CIA Informants Snatched in Pakistan - My Take

Pakistan's arrested CIA informants - folks who helped the CIA find Osama bin Laden. Who had been living in a slightly-fortified compound in a medium-size city about 31 miles from Islamabad.

I don't know - and don't have enough information to guess - whether the people who were arrested really were arrested: or whether the whole thing is some kind of plot. My guess is that they really were snatched, but maybe someone in Pakistan's leadership wants someone else to look bad. Or maybe a clerk didn't get treated the way he likes, and made up the story to get even. I doubt that - but it's possible.

Brigadier General Syed Azmat Ali says that a major wasn't arrested.¹ Maybe the major isn't a major any more - and so the Brigadier General's statement, "we ... deny that any such or any army officer..." is true. Now.

Or maybe the Brigadier General wants to live to see next year - or has family he's protecting.

From what I understand, the ISI is - really - what never-left-the-'60s liberals think the CIA is like. (December 27, 2008)

For the moment, I'm assuming that at least five people who helped the CIA find bin Laden are being held by the ISI. Or somebody with the muscle to pull a job like that, and have a Brigadier General provide an alibi.

What I don't know - and don't have enough information to guess - is whether the folks who've been snatched were targeted because they finked on bin Laden, or because they told the CIA instead of the 'right people' in Pakistan.

If this makes it seem like I don't have the highest regard for the folks who run various parts of Pakistan - you're perceptive. In my opinion, Pakistan is in better shape than Somalia: but it's just barely a "nation." More like a territory run by a feuding collection of tribal leaders, terrorists, warlords, and the occasional allegedly-elected official.

In the news:

"PAKISTAN'S ISI spy agency has arrested at least five CIA informants who helped lead US commandos to Osama bin Laden's Pakistan compound, highlighting the deepening fractures in the alliance.

"The five Pakistani informants, including an army major believed to have noted down the number plates of all vehicles that visited the Abbottabad compound, had been taken into custody, US officials confirmed to The New York Times yesterday.

"Last week, Pakistani army chief Ashfaq Parvaz Kayani announced he was ending all US military counter-insurgency training of his country's soldiers and imposing new restrictions on intelligence sharing between the nations...."
(The Australian)

---

"Pakistan's intelligence service has arrested the owner of a safe house rented to the CIA to observe Usama bin Laden's compound before the U.S. raid that killed the Al Qaeda leader, as well as a 'handful' of other Pakistanis, a U.S. official said late Tuesday.

"In Pakistan, a Western official confirmed a New York Times report that five of the Pakistani informants who fed information to the CIA before the May 2 bin Laden raid were arrested by Pakistan's top military spy agency, the Inter-Services Intelligence agency, known as ISI.

"The officials spoke to The Associated Press on the condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive intelligence matters...."
(Associated Press, via FoxNews.com)

Related posts:

• "Osama bin Laden: Questions, Answers, and Opinions"
  (May 4, 2011)
• "Pakistan, YouTube, Censorship and the Sixties"
  (May 20, 2010)
• "Pakistan Arrests (Alleged) Times Square Bomber's Financial Backers - By Jove! I Think They've Got It!"
  (May 15, 2010)
• "Pakistan's Bosses Diverted Money Earmarked for Military: No Surprise, But Quite a Disappointment"
  (October 5, 2009)
• "Pakistan, India, Mumbai, Nuclear Weapons, and Pashtunistan: Simple This Isn't"
  (December 27, 2008)

In the news:

• "Pakistan arrests CIA informants"
  Amanda Hodge, The Australian (June 16, 2011) It's 2:21 a.m., June 16, 2011, as I'm posting this)
• "Pakistani Forces Arrest CIA Informants Who Led U.S. to Usama Bin Laden"
  Associated Press, via FoxNews.com (June 15, 2011)
• "Pakistan Denies Arresting Army Major for US Ties"
  VOA News, Voice of America (June 15, 2011)

---

¹ From VOA News:

"A report in Wednesday's New York Times quotes unnamed U.S. intelligence officials as saying Pakistan has arrested five people, including a Pakistani military official, accused of passing information to the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency prior to last month's U.S. raid in the Pakistani garrison town of Abbottabad that resulted in the death of Osama bin Laden. The Times report exposes the growing friction between the U.S. and Pakistan in the wake of that operation.

"The New York Times article cites unnamed sources in the American intelligence community who claim that the five detainees include a Pakistani army major who copied the license plate numbers of cars visiting Bin Laden's compound in Abbottabad in the weeks leading up to the May 2 U.S. raid.

"Pakistani military spokesman Brigadier General Syed Azmat Ali emphasized that no Pakistani military personnel have been detained in relation to the Abbottabad raid.

" 'We categorically deny that any such or any army officer was arrested in connection with this,' said Azmat Ali...."
(VOA News)

A Chilly Cell, the AP, the CIA, and Emotions

An AP story, about the death of a "militant" in a CIA prison:

"More than seven years ago, a suspected Afghan militant was brought to a dimly lit CIA compound northeast of the airport in Kabul. The CIA called it the Salt Pit. Inmates knew it as the dark prison.

