Another Leak...Geez

[InfinityGoddess]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/10/08/AR2007100801817_pf.html

A small private intelligence company that monitors Islamic terrorist groups obtained a new Osama bin Laden (http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/related/topic/Osama+bin+Laden?tid=informline) video ahead of its official release last month, and around 10 a.m. on Sept. 7, it notified the Bush administration of its secret acquisition. It gave two senior officials access on the condition that the officials not reveal they had it until the al-Qaeda (http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/related/topic/Al+Qaeda?tid=informline) release.


Within 20 minutes, a range of intelligence agencies had begun downloading it from the company's Web site. By midafternoon that day, the video and a transcript of its audio track had been leaked from within the Bush administration to cable television news and broadcast worldwide.
The founder of the company, the SITE Intelligence Group, says this premature disclosure tipped al-Qaeda to a security breach and destroyed a years-long surveillance operation that the company has used to intercept and pass along secret messages, videos and advance warnings of suicide bombings from the terrorist group's communications network.


"Techniques that took years to develop are now ineffective and worthless," said Rita Katz, the firm's 44-year-old founder, who has garnered wide attention by publicizing statements and videos from extremist chat rooms and Web sites, while attracting controversy over the secrecy of SITE's methodology. Her firm provides intelligence about terrorist groups to a wide range of paying clients, including private firms and military and intelligence agencies from the United States and several other countries.


Heckuva job, Shrubsie.

[Bird of Prey]

I wouldn't believe a word of it, IG.

[InfinityGoddess]

I wouldn't believe a word of it, IG.

Oh?

[William Haskins]

hang on. my popcorn's almost ready.

[Bird of Prey]

Oh?
Techniques that took years to develop are now ineffective and worthless," said Rita Katz, the firm's 44-year-old founder, who has garnered wide attention by publicizing statements and videos from extremist chat rooms and Web sites, while attracting controversy over the secrecy of SITE's methodology. Her firm provides intelligence about terrorist groups to a wide range of paying clients, including private firms and military and intelligence agencies from the United States and several other countries.
The precise source of the leak remains unknown. Government officials declined to be interviewed about the circumstances on the record, but they did not challenge Katz's version of events. They also said the incident had no effect on U.S. intelligence-gathering efforts and did not diminish the government's ability to anticipate attacks.

Think about that. First of all, who could possibly know about it that would leak it if it's highly classified?

Secondly, she offered it to the government free of charge? Right. Katz doesn't offer any clients any freebees or the rest of her "clients" would be hopping mad. My guess? No deal could be had.

There's about a dozen conclusions that could be drawn, but I'm betting US intelligence already knew about it, would like her to shut up and stop peddling to outside sources, and this is its way of embarrassing her.

[InfinityGoddess]

There's about a dozen conclusions that could be drawn, but I'm betting US intelligence already knew about it, would like her to shut up and stop peddling to outside sources, and this is its way of embarrassing her.

I suppose you could be right. Still pretty slimy to me, though.

[whistlelock]

lesson here: gossip kills website spying.

that's what i've learned.

[Bird of Prey]

Lesson here: never believe unnamed sources ever. They speak with impunity.

[Joe270]

Lesson here: IG will knee-jerk and blame Bush for anything, in the absence of any facts whatsoever.

[Jean Marie]

Yep.

[ColoradoGuy]

Lesson here: IG will knee-jerk and blame Bush for anything, in the absence of any facts whatsoever.
Which reminds me--my lower back is sorta sore right now. Do you think . . . ?

[InfinityGoddess]

Lesson here: IG will knee-jerk and blame Bush for anything, in the absence of any facts whatsoever.

It was in the Washington Post, fer cryin' out loud. And on the teevee too. Honestly.

Plus the Shrub has done plenty of dubious things. So don't go thinking I'm "knee-jerking" anyone. Shrub hasn't done anything to warrant anyone to take him lightly.

[Joe270]

It was in the Washington Post, fer cryin' out loud. And on the teevee too. Honestly.

I didn't see anything in there that stated George Bush leaked this intel out.

You said it, not the Washington Post.

Since no one truly knows anything about this yet, I'd call that a knee-jerk reaction. In fact, that's pretty much the definition of knee-jerk.


Which reminds me--my lower back is sorta sore right now. Do you think . . . ?


. . .that you're dying from kidney failure? I dunno. I'd get checked for kidney stones if I were you, though. You can't be too careful. Many folks die every year from sepsis brought on by kidney stones.

[ColoradoGuy]

. . .that you're dying from kidney failure? I dunno. I'd get checked for kidney stones if I were you, though. You can't be too careful. Many folks die every year from sepsis brought on by kidney stones.
I blame right-wing talk radio. I've got a link here somewhere . . .

