Marcy Wheeler is an independent journalist writing about national security and civil liberties. She writes as emptywheel at her eponymous blog, publishes at outlets including Vice, Motherboard, the Nation, the Atlantic, Al Jazeera, and appears frequently on television and radio. She is the author of Anatomy of Deceit, a primer on the CIA leak investigation, and liveblogged the Scooter Libby trial.
Marcy has a PhD from the University of Michigan, where she researched the “feuilleton,” a short conversational newspaper form that has proven important in times of heightened censorship. Before and after her time in academics, Marcy provided documentation consulting for corporations in the auto, tech, and energy industries. She lives with her spouse in Grand Rapids, MI.
Summary: In this post I look at the report released by the House Intelligence Committee. It serves two purposes, in my opinion: To present the first “case” against Iran, under the guise of calling for better intelligence on Iran. And to suggest that, since we don’t have good intelligence on Iran, we can’t negotiate with them, because we’d have no way of verifying any agreement.
I’ve been pondering two questions of late.
President Bush’s claim the other day that no one ever claimed a connection between Iraq and 9/11 got me thinking. Judy Miller reported extensively on Al Qaeda before 9/11–both the previous World Trade Center bombing and on terrorist financing. We know she tried to report on imminent threats from Al Qaeda in summer 2001.
Just a few words about the story that some are pointing to as a big deal. Armitage, whom we’ve been arguing was Woodward’s source since March, is probably the Woodward source. And in other exciting news, my corn just grew 1/4 inch last night. (Actually, it is exciting, I picked the first cob last night, and it was stunningly beautiful.
Back in April, I speculated that Judy Miller had been leaked the CIA/DIA White Paper on the purported mobile bioweapons labs (MBL) to pre-empt the report of an expert team, the “Jefferson Team,” sent to Iraq to investigate the trailers. Via Steve Aftergood and this report on the trailers (which I will follow-up with shortly and which lukery is busy working on as well), I found the White Paper itself.
Justin Rood points to this Observer article which supports two of my past speculations.
emptywheel, 8/18
But I suspect he may be misreading theadministration’s dominant impulse with regards to information. Roodargues that because the administration hates leaks, the leak musteither have been sanctioned or just something the administrationmissed.
Most likely, the leak was sanctioned.
We know that Dick reads–and probably annotates–Sy Hersh’s articles. No lesser source than Patrick Fitzgerald suggested as much in his filing describing which newspaper articles he’ll submit as evidence during Libby’s trial. You remember–the filing where he showed us Dick’s annotated copy of Wilson’s op-ed? Well, in the same filing, he revealed that a copy of Sy Hersh’s famous Stovepipe article circulated around OVP, and Libby and “others” had annotated the
The most breathtaking moment in John Yoo’s op-ed today in the LAT comes when he seamlessly moves from claiming British “advantages” over our civil liberties protections don’t go far enough to throwing out probable cause as equally old fashioned.
But increasing detention time or making warrants easier to come by merely extends an old-fashioned approach to catching terrorists.
Justin Rood points out an interesting leak–the tidbit that some of the people arrested in last week’s alleged terrorist plot made phone calls to the United States.
That’s why my antennae started buzzing when I read this paragraph from an Aug. 12 AP story about U.S. government efforts to trace possible domestic links to the recently-foiled London terror plot:
Two.
Jane Harman is confused. In her statement responding to yesterday’s court decision, she said (looking for a link, not up on her site yet):
Today, a federal court in Detroitstruck down as unconstitutional the President’s NSA Program. Thedecision is significant in that it represents the first judicialdetermination that the President’s program violates the law and theConstitution.
The terrorists who are plotting against us would like nothing more thanto see us erode our
I can’t remember where I asked it, but several weeks ago I asked who was going to pay for Lebanon’s reconstruction. Some in the thread mused that we, the American taxpayers, would pay for it. Well, wouldn’t you know:
The Bush administration is scrambling to assemble a plan to helprebuild Lebanon, hoping that by competing with Hezbollah for thepublic’s favor it can undo the damage the war has inflicted on itsimage and