"Inside a chilly cell, the man was shackled and left half-naked. He was found dead, exposed to the cold, in the early hours of Nov. 20, 2002.

"The Salt Pit death was the only fatality known to have occurred inside the secret prison network the CIA operated abroad after the Sept. 11 attacks. The death had strong repercussions inside the CIA. It helped lead to a review that uncovered abuses in detention and interrogation procedures, and forced the agency to change those procedures...."
(The Associated Press)

Anyone who likes perfection, instant gratification, and universal niceness, will not like the CIA, or the American judicial system. I'm no fan of America's Department of Justice myself: largely because of what I continue to view as ideologically-motivated efforts to achieve social engineering. A catchphrase describing that sort of thing has been "legislating from the bench." We may be emerging from that - interesting - period. Which is another topic.

What, if Anything, does This Article Show?

I don't know that I'd fault The Associated Press for the article's second paragraph:

"Inside a chilly cell, the man was shackled and left half-naked. He was found dead, exposed to the cold, in the early hours of Nov. 20, 2002."

Yes, it paints a vivid picture, and uses emotive terms when more clinical ones could have been employed. But news services are businesses. One of their primary goals is to make a profit. Experience seems to show that strumming on people's heartstrings is an effective way to sell newspapers.

And The Associated Press made what might be viewed as a remarkable statement in the third paragraph:

"...The death had strong repercussions inside the CIA. It helped lead to a review that uncovered abuses in detention and interrogation procedures, and forced the agency to change those procedures...."

Reform? CIA?? As something that's happened?! Not as something tearfully called for by the Society for the Liberation of Chilly Half-Naked Prisoners? There are days when I think that an acknowledgment by a traditional news service that the CIA did something right is news in itself.

The AP makes up for that (error?) a bit later in this article:

"...The CIA's program of waterboarding and other harsh treatment of suspected terrorists has been debated since it ended in 2006. The Salt Pit case stands as a cautionary tale about the unfettered use of such practices. The Obama administration shut the CIA's prisons last year.

"It remains uncertain whether any intelligence officers have been punished as a result of the Afghan's death, raising questions about the CIA's accountability in the case. The CIA's then-station chief in Afghanistan was promoted after Rahman's death, and the officer who ran the prison went on to other assignments, including one overseas, several former intelligence officials said.

"The CIA declined to discuss the Salt Pit case and denied a Freedom of Information Act request submitted by the AP...."
(The Associated Press)

I'll repeat the first paragraph of that excerpt again.

"...The CIA's program of waterboarding and other harsh treatment of suspected terrorists has been debated since it ended in 2006. The Salt Pit case stands as a cautionary tale about the unfettered use of such practices. The Obama administration shut the CIA's prisons last year...."

The AP doesn't actually say that waterboarding is what killed that "militant." But I think an argument can be made that it's implied. Hats off, in a way: the paragraph is, to the best of my knowledge, factually accurate.

And, I think just as important: the AP acknowledges that the CIA has reformed its practices. Yes, it was "forced to:" but I suspect that since the article does not mention who or what applied the force, it wasn't the Obama administration or a 'concerned citizens' outfit.

I learned about "checks and balances" in high school. The American system has them built into its government. The people who wrote the Constitution apparently realized that this new country's government would be staffed by human beings: and that we're not perfect. Oversight - intelligent oversight - is important.

Although it's the "fourth estate," and not a formally-recognized part of government, I think the press is in effect a sort of 'check and balance' on governmental institutions. Which is one reason why I think the Freedom of Information Act was a good idea.

I also think that allowing some requests for information to be denied is a good idea.

"...The CIA declined to discuss the Salt Pit case and denied a Freedom of Information Act request submitted by the AP...."

Do I think the CIA is trying to cover up something? Of course I do! They'd jolly well better be trying to cover up those details of their operation which could get their agents and American citizens killed.

It's possible, of course, that the CIA is engaged in some sort of plot to enslave the world, stifle freedom, and kill fur seals. Maybe that's why they denied the AP's request. Or maybe the CIA is more interested in protecting Americans, than in selling newspapers.

Related posts:

• "Police Abuse: America isn't Russia"
  (February 19, 2010)
• "News Stories You're Not Supposed to Know About"
  (December 31, 2009)
• "Imperialist American Aggressors Attack Poland?"
  (October 30, 2009)
• "Attack on New York City Thwarted; or Your Constitutional Rights Threatened: Depends on Your Point of View"
  (October 6, 2009)
• "Afghanistan, a Reporter and a Couple of Dead Guys, and the News"
  (September 9, 2009)
• "'America Tortured Prisoners' - Here We Go Again"
  (August 25, 2009)
• "What is an Information Gatekeeper?"
  (August 14, 2009)
• "Abu Ghraib: Abuse and Sexual Humiliation by American Soldiers in the News Again"
  (January 25, 2009)
• "Emotions, the Frontal Cortex, The War on Terror, Anarchists, and the Illuminati"
  (December 23, 2008)
• "Army Report: Big Mistakes in Iraq!"
  (June 30, 2008)
• "Waterboarding, Moralizing, Politics, and Security"
  (April 23, 2009)
• "Japanese Court, Okinawa, Kenzaburo Oe: There's a Lesson Here"
  (April 5, 2008)
• " 'The Army is Unraveling' - Just Like Vietnam!"
  (March 19, 2008)
• "Top Newspaper's Journalists Praised: Blackout Imposed on Praise"
  (October 15, 2007)

In the news:

• "AP INVESTIGATION: Details in CIA detainee's death"
  The Associated Press (March 28, 2010)

CIA Shot Neda: Old Story, New Names

I was wondering how long this would take.

