Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Is Judith Miller's mission Mockingbird related?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
Samantha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 06:49 PM
Original message
Is Judith Miller's mission Mockingbird related?
Let's focus on Miller for a moment. She and Cooper were ostensibly in the same position until it became "show time." Cooper went left, Miller went right? Why?

I have just been on two threads discussing this issue and posted the question, could Judith Miller possibly be a part of the CIA's Operation Mockingbird project? Looks like a possibility to me in light of the following facts.

Judith Miller publicly stated she did not do backup research on the information given to her on some stories? Why? "It is not my job," is her asinine response. Her job is her reputation, or is it?

If you are familiar with the Operation Mockingbird project, revealed by Bernstein as an undertaking of the CIA to embed an agent in every substantial news subsidiary/publication in this country, one must ask, well who might that be at the New York Times? Assuming the Times has such an embedded agent (how could it not), in what direction might one look to discover who it might be. Off the top of my head, I will say, look for the person who functions as a mouthpiece for the Bush* administration agenda. Who wrote stories on weapons of mass destruction, perhaps fixing the stories about intelligence now publicly suspected as being fixed itself. Even Orin Hatch publicly remarked what tremendously wonderful work Miller had been doing (during the height of the war).

So, if one wonders why Miller might choose jail over revealing her source, perhaps it is simply not an option. Perhaps Plame is not the only undercover agent involved in this unraveling story. Perhaps Wilson got it wrong. Miller unlike Plame is not a victim of the administration's refusal to investigate the leak; Miller might possibly be the avenue the administration chose to explore because of information leaked by Plame. That information, given voice by her husband and the former Ambassador, Joseph Wilson, publicly stated Iraq did not attempt to buy yellow cake from Niger. (Yes, he took an investigative trip to look into the story, but Plame set it up so that HE would be sent.) And with that opinion, written in an Op-Ed in The New York Times, I might remind you, came the inference the weapons of mass destruction charge being levied by Bush* was a lie. To counter the lie, perhaps the administration privately asked the New York Times own Judith Miller to step up to the plate and rebut Wilson and Plame.

After all, we know Bush* had everyone in one of two Iraq-war camps: you were either for him or against him. Wilson was obviously against him. Miller was with him. Plame, the CIA agent in the I am against you camp, took steps to bring to the light of day her position on the matter. Countering that out steps Miller. Operation Mockingbird in action, I ask?

If Miller is a Operation Mockingbird agent, her mission would be to protect her source at all costs, fall on the sword so to speak, protect her position at The New York Times, and therefore her agenda.

It all fits with the eight blank pages in that Judge's opinion as far as the evidence which has accrued in the arena of a serious breach of national security.

Have I put these pieces together in a manner that paints a false picture; or is it possible these pieces naturally fall together to paint an inference of the truth? Should I be wearing a tinfoil hat as I type?

Looks possible to me -- is it plausible?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Samantha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 07:47 PM
Response to Original message
1. Okay, kicking my own thread
Doesn't anyone have ANY comments?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EVDebs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-08-05 05:11 PM
Response to Reply #1
75. It begs the question, Besides Judith, how many others on NYT and WashPost
and all the others...are also part of Operation Mockingbird ? Or better yet, why should we trust anything M$M puts out anymore ?"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
screembloodymurder Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 07:52 PM
Response to Original message
2. Logical
and she would be a perfect agent. Did you notice her coy little smile as she was led away to prison. Some people get off on secrets.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Samantha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 08:00 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. I stumbled into this territory kind of accidentally
But the more I thought about it, the more excited I became. I was actually shaking when I posted this thread. I hoped it would generate a lot of comment and speculation. It does seem to fit, doesn't it?

AND THANK YOU FOR COMMENTING.

Why would anyone make such a sacrifice for a misfit within the Bush* administration when obviously their ship is sinking. The only logical reason would be if there were no other choice. Judith Miller seems so committed to this path, pursuit of the truth seems not even an afterthought. If it were truly her mission to spread the propaganda of the Bush* administration, then it makes sense she would protect her sources at all costs.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
screembloodymurder Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 08:11 PM
Response to Reply #3
5. I really think Judith is an agent. We know she's not a reporter.
Everything fits.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Samantha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 08:21 PM
Response to Reply #5
12. Okay, I am screamingbloodymurder myself!
You seem to think this is truly a possibility? I think you are right, she's obviously not a reporter. I remind you again of that asinine statement, I do not research the authenticity of the story -- it's not my job. I have never heard any reporter make such a statement. Even those who have background checkers and don't do the work themselves do not publicly admit this. But when viewing Miller in the light of an embedded reporter, as in Mockingbird, it all falls into place, doesn't it?

