« Weekend Caption Contest™ Winners | Main | Whatever Happened To Choire Sicha? »

A Challenge

I have a challenge for everyone who was crying out for impeachment, for arrests, for "Carl Rove being frog-marched in handcuffs" over the exposure of Valerie Plame, wife of Ambassador Joseph Wilson, as a CIA analyst.

I challenge you to show one-tenth of that passion about the exposure of Mohammed Naeem Noor Khan, the turned Al Qaeda operative. This was the first EVER high-level penetration we've ever made of the people who killed thousands on 9/11, blew up two of our embassies in Africa, nearly sank one of our warships, bombed the World Trade Center in 1993, and have killed hundreds of Americans in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Come on, people. Let's talk about hauling New York Times reporters before judges. They have literally "given aid and comfort to the enemy in time of war." I want to see whoever leaked Khan's name frog-marched to face charges of high treason. The exposure of Khan did a hell of a lot more damage than that of Plame.



Listed below are links to weblogs that reference A Challenge:

» mypetjawa v. 2.0 (beta) linked with Who Outted Khan?

Comments (6)

And yet, if you read Al-Reu... (Below threshold)

And yet, if you read Al-Reuters, you get a story titled: Unmasking of Qaeda Mole a U.S. Security Blunder-Experts

Which of course blames Bush, NOT the New York Times, for blowing the cover of the "mole." Now, to be honest, this guy was not a "mole," because a mole is one of your own agents infiltrated into the enemy's camp. The captured Al Qaeda guy (hereafter MNNK) was NOT one of our guys. He was cooperating under duress, probably EXTREME duress, since the Pakistanis don't have silly things like Miranda Rights and squeamishness about torture. But it was only a matter of time until his buddies found out that he had been captured. MNNK had the shelf life of a loaf of bread. It seems likely that he would have taken the first opportunity to tip off his Al Qaeda contacts that he had been captured. I don't really see this as a big deal. We got the bad guy, we got his computer and all of the information it held, and we'll squeeze him like a lemon for as long as he's useful.

I don't know much about in... (Below threshold)

I don't know much about international high level terrorism, I do know about informants on a local level. Barcodeking is right, the shelf life of an informant is short.
Enterprises such as AlQ compartmentalise information, just as do successful criminal enterprises. When we turn one of their members we get information and act on it. Act on the first piece of info, the survivors wonder what happened, act on the second piece, they start thinking 'informant'. We act on the third piece they start putting together who had access, by the fourth piece they've pretty much figured it out. Then it's a race, act on what's left before the warnings arrive.
Once an informant is used up or blown, or suspected of being blown, there is one more thing the agencies can use him for, disruption. Announce that we have him as an informant and everyone that's ever dealt with him, even at second or third hand, has to use his escape plan. Whatever operations being planned are disrupted as every AlQ asshole dives in a hole and pulls it in after him.
I've seen it work on a local level, there's no reason it won't work on the international level.
Watch. There should be someone at high level vowing, with red face and bulging veins, to find the leaker. If nothing happens within a month or three, it was a planned leak. It's a show, rehearsed a thousand times. It always works because the bad guys have to take informants very seriously.
Just like, while playing defense, we have to be right every time, they only have to be right once, a show like this puts THEM on defense.

The thing is that for all w... (Below threshold)

The thing is that for all we know he was useless when he was outed, vague protests from "security experts" notwithstanding. While it's hard to give the Times a pass, just maybe they were pawns in a bigger game we know nothing about.

You are right JT. But Rove ... (Below threshold)

You are right JT. But Rove could have had something to do with this one too.

You're absolutely right - t... (Below threshold)

You're absolutely right - this deserves more scrutiny.

Any bets that this was ALSO done by the Bush administration? Looks like they are to blame for both.

As much as I'd like to puch... (Below threshold)

As much as I'd like to puch the Gray Lady while she wheezes on the ground I can't help bu think this is a non-story hyped up to make the weekend interesting. We have the laptops... game over. They (the bad guys) already know.

This is like putting out a two day old camp fire. Lots of smoke and a waste of water.






Follow Wizbang

Follow Wizbang on FacebookFollow Wizbang on TwitterSubscribe to Wizbang feedWizbang Mobile


Send e-mail tips to us:

[email protected]

Fresh Links


Section Editor: Maggie Whitton

Editors: Jay Tea, Lorie Byrd, Kim Priestap, DJ Drummond, Michael Laprarie, Baron Von Ottomatic, Shawn Mallow, Rick, Dan Karipides, Michael Avitablile, Charlie Quidnunc, Steve Schippert

Emeritus: Paul, Mary Katherine Ham, Jim Addison, Alexander K. McClure, Cassy Fiano, Bill Jempty, John Stansbury, Rob Port

In Memorium: HughS

All original content copyright © 2003-2010 by Wizbang®, LLC. All rights reserved. Wizbang® is a registered service mark.

Powered by Movable Type Pro 4.361

Hosting by ServInt

Ratings on this site are powered by the Ajax Ratings Pro plugin for Movable Type.

Search on this site is powered by the FastSearch plugin for Movable Type.

Blogrolls on this site are powered by the MT-Blogroll.

Temporary site design is based on Cutline and Cutline for MT. Graphics by Apothegm Designs.

Author Login

Terms Of Service

DCMA Compliance Notice

Privacy Policy