"The United States may have been behind the killing of Neda Agha-Soltan, the 26-year-old Iranian woman whose fatal videotaped shooting Saturday made her a symbol of opposition to the June 12 presidential election results, the country's ambassador to Mexico said Thursday.

" 'This death of Neda is very suspicious,' Ambassador Mohammad Hassan Ghadiri said. 'My question is, how is it that this Miss Neda is shot from behind, got shot in front of several cameras, and is shot in an area where no significant demonstration was behind held?'

"He suggested that the CIA or another intelligence service may have been responsible.

" 'Well, if the CIA wants to kill some people and attribute that to the government elements, then choosing women is an appropriate choice, because the death of a woman draws more sympathy,' Ghadiri said...." (CNN)

Like the 'terrorists killed Neda Agha Soltan story, this is plausible - if for a more limited audience.

Quite a number of people in America are convinced that the FBI killed President Kennedy and that the CIA blew up New York City's World Trade Center. Lack of evidence can be used as proof. Paraphrasing something I wrote earlier: 'There's no evidence that the CIA secretly shot Neda - You see?! That proves it! They won't let The Truth be published!!' (January 14, 2009)

I don't see the CIA as being like James Bond's MI6, with quite a lot of SPECTRE mixed in: but I don't think that George Bush and the British royal family are space alien shape-shifting lizard people either. Which, for some, makes me a dupe or part of the conspiracy. That, I can live with.

As for the Ghadiri's "...choosing women is an appropriate choice, because the death of a woman draws more sympathy,'..." It's quite true: Neda wouldn't be on monitor screens around the world if she was fifty-something man. Probably.

This helps explain why the killing of Neda is such a thorn in the side of the ayatollahs: but that doesn't mean that the CIA did it.

I think it's at least as likely that the company that was going to deliver Neda's piano had broken the instrument, and had her killed to cover up their mistake.

Related Posts:

• "Iran: 'Terrorists' Killed Neda Agha Soltan - Officially"
  (June 24, 2009)
• "Lebanon, Israel, Pakistan, India, and the Lizard People"
  (January 14, 2009)

In the news:

• "Iranian envoy: CIA involved in Neda's shooting?"
  CNN (June 25, 2009)

Someone in the CIA Lied: That's Why There's an Inspector General

The last I checked, everyone in the CIA is a human being: aside from the occasional cat, bat, or rat recruited as a special operative. Human beings can, sometimes do, lie.

So, I'm not surprised to see "CIA Inspector: Agents Lied About 2001 Missionary Shoot-Down in Peru" in today's headlines.

I'm disappointed, too, but not as much as I might be. My view of the CIA, and that of the more 'involved' people of my youth are not on the same page. In some cases, they're not even in the same space-time continuum.

2001: Peruvian Air Force Shoots Down Missionaries

Veronica and James Bowers, their children Charity and Cory, and pilot Kevin Donaldson, were flying a Cessna 185 floatplane from the Colombian border, headed to Iquitos, Peru.

The Bowers were Christian missionaries. The Peruvian air force thought the Cessna was dangerous, and shot it down. James, Cory, and Kevin survived. Veronica and Charity didn't.

The CIA really was involved. Agents were in Peru, involved in an operation that was supposed to keep Peruvian pilots from shooting down innocent people, as well as make the 'Andean airbridge' unusable by Colombian drug smugglers.

CIA agents, Peruvian Pilots, and a Missionary Family: Something Went Horribly Wrong

Right now, it looks like a contractor working for the CIA identified the Bowers' Cessna as a drug smuggler's aircraft, told the Peruvian air force to shoot it down, which they did.

Meanwhile, CIA agents were trying to tell the Peruvian pilots the plane had a couple of kids and a missionary couple inside. What the Associated Press called "language problems and established procedures" delayed the message until it was too late.

That was what Congress heard in 2001.

The truth is probably more complicated than that.

A CIA inspector general's report, finished about six weeks ago, says that "said the CIA covered up the actions of those involved," as FOXNews wrote.

A congressman, doing his job - finding CIA plots involving his constituents in this case - got the report declassified. And says that he's studying it.

Peruvian Pilots and CIA Plots

Assuming that what's in the news is somewhat accurate, it sounds like there was, literally, a CIA plot in Peru. Two of them, actually. One, to keep illicit drugs from getting out of Colombia by the 'Andean airbridge.' The other, to cover up details of what happened to the Bowers family and Mr. Donaldson.

The first was what the CIA is supposed to do.

The other wasn't.

