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...
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.