YOU JUST CONFIRMED I AM NOT HALLUCINATING. YOU SEE SOME LOGIC IN THIS THEORY TOO. THANK YOU FOR COMMENTING.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FreedomAngel82 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-08-05 12:01 AM
Response to Reply #2
43. That really got me too
I don't know why she smiled like that. It was like she had some really good sex or something. But it really got me when she was smiling and going to jail. Most people don't smile like that when they go to jail. I thought it was very interesting myself. Malloy told about this on Wed night that when he for a while worked at CNNI he was in a writing room or something and told how a coworker pointed out to him who was writing who was with the CIA. Scary shit.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bridgit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 08:02 PM
Response to Original message
4. poor judith, she was the canary in the coal mine...
the canary died
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Samantha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 08:14 PM
Response to Reply #4
9. Wonderful analogy
She's starting to remind me to Kathryn Harris (not sure of the spelling; pretty sure of the resemblance.)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bridgit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 08:18 PM
Response to Reply #9
10. as is yours...
entities all dressed up & ready to break hearts without any party to go to :cry:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Samantha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 08:56 PM
Response to Reply #10
19. Political twins?
Kathryn Harris stole election 2000 for Bush.* In her quest to gain political payback, she now feels "stabbed in the back" by the lack of support from the Bush regime.

Judith Miller spread war propaganda for Bush.* In her quest to protect her source, she goes to jail.

What is it with Bush* using women for political advantage? Political male chauvinism or simple redneck reflux?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
alittlelark Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 08:11 PM
Response to Original message
6. I started one of those 2 threads late last night....
Given her beginnings at Pacifica I think she is a RW asset.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CityZen-X Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 08:13 PM
Response to Original message
7. Miller Is a Traitor
Waiting for her Kick-Back from the Karlovian Love Fund!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CityZen-X Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 08:14 PM
Response to Original message
8. Miller Is a Traitor
Waiting for her Kick-Back from the Karlovian Love Fund!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kittenpants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 08:19 PM
Response to Original message
11. I read your post earlier & didn't comment only because I don't know
to what degree Miller works for *. I guess we all agree she is parroting their talking points, but is she just a right-wing schill that has cultivated high-up connections because of her republican ass kissing or has she been carried along by the neocons all along?

I think your idea is very possible, especially given her relationship to Chalabi, the fact that she was the last person to talk to David Kelly before his 'suicide,' and her overall disgusting smarminess.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Samantha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 09:07 PM
Response to Reply #11
20. Well, it's just a theory I slid into
I don't won't to be one of those people starting a wild Internet rumor. But the more I "talked" on other threads, it just seemed to fall into place. Buried among several responses on the two other threads, no one responded. I thought if I started a separate thread with this theory, people might point blank refute this possibility with some logical explanation, but so far, seems like some might actually be looking at the possibility.

I read about Mockingbird several years ago. It shocked me at that time to think the U.S. government would actually do something like that. Now, nothing the U.S. government does shocks me. But if you approach the question like this, every major news outlet has an embedded agent, at least that was the CIA's goal and I have not heard this effort has been discontinued, one must logically ask, who would that be at the New York Times? Obviously, it would be someone who shrills for the Bush Administration, and in that connection, Miller leaps to the eye. Especially, in light of some of her really dumb public comments. And as one poster remarked above, she's obviously NOT A REPORTER!

And of course, we are left with that question, why in the face of a failing Bush* administration, would she be willing to go to jail if there were other options. Answer: she has no other options.

