Juan Cole Update on Khan outing scandal (8-10)

[enough]

http://www.juancole.com/

Tuesday, August 10, 2004

Update on Khan Scandal
We know that the Pakistani government has complained that the Bush administration blew the cover of Muhammad Naeem Noor Khan. Not only are the Pakistanis annoyed by the blown cover , they are also furious about the cavalier way the FBI used a fiction about a plot against the life of Pakistan's ambassador in the US to entrap two merchants into what they thought was a money-making scheme that involved providing weapons to terrorists.

Responding to volley of questions about the issue at the weekly press briefing, the Foreign Office Spokesman Masood Khan said, “ At one level this is a bizarre story; at another quite dangerous.”

great big long edit>

Given the evidence from Pakistani complaints (and strong but implicit such evidence via British government complaints), there is not any doubt that the Bush administration blew Khan's cover and also spread a lot of operational details all over the press that the Pakistanis, the British and even the CIA would have liked to keep secret.

Remaining questions:
Why did Wolf Blitzer think that Khan's name had been provided "on background"? Why did Condi Rice agree with him? Either she knew this was true and agreed, or was ignorant and just parroted back to him his statement. If the latter, which her office asserts, is actually true, then she should be fired immediately. You can't have public officials who a) don't know key information and b) purvey misinformation "reflexively" to millions of viewers about important issues.

more>





The more you think about it, the more you have to wonder what exactly is with Bushco's repeated outing of CIA assets (if that's the word). Are they just thoughtless, caring for nothing but political maneuvers, or do they have some method in their madness?

[bluestateguy]

1. Is this going to amount to anything?

What I mean is, will it make it up to the corporate newscasts? That's when you know a story has hit the big time.

[ozymandius]

8. It's quite simple really.

All it takes to make this something is a motivated group of politicians with an axe to grind - and a willngness to follow through. Congressional lack of civility is at an all-time low. However, the last time we saw such a low was thirty years ago when a belligerent president managed to piss off everyone who matters in Washington.

Watergate was a wonderful example of Congressional follow-through. Even the Republican faithful knew they could not save Nixon's miserable hide.

Thirty years hence, we see plenty with an axe to grind but they've been slow with the follow-through. I am willing to bet that this election will exact its own punishment on Bush. That sentiment, I'll also wager, is shared by key Democratic members of Congress.

[KC21304]

2. Did she tell Blitzer it was on background ?

I know she told Russert.

[enough]

3. Cole has a lot to say about that

at the link.

[phiddle]

4. They seem to think that

the CIA will just shut up and take it, perhaps as a legacy of Poppy's involvement. But the list of CIA grievances against the administration is getting pretty long:
1. Spotty intelligence and inadequate analysis before 9/11, leading to
2. The 9/11 commission's recommendation of an intelligence overseer which would by definition reduce the CIA's autonomy
3. Taking the rap for the failure to pinpoint bin Laden's location
4. Inaccurate intelligence regarding Iraq's WMD and ties to terrorism
5. L'affaire Plame, and the subsequent destruction of a major network
6. Now, outing an Al Qaida mole.

Does anyone else suspect (hope) that the intelligence community may have some VERY nasty surprises in store for the BFEE?

[sallyseven]

5. I think the CIA will go after bush.

They are blaming CIA for all their screw-ups. FBI is next because cheney hates the intelligence agency's. Started his own gang of thugs.

[Pallas180]

7. If we're lucky they're going after cheney first the same way

they did with Nixon's veep to get him out of the way before they
relieved Nixon of the office.

[Pallas180]

6. Read American Judas above & you'll have the answer -they're

covering for Cheney's illegally trading with Paks and Pak Father of Nuke, also named Khan, and others in the middle east as CEO of Halliburton as well as Cheney and Rumsfeld supplying NOrth Korea with nuke components.

No I'm not making it up.

Junior sealed pappy's papers because they would show that in the 80's
pappy gave Red China nuke secrets so they would help him with Iran-Contra.

Aint that sweet?

Plame and Khan would lead right back to the man who gives new meaning
to the name VICE president. So if you out them, their work is finished - no more leads to Al Queda and nuke scientist Khan which leads to Cheney and Rumsfeld while private CEO's.

[enough]

9. Thanks Pallas

I have downloaded the pdf -- will read it this weekend.

http://s93118771.onlinehome.us/DU/AMERICANJUDAS.pdf

"American Judas" is surely the most fitting name I have ever heard for GWB. Doesn't matter what part of our lives you may care about most -- the epithet fits perfectly.

(Except now that I glance at it, it seems to be referring to Cheney. I guess we'll have to call them the American Judasses.)

[NV1962]

10. and that is *exactly* why Bush wants Goss:

to impose / keep discipline and obeyance in the CIA.

Goss goose-stepping in, followed by the cleanup crew: all hunting for the leaky critics that cause Bush so much trouble.

Fat chance that it'll work though; look at the FBI under Ashcroft. Plenty of whistleblowers and anonymous sources there, too.