At this point, there's no way of telling what happened: or why. I can think of a number of explanations that cover the published facts, ranging from the plausible to the wildly unlikely:

1. The cover-up was a well-intentioned by misguided attempt to make the Peruvian air force not look like a bunch of trigger-happy bozos from a banana republic¹
2. The agents on the ground weren't lying, but a CIA bureaucrat is
   • The procedures he made the agents follow makes Dilbert's office seem functional
3. The Bowers were missionaries, and drug smugglers
4. The Cessna was shot down by alien spaceships, and the CIA is covering up a plot involving space aliens, the Illuminati, Masons, and Elvis

Seven Years to Write a Report?! Remember: the CIA is a Bureaucracy

Not many small businesses would survive, if it took seven years to write a report, but the CIA is a bureaucracy. Things take longer, when there are authorization forms, countersigning, forms to get forms, and nested committees to deal with - on top of the actual work.

Concerns About the CIA: Real and Imagined

One reason I like living in America is that this country's government has a system of checks and balances: which often work.

That's what I see happening here. There's an inspector general who reviews what's happened in the CIA, looking for things that need improvement. (No, really - that's how I see it.) There are members of Congress who gain status - and votes - if they can find some foul-up in a federal agency, and make it look like they have something to do with correcting it.

Are things perfect here? Hardly: but the system keeps getting tweaked. Which seems to be what's happening in this case.

But: It's the CIA!!!!!

I grew up in the sixties, went to college in the seventies, and went back in the eighties. I experienced political correctness, up close and personal, before it was called political correctness.

I know that a number of very sincere people really believe that the CIA is at least as dangerous as the FBI and the NRA. And, that they're all a real and present danger to our life, liberty, and pursuit of grooviness. (Remember when "groovy" was "cool"?)

I don't live in that world.

Given a choice between having a CIA agent, and an Al Qaeda agent move in next door, I'd pick the person from the CIA. That doesn't mean that I think the CIA is perfect. I don't see Congress that way, either. But I prefer to believe that the people in both outfits mean well, by and large.

CIA, Politics, and Stereotypes

In some circles, "everybody knows" who the players are, when it comes to defending the masses from CIA plots.

Which may be why this matter of CIA plots, Peruvian pilots, and a dead Michigan missionary, isn't getting quite the attention I expected. The parties involved don't follow the stereotype.

• Michigan Republican Rep. Pete Hoekstra had the CIA inspector general's report declassified, and drew attention to it
  • Republican?! Well, it's been a long time since Watergate
• The story's on the Associated Press, but Fox News is the one that used "Agents Lied" in their headline
  • I've been told that Fox News is a tool of the Republican party - and 'should' be either covering up the plot, or whitewashing it

I remember the days when sincere, intense, people were convinced that commie plots were behind most of what they didn't like. The character Frank Burns, of the M.A.S.H. television series, is partly a broadly-drawn caricature of that type.

Although I'm not in the 'Russia can do no wrong' camp, I don't see communist plots behind every event, either.

The John Birch Society doesn't seem to have the traction now, that it did in the early sixties. These days, I'm more likely to run into sincere, intense, people who are convinced that Big Oil, Big Tobacco, the CIA, and/or an assortment of other nefarious enemies of the peoples' welfare, are behind most of what they don't like.

Times change, people: not so much.

Time to End this Post

Finally, the usual set of links. Both 'background' resources are on the CIA website. If your intestines tie themselves in knots at the thought of federal agents, or you have concerns about encountering hypnotic patterns on the screen: stay away.

Background:

• "Worldwide Threat Assessment Brief"
  CIA (February 22, 1996)
• "Peru"
  CIA World Factbook (updated November 6, 2008)

News:

• "CIA report raises questions about 2001 shoot down"
  Associated Press (November 20, 2008)
• "CIA Inspector: Agents Lied About 2001 Missionary Shoot-Down in Peru"
  FOXNews (November 20, 2008)

---

¹ I do not think that Peru is a 'banana republic.' It's one of the world's top producers of cocaine, but that seems to be part of the country's private sector. And, Peru participates in G-15, G-24 and G-77: a whole alphabet soup of international organizations, from APEC to WTO.

The country has a rather exciting political history, good and bad. Back in 2001, Alejandro Toledo was elected president: and became the first Native American / American Indian / Amerind Peruvian president. Putting Peru ahead of the USA in that department.

So, no: Peru isn't a 'banana republic.' No mustachioed generalissimo presidente whose predecessor committed suicide by shooting himself in the back. It's not a perfect place, but I don't know of any real Shangri-La. The Lost Horizon kind, not Doris Duke's Shangri-La in Hawaii.

CIA Says Osama bin Laden Isolated: Can Everybody Go Home Now?

It's in the news: Osama bin Laden is isolated. He's not actually running Al Qaeda now.

Does this mean that all the troops can go home now? From what some very intelligent (just ask them) people say, maybe they can. And should:

• Osama bin Laden is really important
• He's the one to blame for 9/11
• Anything not obviously focused on serving Osama bin Laden with an arrest warrant is a mistake
  • And the fault of George W. Bush

Me? I think that there's more going on than Osama bin Laden and his vision for Islam. And, I don't see response to the 9/11 attack as something that should be handled by law enforcement. Neither do many others, now, from what I've heard and read.

