# BushCo outs our al-Qaeda infiltrator?! (Incompetent, malevolent, who gives a flip??) **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [August 8, 2004, 1:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bushco-outs-our-al-qaeda-infiltrator-incompetent-malevolent-who-gives-a-flip/258831 "2004-08-08T01:01:09Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 9\ **Page:** 6
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [August 11, 2004, 4:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bushco-outs-our-al-qaeda-infiltrator-incompetent-malevolent-who-gives-a-flip/258831/101 "2004-08-11T16:10:31Z")
> [@Mr. Moto](#): > > What are you, **Diogenes** , a Maoist now? > > It’s not enough that I agree, I have to be _vehement_ about it? > > Sorry, but I just can’t find my little red book anywhere. You set your own bar for vehemence with your Berger thread. I’m only saying that you should be at least _more_ vehement about the WH failures than Berger’s little episode. I’m only talking about your reactions realtive to yourself. If Berger makes you blow your top, then the WH outing its own mole and allowing aQ suspects to escape should _really_ make you blow your top. If you hadn’t blown your top about Berger and just expressed annoyance about it, then I wouldn’t say you had to be “vehement” about the WH failures, only that you should be more _annoyed_ by them. Do you see what I’m getting at? The WH failures or qualitatively _worse_ than what Berger did, so your own reactions should reflect that if you’re being intellectually honest. ---
**Author:** ![Squink](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b5e925/32.png) [@Squink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Squink)\ **Post date:** [August 11, 2004, 4:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bushco-outs-our-al-qaeda-infiltrator-incompetent-malevolent-who-gives-a-flip/258831/102 "2004-08-11T16:14:13Z")
> [@Mr. Moto](#): > > It’s not enough that I agree, I have to be _vehement_ about it? You’ve heard the phrase “damning with faint praise”, **Mr Moto**? Well, what you’ve posted in this thread is more like **”praising with faint damning.”** Not only has the administration screwed up several current intelligence operations, but if our friends the Pakistanis have any reservations about finding and turning over bin Laden himself, we’ve given them the perfect excuse not to: “You burned our operation, and now we can’t find him.” From the political perspective of Bush delivering Osama in an October surprise, that’s just stupid! ---
**Author:** ![tagos](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/bbe5ce/32.png) [@tagos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tagos)\ **Post date:** [August 11, 2004, 4:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bushco-outs-our-al-qaeda-infiltrator-incompetent-malevolent-who-gives-a-flip/258831/103 "2004-08-11T16:17:03Z")
> [@Diogenes the Cynic](#): > > The WH failures or qualitatively _worse_ than what Berger did, so your own reactions should reflect that if you’re being intellectually honest. Setting the bar unattainably high there I fear. Even comparing the two events is clearly preposterous and anyone who either can’t see that or won’t acknowledge it isn’t open to rational debate. Kudos for your efforts though. ---
**Author:** ![PatriotX](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/c4cdca/32.png) [@PatriotX](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PatriotX)\ **Post date:** [August 11, 2004, 4:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bushco-outs-our-al-qaeda-infiltrator-incompetent-malevolent-who-gives-a-flip/258831/104 "2004-08-11T16:25:19Z")
> [@tagos](#): > > Even comparing the two events is clearly preposterous… I felt that this bore repeating ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Moto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/9de0a6/32.png) [@Mr.Moto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Moto)\ **Post date:** [August 11, 2004, 4:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bushco-outs-our-al-qaeda-infiltrator-incompetent-malevolent-who-gives-a-flip/258831/105 "2004-08-11T16:38:42Z")
> [@SimonX](#): > > If Mr. Berger had taken current classified information and published it in a newspaper that is read world-wide, then the comparisons would be more apt. > As it is, they are qualitatively different events. Agreed. I’m not happy about it. And I’ve called for prosecution here. My position on all of this is intellectually and morally consistent, and I don’t give the current administration a pass because they’re Republican. Someone fucks up, they lose their job. If they fuck up really bad, they go to jail. I don’t see any goddam ambiguity in my position here. If that wasn’t clear before, it should be crystal fucking clear now. ---
**Author:** ![PatriotX](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/c4cdca/32.png) [@PatriotX](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PatriotX)\ **Post date:** [August 11, 2004, 5:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bushco-outs-our-al-qaeda-infiltrator-incompetent-malevolent-who-gives-a-flip/258831/106 "2004-08-11T17:25:41Z")
> [@Mr. Moto](#): > > Agreed. I’m not happy about it. And I’ve called for prosecution here. > > My position on all of this is intellectually and morally consistent, and I don’t give the current administration a pass because they’re Republican. > > Someone fucks up, they lose their job. If they fuck up really bad, they go to jail. I don’t see any goddam ambiguity in my position here. > > If that wasn’t clear before, it should be crystal fucking clear now. I don’t recall being in doubt as to what your position was. I was only in doubt about this comment of yours, “It’s hardly the first time something like this has happened.” This struck me as odd, so I asked, “When was the last time that the WH provided the name of a mole to the press?” You replied, “There were major SCIF violations during the Clinton administration at the White House. They involved loading classified disks onto unclassified laptops, and hooking those laptops up to classified networks.” As this wasn’t an example of another time that the WH provided the name of a mole to the press, I asked you, “So, you are equating inappropriately risky behavior (improper computer