So you put it together and let me know what you think.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pithy Cherub Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 08:24 PM
Response to Original message
13. Mockingbird Miller interesting. One way to tie
her to that fiasco is to look at her broadcast appearances in the run up to the war and through 2005. Were they through the mockingbird distribution channel?
:shrug:

Judith Miller is a muckraking "journalist" who used every bit of her credibility on this. She is protecting herself and wrapping it in a faux protect the source while in prison. She is a witness to a crime and a citizen of the US, therefore not above the law. She sold her integrity to the highest bidder.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Samantha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 09:11 PM
Response to Reply #13
22. But
WHY?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Raksha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 08:25 PM
Response to Original message
14. If Judith Miller is a CIA agent...
...what else could she be BUT an "Operation Mockingbird" propagandist? That doesn't sound tinfoil-hatty to me at all. It's her propagandist role that led me to suspect she was CIA in the first place.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Samantha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 09:13 PM
Response to Reply #14
23. When did you start to think she was CIA in the first place?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Raksha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-08-05 03:28 AM
Response to Reply #23
47. That's a good question...
I've never seen Judith Miller on TV, never read one of her articles, and I first saw a picture of her last night. Until then, I didn't even know what she looks like! But I began reading about Operation Mockingbird a few months ago on the Web, mostly from links on various DU threads. And I knew that Judy Miller wrote articles for the NYT based upon "information" supplied by Chalabi, hyping the threat of Saddam's WMDs. So I guess I kind of put two and two together, but I'm not sure at what point, or what specific nugget of information clicked it into place for me. But her behavior since coming under the spotlight in the Plame case has certainly reinforced that perception.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Samantha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-08-05 08:53 AM
Response to Reply #47
57. Thank you for your thoughtful response
I read it while listening to a caller on CSPAN in the background. She made the point, "Judith Miller is not a reporter. She got the information directly from the White House and gave it to other reporters." In essence, the caller suggests Miller was a mouthpiece for Bush.* And essentially, that's what we have been saying here.

If you review the Mockingbird deployment of CIA assets (see post above), you see they have a variety of associations. Some are official; some are tacit. Perhaps Miller's association with the White House is something that grew over a period of time in a tacit manner. Perhaps it does not matter whether the association was official or unofficial. They only thing that matters is the RESULTS and the aftermath of that undercover cooperation. And that's what we can look at now. Perhaps in time we will learn the literal truth, perhaps we will not. But regardless, we see the adverse impact the manipulation of the Miller stories has wreaked. What remains to be seen is will she pay a price for that manipulation of the news?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BushFungus Donating Member (77 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 09:49 PM
Response to Reply #14
30. Oh great.
So much for a free press in America...

Wonder how it makes us different from Russia, China, etc. Not much I guess.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 08:31 PM
Response to Original message
15. I fully believe she allows herself to be used by the fascists.
.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
librechik Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 08:33 PM
Response to Original message
16. it's the only thing that makes sense
remember, there are two factions in the CIA:the rank and file, aho have no politics, just look for facts, and the political faction, which is all about intrigue and controlling the inconvenient facts dug up by the rank and file. Judith is a political type, obviously, since facts are less important to her than her assignment: get the US into Iraq.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Samantha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 09:20 PM
Response to Reply #16
26. It does make sense, doesn't it?
And if the New York Times would authenticate a stolen election, why would it draw a line at supporting an illegal war promulgated by the politican who usurped the election?

And I suppose if Miller is CIA it will all come out in the dirty water. But how long will that take?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wallwriter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 08:41 PM
Response to Original message
17. Seems plausible. What do we know about her background?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Samantha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 09:24 PM
Response to Reply #17
27. I know very little about her background
She "came alive" for me when she was writing her articles on WMD at the New York Times and was raved about by people like Orin Hatch. I didn't agree with much she wrote, well, actually hardly anything, but I did wonder where exactly she obtained her expertise in this area. I wondered that a lot. It would be very interesting to research her background, but I am not sure how revealing that would be.

Do you know much about her background?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zen Democrat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 10:47 PM
Response to Reply #27
35. She started at "Pacifica" in 1971.
Edited on Thu Jul-07-05 10:48 PM by Zen Democrat
Now everyone surely knows that Pacifica was being infiltrated at that time. Curiouser and curiouser.

Perhaps she was being "sheep-dipped"?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
H2O Man Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 11:46 PM
Response to Reply #35
40. Correct.
There were a number of students being taken into different intelligence organizations. Mockingbird refers to the CIA. It should be recognized that there were numerous other similar programs. I would suggest that Judith is not with CI, but the idea of her being connected elsewhere is very real.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Samantha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-08-05 09:19 AM
Response to Reply #40
58. Now THAT is very interesting
It suggests other more remote possibilities. There are cooperative intelligence efforts supported by joint agencies of the government. Some of these are very less well known to the public. However, there are some so secretive they are not known to the Congress. Mindboggling, right, but it's true. Perhaps Miller somehow was drafted into one of these. We may never know.