Osama bin Laden, Al Qaeda, and the War on Terror: It's Not Over Yet

My guess is that we're still closer to the beginning of the War on Terror, than its end.

I'm not being pessimistic: but this conflict is not like the major global wars of the 20th century, where there American and other nations were facing an enemy with a well-defined territory, combatants who were, by and large, readily identifiable, and headquarters that could be seized.

The War on Terror is going to take time.

Here's a bit of what CIA Director Michael Hayden said about Osama bin Laden, as reported on CNN:

• " 'He is putting a lot of energy into his own survival -- a lot of energy into his own security,' ...
  " 'In fact, he appears to be largely isolated from the day-to-day operations of the organization he nominally heads....'"
• "...'Al Qaeda has suffered serious setbacks, but it remains a determined, adaptive enemy unlike any our nation has ever faced,' Hayden said. 'The war is far from over.' "
• " 'This is an organization that has never been through a change at the top,' he said. 'For 20 years, bin Laden has been the visionary, the inspiration or harmonizing force behind al Qaeda....' "

Would capturing or killing bin Laden be good for people who aren't with Al Qaeda? Almost certainly, yes.

Is Osama bin Laden the only target in the War on Terror? Definitely not.

Am I disheartened at how long the War on Terror has been going on?

No: but then, I'm a historian. I recognize that the War on Terror isn't a matter of one nation attacking another, or even a war between many nations. Al Qaeda and its affiliates are going to be very, very, difficult to overcome.

But, I think that the strange vision of Islam that bin Laden and some others have will not win. As I've written before, there are Muslims who do not see eye-to-eye with the likes of Al Qaeda. And, even in the Middle East, some Muslims are starting to question their more enthusiastic leaders (see "Chief Saudi Judge: Death to Network Owners!" (September 19, 2008)).

In the news:

• "CIA head says bin Laden isolated, fighting to survive"
  CNN (November 13, 2008)

"Axis of Oil" - Slippery Situation for Next President

The next American president will have a full plate. On top of everything else, there's the "Axis of Oil," Russia, Venezuela, and Iran; and North Korea, with it's on-again, off-again nuclear program, extreme poverty, and possibly-dead leader.

The term "Axis of Oil" has been around for several years, at least, and means different things, depending on who's using it. This week, it's the CIA director, Michael Hayden, using "Axis of Oil" to mean Russia, Iran, Venezuela, and their common interest as oil-rich nations.

He says that the Axis of Oil, and fragile North Korea, are some of the top security issues the next president will have.

According to Mr. Hayden, North Korea's restart of its nuclear program may be for real, or a political gesture. North Korea's leaders are very good at applying diplomatic pressure, so removing U.N. seals could be a matter of raising the ante. Or, they may really think that they need nuclear bombs to protect themselves from American imperialism. In which case, it's anyone's guess what city will be vaporized first.

About Iran, Mr. Hayden says that the Ayatollahs could have nuclear bombs around the middle of the next decade. Or, they could delay their program. On the other hand, they could speed it up. It's their call.

I'm a little more comfortable with atomic Ayatollahs, than with Kim Jong Il deciding what to do with nuclear bombs. As I see it:

• The Ayatollahs would rather have live converts than a nuclear afterglow, so they're a little less likely to have a fit and start lobbing A-bombs
• North Korea may not be so comparatively rational
  • Kim Jong Il has inspired cracks like "Our Dictator is Crazier than Your Dictator"
  • He may be dead or incapacitated, in which case a North Korean general with less sense than Dear Leader might decide to use his bombs, to
    • Defend North Korea or
    • Show how strong he was

I wouldn't be all that surprised if downtown Tokyo, or Sydney, or Anchorage, disappeared with a bright flash sometime in the next ten years or so.

The next American president, and everyone else, will be living in a world which most likely will have:

• Putin, Chavez, and Ahmadinejad on a petrodollar high
• Nuclear weapons controlled by
  • The Ayatollahs and
  • Either an arguably-crazy dictator or the generals scrambling to take his place

Whatever else can be said about the immediate future, it's not going to be boring.

In the news:

• "CIA Director: North Korea, 'Axis of Oil' Pose Greatest Security Challenges for Next President" FOXNews (October 2, 2008)

(I'd have more, but this was a Fox News exclusive interview, and the other sources I found referred back to this.)

Syrian Ambassador: Reactor? That's No Reactor

Western news media, at least, have taken to calling Syria's whatsit that Israel bombed last year a "reactor." I think they're right.

Once more, I have to point out that "Another War-on-Terror Blog" isn't political. But, politicians make decisions that affect war and peace. For that reason, politics has to be discussed. Particularly in an election year.

Although my favorite of the Syrian stories about what Israeli warplanes bombed on September 6, 2007, is that it was an agricultural facility, I must admit that evidence favored it being a nuclear reactor, nearly identical to one in North Korea.

