Posted on 09/13/2004 6:53:33 PM PDT by Darkwolf377
Why did someone in the Bush administration leak the name of suspected al-Qaida member Mohammad Naeem Noor Khan to the press? In the weeks between his July 13 arrest and the Department of Homeland Security's Aug. 1 decision to raise the terrorist warning alert to orange, Khan had been convinced to engage his former colleagues in an encoded e-mail correspondence. In other words, he had been turned. When the New York Times first revealed his identity, and the White House later confirmed it, the administration sacrificed what one intelligence expert called a "holy grail."
"[The leak] goes against all the rules of counter-espionage, counter-terrorism, running agents and so forth," the intelligence source explained to Reuters. "The whole thing smacks of either incompetence or worse."
However, two days later, another Reuters article allowed that maybe the leak wasn't the tremendous screw-up the wire service had previously reported. "Terrorism experts," the piece noted, "said the reasons for the release of Khan's name could range from a judgment error to a sophisticated ploy designed to put al Qaeda on edge about the extent to which the network has been infiltrated by moles."
(Excerpt) Read more at slate.msn.com ...
Because we don't believe a word Old Media reports?
I remember quite well it being discussed. It is seared, seared into my memory. Ms C Rice was being blamed far and wide for leaking the name, but a close reading of the news story showed that a senior US intelligence figure was confirming information leaked by the Pakistanis. The original divulgers, then, were Pakistanis, not Ms Rice or some other American.
It was discussed widely. Too widely, really, considering that the original story makes it pretty clear that it was actually a Pakistani who leaked the name -- but the coverage blamed the Bush Administration, of course.
Yes, and my liberal Senator Moo-cow-ski (D-MD) demanded while wringing her hands that this horrendous breach of the administration have Senatorial investigation.
It was discussed widely. Too widely, really, considering that the original story makes it pretty clear that it was actually a Pakistani who leaked the name -- but the coverage blamed the Bush Administration, of course.
I think you're misunderstanding me. I mean this specific article--the original "Bush Administration screwed up by leaking" story was discussed widely, but this is the first time I've heard of the subsequent blowing of the REAL story by the NYTimes.
THAT is the story I'm talking about.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.