In theory, Congress has the oversight of these agencies (pre-Homeland Security). It still control the purse strings. When we hear of so many millions of dollars that have disappeared down the security hole, with no accountability, I always assume some covert effort not known to the American people or overseen by the Congress has received a huge deposit in its operating account.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
H2O Man Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-08-05 11:56 AM
Response to Reply #58
70. There are agencies
that the public has never heard of. There are others that people have heard of, but never give much thought to. Now here is something to think about: any "normal" person who makes "the news" -- take even an abnormal run-away bride -- becomes an open book immediately. Their family background and personal life becomes public. CNN, Fox, and the Daily News will have photographs and paragraphs filled with details that verge on obscenity in exposing a person's private life. Immediately, or at most, in 24 hours.

Now think of Jeff Gannon. Six months after he became news, rather than distoted it, he remains a mystery. All that is "known" about him is some nonsense he posted on the internet to distract attention from who he really is, and who he works for. What does it take to keep an identity that secret?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Samantha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-09-05 06:11 AM
Response to Reply #70
90. That's an interesting note
Somehow I missed this.

What does it take to keep an identity secret? A government agency that helps you start over with some new papers and a press that keeps the spotlight off you when the story breaks.

I think eventually we will learn more of Gannon. He's going to be around for some time. Eventually someone will recognize him and tell some stories.

I hope we learn more about Judith Miller and who she is protecting sooner than that. Perhaps you will take a look at the info posted in the article below about her sources and give us your thoughts on that. She has been talking to Perle, Wolfowitz and The Office of Special Plans. Perhaps she is protecting Cheney?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
H2O Man Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-09-05 07:50 AM
Response to Reply #90
93. Miller is part of
that group. Keep in mind that there were two "intelligence" groups created under VP Cheney. Wilson details them in his wonderful book; he describes an associate giving a "chilling" description of one of them representing a coup at the State Department.

Those groups, which were neocon cells, did not rely upon people with zero background experience to learn intelligence work. It relied upon those with years of experience.

Thus, she is not protecting things external to any extent that is greater than she is protecting her own sorry self.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Samantha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-09-05 08:57 PM
Response to Reply #70
100. Gannon along with Miller was a recipient of the Plame identity leak?
I don't know how reliable this source is (but then we are discussing Gannon, so...)

"If you're still unconvinced that they know him, consider this. He's one of the guys who got the Plame leak! That's right -- when someone in the Bush White House wanted to punish Joe Wilson, the ambassador who exposed Bush's yellowcake lie in the State of the Union address, they did it by leaking the identity of Wilson's wife, Valerie Plame -- who was working for the CIA -- to a select few "journalists", including Judith Miller of the New York Times, Robert Novak (the only one who published the information), and ... "Jeff Gannon". I guess they know who he is, all right."

http://www.pbrennan.net/2005/02/jeff-gannon-white-house...

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Just Me Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 08:42 PM
Response to Original message
18. It almost seems too obvious to those of us familiar with,...
Edited on Thu Jul-07-05 08:43 PM by Just Me
,...Op Mockingbird and the BFEE-side of the CIA. Nevertheless, she could just be a sell-out, ambitious HO whose selective "principles" are applied in self-serving ways.

Either way, I have no respect for that woman because she sacrificed the bests interests of Americans to toe with traitors.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Raksha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 09:15 PM
Response to Reply #18
24. Isn't that just exactly the kind of person Mockingbird would recruit?
"An ambitious, sellout HO" with no principles and a superficial talent for writing? Sounds like exactly what they'd look for.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Samantha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 09:41 PM
Response to Reply #18
29. I have no respect for her either and I am having a hard time buying
Edited on Thu Jul-07-05 09:42 PM by Samantha
the idea she's making the ultimate sacrifice for reasons of principle.

I guess it's one thing to wonder about this but quite another to know. I have always wondered about that weapons of mass destruction expertise, but how can we find out anything about her origins? Do we have to wait for the legal revelation? And would a court reveal she had a CIA connection?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kestrel91316 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 10:53 PM
Response to Reply #29
36. Um, no, it's illegal to reveal a covert CIA operative. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Al-CIAda Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 09:10 PM
Response to Original message
21. Malloy was talking last night of how he went back to CNN to visit
a former co-worker. Through the course of conversation, he was made aware of the MANY 'operatives' in their employ.