I miss the radioactive kimchi scenario, though ("Radioactive Kimchi, or Nuclear Bomb Material?" (September 23, 2007).

Syria Says: Is Not!

The Syrian ambassador to the United Kingdom was much more eloquent than that, of course. Sami al-Khiyami Said that Syria and North Korea were being very nice: "This has nothing to do with North Korea and Syria. They [the Americans] just want to exert more pressure on North Korea. This is why they are coming up with this story," he told Reuters.

Member of Congress Says It's a Plot!

New York's own Representative Gary Ackerman, who had his own hearing about U.S. policy toward Syria, says that the White House didn't give everybody the same amount of information. He called that "bizarre behavior." "This is the selective control of information that led us to war in Iraq," Ackerman said.

He could be right, but I thought that some of what the CIA told a Congressional committee today was very, very secret: Not the sort of thing you want everyone to know.

Ackerman's not alone, though Michigan's Representative Pete Hoekstra, a leading member of the House Intelligence Committee, said: " 'I think many people believe that we were used today by the administration because — not because they felt they had to inform Congress because it was their legal obligation to do that, but because they had other agendas in mind,' he said.

With due respect to the representative from Michigan, that sounds an awful lot like 'it's some kinda plot.'

And, other members of Congress talked, too: Maine's Senator Susan Collins brought up a sensible point, that revealing this much information could compromise American intelligence sources.

As to that, it will help if members of Congress keep their collective yap shut.

Which, thankfully, they are: so far.

But tomorrow's another day.

Israeli Raid on Syrian Reactor in Today's News

• "US video to link North Korea to Syrian nuclear reactor: reports"
  AFP (April 24, 2008)
  Excerpt:
  "WASHINGTON (AFP) — The US government on Thursday will show lawmakers a video linking North Korea to a Syrian nuclear reactor the Israelis bombed in September, leading US newspapers said Thursday.
  "The New York Times and The Washington Post, citing unnamed senior officials said the video showed North Koreans inside the secret Syrian facility code-named Al Kibar."
• "Syria 'had covert nuclear scheme' "
  BBC (April 24, 2008)
  Excerpt:
  "The United States has accused North Korea of helping Syria build a nuclear reactor that 'was not intended for peaceful purposes'.
  "The site, said to be like one in North Korea, was bombed by Israel in 2007."
• "Syria denies building nuclear reactor with N.Korea"
  International Herald Tribune (April 24, 2008)
  Excerpt:
  "LONDON: Syria on Thursday dismissed U.S. accusations that North Korea was helping it build a nuclear reactor that could produce plutonium.
  "Syria's ambassador to Britain, Sami al-Khiyami, told Reuters that the accusation, which President George W. Bush's administration was expected to lay out to lawmakers on Thursday, was to put pressure on North Korea in talks about Pyongyang's nuclear programme.
  " 'This has nothing to do with North Korea and Syria. They just want to exert more pressure on North Korea. This is why they are coming up with this story,' Khiyami said."
• "Official: Syrian Nuclear Reactor Was Weeks From Functioning"
  FOXNews (April 24, 2008)
  Excerpt:
  "WASHINGTON — A Syrian nuclear reactor built with help from North Korea was weeks away from functioning, a top U.S. official said Thursday after lawmakers were briefed on the site destroyed last year by Israeli jets.
  "The official, who wanted anonymity, told The Associated Press that the facility was mostly completed but still needed significant testing before it could be declared operational."

Return of the Radioactive Kimchi!! North Korean Nuclear Reactor in Syria Back in the News

September 6, 2007: Israeli jets bombed empty sand, an agricultural station, or a warehouse in Syria, according to various Syrian reports. The Israeli government was very, very quiet about what happened.

The Syrian government was probably responsible for the cleanup crew that went out and removed debris from the attack, so now it does seem to be just empty sand.

That was then, this is now.

It looks like Congressional intelligence committees will get confidential briefings tomorrow, about information regarding the Syrian nuclear reactor. Or empty sand. Or warehouse. Or agricultural station.

If members of Congress maintain their tradition for keeping secrets, particularly in an election year, I'd say that the first leak will come less than two hours after the first briefing ends. It will be interesting to see what various members of Congress say that they heard.

The Syrian claim that the Jews blew up an agricultural facility isn't as crazy as it sounds. I outlined a non-impossible scenario in an earlier post:

"That agricultural research facility that Syria says the Israeli Air Force didn't bomb may be just that: an ag station.

"As for the North Korean protest: I'm surprised that no one has realized what happened.

"It's obvious, when you think about it: North Korea is upset because North Korean nationals there: expert chefs and agricultural specialists, and a large quantity of radioactive Kimchi.

"After all the trouble China is having with lead-coated toys and lethal pharmaceuticals, North Korea is understandably hesitant to admit that the fermented cabbage they were shipping to Syria was radioactive."

