense will be surprised when we're hit again.
- There are thousands of terrorist muslims in country.
- TSA can search an unlimited number of white people, but only two arabs.
- etc., etc.
There's no way we screwed up this bad? Right.
I hope you are right.
Sans your scenario, we have a sell-out in a trusted position.
If a sell out, a sell-out for what?
$100 from the NY Slimes?