[blacbird]

I didn't see anything in there that stated George Bush leaked this intel out.

You said it, not the Washington Post.

Au contraire, mon frère:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21186181/

caw

[Joe270]

That's at a quarter to nine tonight, not from this morning for one thing.

For another, I'd like to see it substantiated first. Did the Whitehouse leak it or did one of the intel offices with a copy from the Whitehouse leak it?

Or did someone else leak it? The issue has not been resolved yet.

It even states that the source of the leak is unknown in the article you linked.

[Jean Marie]

Which reminds me--my lower back is sorta sore right now. Do you think . . . ?
Um, if you look at how you're standing, Chris, you're leaning too much on your right foot. Throws your back out...gotta stand w/ your weight distributed equally on both feet.

[blacbird]

That's at a quarter to nine tonight, not from this morning for one thing.


Boy, you just don't give up, do you? I saw this very story this morning, and thought about posting a link to it, but got busy and didn't. When your doubt arose, I knew exactly where to find it, and went there, and by golly, there it still was. If you look at the time-stamp, you'll see it's been updated since then, but it was there this morning, with full attribution to WP.

So I've got another question: Is there any length you won't go to to defend George W. Bush against any criticism of his performance? Or is the hero-worship just too strong?

caw

[SpookyWriter]

Um, if you look at how you're standing, Chris, you're leaning too much on your right foot. Throws your back out...gotta stand w/ your weight distributed equally on both feet.I always heard that bending over during a campaign is one way to avoid excessive back pains.

[Joe270]

So I've got another question: Is there any length you won't go to to defend George W. Bush against any criticism of his performance? Or is the hero-worship just too strong?

Perhaps if the guy got a fair hearing every once in a while, I wouldn't have to point out the obvious, like the source of the leak is still undetermined.

Yet folks like IG are already blaming Bush. He may be responsible, I don't know and neither does she. Perhaps the Brits had the same intel, and they leaked it. I don't know, but I don't think it's right to cast accusations about without some clue as to who might be responsible.

I defended the man murdered by his daughter who claimed he abused her, so she killed him. Dead men tell no tales, and there was no evidence to substantiate her claim reported, but lots of people thought it was just fine that she murdered her father. Who knows, maybe he just wouldn't let her borrow the car, so she offed him. We don't know.

And we don't know who leaked this intel, either. So, sure, I'll defend someone falsely accused.

[blacbird]

Perhaps if the guy got a fair hearing every once in a while, I wouldn't have to point out the obvious, like the source of the leak is still undetermined.

Yet folks like IG are already blaming Bush. He may be responsible, I don't know and neither does she. Perhaps the Brits had the same intel, and they leaked it. I don't know, but I don't think it's right to cast accusations about without some clue as to who might be responsible.

I defended the man murdered by his daughter who claimed he abused her, so she killed him. Dead men tell no tales, and there was no evidence to substantiate her claim reported, but lots of people thought it was just fine that she murdered her father. Who knows, maybe he just wouldn't let her borrow the car, so she offed him. We don't know.

And we don't know who leaked this intel, either. So, sure, I'll defend someone falsely accused.

For the record, as I read the story, I don't think anybody claimed that GWB personally leaked the info. Chances are, given his history of inattention to detail, he never even knew about it. Point is, it appears that someone, somewhere in the Admin, did leak it. Which goes right to the heart of an Administration of breathtaking incompetence, under the direction of the man who tried to nominate Harriet Miers to the Supreme Court.

caw

[paprikapink]

And we don't know who leaked this intel, either. So, sure, I'll defend someone falsely accused.

Would it be inaccurate to say that you mean you'll defend someone who is accused but not yet proven guilty? Because, as has been stated several times, the source of the leak is unknown. The accusations are not necessarily false. They might be false. But we just don't know. Meanwhile, yeah, that's fair. You defend the poor fellow.

[oswann]

I go away for a while and look what happens to the quality of the threads in here.

Os.

[jodiodi]

I heard the report or read it somewhere a few days ago and then yesterday it was on NPR while we were going home. The White House denied it leaked anything (but after the Scooter Libby debacle, I take that denial with a grain of salt). There were, likely, several hands it passed through in Congress, the CIA, the Pentagon, etc., and any one of those hands could belong to someone who's known to the media as 'an unnamed source'.

While I don't agree with every decision Bush and Darth Cheney have made, I try not to look straight to them as the source of all bone-headedness from our government. We have plenty of suspects, all of them the usual ones: the Government.