On a more serious note, here's a sampling of recent news coverage, announcing the upcoming briefings:

• "Hands Across the Border - Syria and North Korea"
  Washington Post, White House Watch, by Dan Froomkin, Columnist
  Excerpts:
  "Jay Solomon writes in the Wall Street Journal (subscription required): 'North Korea was helping Syria build a plutonium-producing nuclear reactor before Israel bombed the site last September, the Bush administration is set to tell Congress.
  " 'The new information could increase the position of hard-liners in Congress and the administration who have argued against a deal being negotiated to dismantle North Korea's nuclear-weapons program. The hard-liners say Pyongyang hasn't provided enough assurances it will dismantle its atomic arsenal in return for economic and diplomatic incentives....' "
  
• "Administration to Brief Congress on North Korea's Efforts to Help Syria Build Nuclear Facility"
  FOXNews.com (April 23, 2008)
  Excerpts:
  "Congressional intelligence committees will be told Thursday that North Korea was helping Syria build a plutonium-producing nuclear reactor before Israeli warplanes bombed the site last September.
  "North Korea has long been suspected of helping Syria advance its secret nuclear program, but both countries deny it. Pyongyang says it has never spread its nuclear expertise beyond its borders."
• "N Korea 'helped Syria with nukes' "
  The Australian (April 24, 2008) (I know: I think the International Date Line is involved.)
  Excerpts:
  "Korea was helping Syria build a plutonium-producing nuclear reactor before Israel bombed the site last September, the Bush administration is to tell the US Congress.
  "The new information could increase the position of hardliners in Congress and the administration who have argued against a deal being negotiated to dismantle North Korea's nuclear-weapons program."

Posts from "Another War-on-Terror Blog," September and October of 2007, on the Israeli raid and its aftermath:

• "Back to Syria's Mystery Building"
  (October 29, 2007)
• "Satellite Images of Syrian Reactor / Warehouse"
  (October 25, 2007)
• "Putin, Ahmadinejad, Iran, Syria, Israel: Here We Go Again?"
  (October 18, 2007)
  (in passing>
• " 'The Jews Blew Up Our Reactor (Which Does Not Exist)' "
  (October 17, 2007)
• "In the News: Anxious Republicans, Castro and Chavez are Friends, and, oh, yes: Israel Destroyed Syrian Nuclear Reactor"
  (October 14, 2007)
• "No Radioactive Kimchi: Israel Blew Up a Syrian Reactor"
  (October 13, 2007)
• "Radioactive Kimchi, or Nuclear Bomb Material?"
  (September 23, 2007)
• "Nuclear Materials from North Korea,
  Sand, or Radioactive Kimchi?"
  ( September 18, 2007)
• "Nuclear Stockpile Bombed?"
  (September 16, 2007)

The CIA Created Al Qaeda: Who Knew?

One of today's posts, "You Think American Courts are Crazy Now?," has an interesting comment.

This excerpt reveals an aspect of the War on Terror that I had hitherto been unaware of: "... Similarly, there exists a good amount of proof suggesting that the CIA runs sections of Al-Queda as a "false flag" operation. We know the CIA created Al-Queda (that's undeniable). ..."

After reading today's comment, I did a little research. I see that the Bush and bin Laden families, and the CIA, are in cahoots, presumably to create the NWO, or New World Order. At least, according to some people.

I still don't "know" that the CIA created Al Qaeda, but I've filed that assertion away with other curious claims about the Central Intelligence Agency: The sort that say, often passionately, that the CIA

• Deals crack cocaine
• Killed Robert Kennedy
• Had a hand in the JFK assassination

The CIA/JFK assassination connection is hardly surprising: Nominees for 'who killed JFK' might have to form two lines: A through M, and N through Z. Oddly, I've not seen Elvis implicated in that terrible crime.

The idea that 9/11 was a CIA plot: or at least an American government conspiracy, seems to be quite popular in some quarters.

A Minnesota congressman, who probably didn't realize he was being recorded, recently said: "It's almost like the Reichstag fire, kind of reminds me of that. After the Reichstag was burned, they blamed the Communists for it and it put the leader of that country [Hitler] in a position where he could basically have authority to do whatever he wanted. The fact is that I'm not saying [Sept. 11] was a [U.S.] plan, or anything like that because, you know, that's how they put you in the nut-ball box -- dismiss you." - from "Rep. Ellison's Misconstrued Reichstag Remarks (July 17, 2007).

I am, however, at best dubious about conspiracy theories: even the engaging ones.

Related posts, on "Who Knew? Assertions and Assumptions from All Over"

The New York Times Wrong! Nation's Newspaper of Record Corrects CIA Tapes Story

That headline is an example of the sort of trick The New York Times pulled.

And a pretty good example of why news should be read, not skimmed.

The nation's 'newspaper of record' published "White House Role Was Wider Than It Said" as the subheadline (or deck) of a story about an election-year sound-and-fury exercise about CIA interrogation tapes made in 2002.