security) with the deliberate act of informing the world of a mole’s identity, are you?” I also pointed out reasons why it is unhelpful to try to compare the two issues (Mr. WH-Leaker-of-Khan’s-Identity vs Mr. Deutch) let alone try to equivicate the two scenarios. AFAICT, you offered no response to this at all. As a matter of fact, no response to me at all until this post telling me that you think divulging classified national security info is bad. Your post implies that I had at some point said that you did not think that such indiscretion was bad. I, of course, said no such thing. Also I note that you have apparently agreed that your earlier comparison of critically unsimilar events was unwarranted. To wit: > [@](#): > > > [@simonX](#): > > > > If Mr. Berger had taken current classified information and published it in a newspaper that is read world-wide, then the comparisons would be more apt. > > As it is, they are qualitatively different events. > > > [@Moto](#): > > > > Agreed. So maybe you can find somewhere appropriate to put your expletive laden retort to posts I didn’t make. Regards Love Sho… Lek… Simply, Simon ---
**Author:** ![Leaper](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/4bbf92/32.png) [@Leaper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Leaper)\ **Post date:** [August 11, 2004, 9:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bushco-outs-our-al-qaeda-infiltrator-incompetent-malevolent-who-gives-a-flip/258831/107 "2004-08-11T21:22:14Z")
Actually, it’s been claimed that the source of the leak was a Pakistani official. If true, this could clear the Administration entirely. OTOH, I’ve only seen mention of this on right-leaning blogs, which may or may not mean anything. Anyone know more? ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [August 11, 2004, 9:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bushco-outs-our-al-qaeda-infiltrator-incompetent-malevolent-who-gives-a-flip/258831/108 "2004-08-11T21:44:47Z")
> [@Leaper](#): > > Actually, it’s been claimed that the source of the leak was a Pakistani official. If true, this could clear the Administration entirely. > > OTOH, I’ve only seen mention of this on right-leaning blogs, which may or may not mean anything. Anyone know more? It’s an implication that [Mickey Kaus](http://www.slate.com/id/2104926/) rather tenuously draws from the wording of the [original New York Times story](http://www.nytimes.com/2004/08/02/politics/02intel.html?ex=1249099200&en=fb9a624b3a180ee7&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland) naming Khan. It’s the sort of ‘evidence’ I put headings like ‘rumormongering’ on when I step out on a limb like that. FWIW, [Pakistan denies it](http://www.picayuneitem.com/articles/2004/08/10/news/09pakistan.txt). And their earlier fury that his name had gotten out gives it a certain basic credibility, although it doesn’t make it a certainty. There’s also a [Boston Globe story](http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2004/08/10/leak_of_qaeda_suspect_name_criticized/) (finally working its way through the US press, at last): > [@](#): > > WASHINGTON – A key Democratic senator yesterday demanded that the Bush administration explain how the name of a valuable Al Qaeda double agent appeared in the press last week, adding to a bipartisan chorus raising questions about an unusual amount of sensitive intelligence that has recently been released about the terrorist network. > > Those expressing concern included members of the administration itself. Yesterday, aides to Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld pointed to a little-noticed remark he made in a speech Friday warning of the dangers of providing too much information about intelligence findings. > > Over the last week, administration sources were quoted as revealing details about uncovered terrorist cells in Pakistan and Britain and alleged plots to blow up key financial institutions, kill top congressional leaders, destroy the US Capitol, and use tourist helicopters in New York City for attacks. > > \ > > But several senior intelligence officials, speaking on condition of anonymity, expressed dismay at the level of information that has been revealed to the media – particularly the role that Khan’s arrest has played. > > ''Most of the people I talk to are most shocked by some of the recent details being revealed about Al Qaeda," said one senior CIA analyst who works on terrorism issues. Read the whole story. BushCo has revealed a LOT of info in the last two weeks, well beyond what was necessary to outline what places were at risk in this alert. Blaming this one on Pakistan doesn’t pass the ‘smell test’, IMHO. ---
**Author:** ![Ale](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/f19dbf/32.png) [@Ale](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ale)\ **Post date:** [August 12, 2004, 1:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bushco-outs-our-al-qaeda-infiltrator-incompetent-malevolent-who-gives-a-flip/258831/109 "2004-08-12T01:56:29Z")
There are a couple points I haven´t seen mentioned here so far. First that if I were a reporter and someone in the goverment comes to me and says “hey, look at this!; top secret, maximum security, I´ll leave it over here, all alone _wink-wink_”, next morning´s headlines wouldn´t be “Khan is a mole”, they would be “Member of the goverment X gives away top secret information”. To begin with for a matter of ethics, being part of such a monumental collapse of intelligence structures is more than I would want to live with, specially if people start to die because of that; second because the alternative headline would probably sell much more. So, IMO whoever got the word from a goverment source was playing along with the original leaker, it was information laundering. Second, the first long lasting consequence of this that I can think of right now is that the probabilities of recruiting more double agents have gone down the tube; it´s already a damn risky live as it is without your **“FRIENDS”** throwing you to the wolves; a fucking good reward that Khan got for risking his skin out there. I don´t think the “Al Qaeda mole wanted” ads will get many replies from now on. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bushco-outs-our-al-qaeda-infiltrator-incompetent-malevolent-who-gives-a-flip/258831.md?page=5)