Here's what happened:

• In the spring of 2002, months after the 9/11 attack, CIA interrogated Abu Zubaydah. He was thought to be a top Al Qaeda logistics officer. They weren't polite to him. In fact, he was kept in a cold room and subjected to loud music, and yelled at. According to one of last year's anti-Bush books, Zubaydah turned out to have three distinct personalities, "a boy, a young man and a middle-aged alter ego." The same book says that this nut (nuts?) was (were?) in charge of arranging travel arrangements for wives and children of Al Qaeda men. He also apparently told "what people ate, or wore, or trifling things they said."
• After information of the tapes of the interrogation was no longer useful, they were destroyed. Aside from taking up space with outdated data, keeping the tapes put the agents involved at risk.
• Now, with a presidential election coming up, politicos and civil rights professionals are very interested in finding out who ordered the tapes destroyed. The buzz word now is "waterboarding," a sort of mock-drowning. It sounds frighteningly unpleasant at best: not the sort of thing I'd care to experience.
• The New York Times ran the CIA tapes news story.

The current New York Times headline is "Bush Lawyers Discussed Fate of C.I.A.Tapes." The first two paragraphs read, "WASHINGTON — At least four top White House lawyers took part in discussions with the Central Intelligence Agency between 2003 and 2005 about whether to destroy videotapes showing the secret interrogations of two operatives from Al Qaeda, according to current and former administration and intelligence officials.

"The accounts indicate that the involvement of White House officials in the discussions before the destruction of the tapes in November 2005 was more extensive than Bush administration officials have acknowledged."

The fourth paragraph reads, "It was previously reported that some administration officials had advised against destroying the tapes, but the emerging picture of White House involvement is more complex." (emphasis is mine)

That's right: it's complicated. More than five and a half years after the fact, not everyone involved can remember exactly what they said, and who they said it to. It may be a White House Cover Up, or what a reasonable person might expect from the memories of several human beings.

Some journalist's dream of getting credit for the next Watergate phenomenon may come true as a result of this CIA tapes matter. Eventually, there will be a major scandal that supports the beliefs of papers like The New York Times. It is possible that the destruction of interrogation tapes in 2002 will be that scandal.

On the other hand, it may not.

Whether or not the CIA tapes were destroyed as part of some sinister cover-up, or whether FBI agents' assertions that they were doing fine until the CIA showed up (The Seattle Times), isn't as important, I think, as what this shows about news coverage.

Back in the 19th century, newspapers had very definite editorial viewpoints, and were proud of the fact. The Fargo Argus, for example, was a staunch Republican newspaper: and said so on the front page banner. I enjoyed reading the colorful, unabashedly biased, news stories, back when I was a researcher for a regional historical society.

Somewhere in the 20th century, news organizations decided that they should be unbiased and objective. That's a nice ambition, but I doubt that any combination of human beings could have the omniscience it would take to know, and report, facts and their meaning accurately and completely.

At best, a news outlet might aspire to give a very wide range of viewpoints, and let the reader or viewer sort out the result.

So What?

Knowledge is power. Headlines, and subheadlines or decks, are intended to catch attention - and can be used to give impressions that just aren't so.

Referring to the imaginative subhead, Editor and Publisher quotes The New York Time's Washington, DC, chief, Dean Baquet. He said that the subheadline went a "little farther than the story," the facts were true.

And the lesson is - Don't assume that the headlines, or the subheadlines, are accurate. And remember, those "objective" news stories may not include all the relevant facts. While you're at it, be aware of how the facts are presented: some words and phrases are emotional triggers, like "cover-up," "conspiracy," and "torture" or "abuse."

Remember, a few years ago, when prisoners at Gitmo were being abused, by being forced to sit on grass?

Congress Protects Alleged Terrorists Against CIA

It's so obvious: In time of war, it's important to know who is on which side.

Particularly if you're one of the people running the war.

The CIA has been investigating the Inspector General (IG), who has been investigating the CIA. The CIA says that the IG takes up too much of their time. The spy agency also says that the IG, in one case, started out with the assumption that detainees at Guantanamo were being mistreated, and then looked for evidence that might support that assumption.

Acting with a swift resolve seldom seen in Washington, Oregon's Senator Wyden sent a letter to the Director of National Intelligence, asking the Director to call off the CIA's probe.

The he rounded up reporters. "I just don't want to see the intimidation of inspector generals in Washington, D.C., and I'm of the view that people who know that they're doing the right thing aren't afraid of oversight," the senator told them.

I realize that it's election season, and that politicians have to do this sort of thing. It's a tradition to get passionately involved with high-profile issues.

And, I agree that checks and balances, and some sort of accountability, are important. Just the same, This is another case where I wonder if the people on capitol hill know who's trying to keep them alive, and who's trying to kill them.

American Government Intercepts, Reads Private Correspondence!

And it's a good thing the CIA did.

On September 11 of this year, the CIA intercepted an email to a top member of Al Qaeda in Islamic North Africa, Salah Gasmi. The message brought up the possibility of an attack on the sewage system of Paris.

With no dates or specific places, there's not much to go on. Considering the very real risk, "we can't afford to take the luxury of ignoring it — but it's so vague," a French official said.

Paris isn't alone. London and cities in Italy and Germany are threatened, too.

Don't feel bad if you don't recognize the name Al Qaeda in Islamic North Africa. It's a new name of a Salafist group that's part of an Islamic insurgency in Algeria. That lot now says they're allied to Osama bin Laden's network.