Gore Vidal noted that he is usually monitored by an off camera 'operative' whenever he is interviewed.

I have little difficulty believing she is in such a club.


=====

...."Some of these journalists relationships with the Agency were tacit; some were explicit. There was cooperation, accommodation and overlap. Journalists provided a full range of clandestine services from simple intelligence- gathering to serving as go-betweens with spies in Communist countries. Reporters shared their notebooks with the CIA. Editors shared their staffs. Some of the journalists were Pulitzer Prize winners, distinguished reporters who considered themselves ambassadors-without-portfolio for their country. Most were less exalted: foreign correspondents who found that their association with the Agency helped their work; stringers and freelancers who were as interested it the derring-do of the spy business as in filing articles, and, the smallest category, full-time CIA employees masquerading as journalists abroad. In many instances, CIA documents show, journalists were engaged to perform tasks for the CIA with the consent of the managements Americas leading news organizations.

The history of the CIAs involvement with the American press continues to be shrouded by an official policy of obfuscation and deception . . . . - Carl Bernstein, 1977

http://www.class.uidaho.edu/mickelsen/Media%20Readings/...
---------

The Times reported that over the last twenty years, the CIA owned or subsidized more than fifty newspapers, news services, radio stations, periodicals and other communications facilities, most of them overseas. These were used for propaganda efforts, or even as cover for operations. Another dozen foreign news organizations were infiltrated by paid CIA agents. At least 22 American news organizations had employed American journalists who were also working for the CIA, and nearly a dozen American publishing houses printed some of the more than 1,000 books that had been produced or subsidized by the CIA. When asked in a 1976 interview whether the CIA had ever told its media agents what to write, William Colby replied, "Oh, sure, all the time."

http://www.stanford.edu/class/e297c/war_peace/media_war...
---------
The Myth of the Liberal Media
The Propaganda Model of News
Edward Herman and Noam Chomsky demolish one of the central tenets of our political culture, the idea of the "liberal media." Instead, utilizing a systematic model based on massive empirical research, they reveal the manner in which the news media are so subordinated to corporate and conservative interests that their function can only be described as that of "elite propaganda."

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article6435.ht...

-------------------


The Propaganda Model of News
1997
(60 min)

An excellent discussion about how the news is sculpted to present a certain viewpoint of events around the world. Featuring Noam Chomsky, Edward Herman and Justin Lewis.

Download 32.6MB
http://www.indybay.org/uploads/myth_of_the_liberal_medi...



THE PAUL MORAN STORY
uly 23, 2003
(20:17 min)

Paul Moran died after a suicide bombing in Iraq. He was a reporter for ABC, and one of the strongest voices along with Judith Miller of the New York Times, to claim Iraq had weapons of mass destruction. At his funeral it raised eyebrows whenCIA, FBI, and other secret agents popped up to pay their respects. In this report, an investigation in how the secret service operates within the mainstream media.

Watch Online
http://203.15.102.143:8080/ramgen/media/dl_030724b.rm


GARY WEBB: INHISWORDS
Download 23MB (8:15 min)
Gary Webb broke the story of the CIAs involvement in cocaine.
http://www.archive.org/download/Gary_Webb2/Gary_Webb_bb...


"Spin"
Brian Springer
Video, 1995, (60 min.)

Using the 1992 presidential election as his springboard, documentary filmmaker Brian Springer captures the behind-the-scenes maneuverings of politicians and newscasters in the early 1990s. Pat Robertson banters about "homos," Al Gore learns how to avoid abortion questions, George Bush talks to Larry King about halcyon -- all presuming they're off camera. Composed of 100% unauthorized satellite footage, Spin is a surreal expose of media-constructed reality.
Download 574MB
http://illegal-art.org/video/vcd/Spin_1.mpg



Bill Moyers "The Secret Government"
aired on PBS in 1987 and is as good as anything on the tape. Bill Moyers is one of the most recognizable and celebrated journalists whose approach to investigative journalism is highly respected. Known for his award winning PBS documentaries, in this segment he interviews several different people involved with the CIA and other government agencies who speak about various U.S. foreign policy covert and overt operations that took place during the Cold War era. His documentary gives quite an overview of what has actually happened in the last 50 years regarding the founding of the National Security Agency and the CIA. (22:04)

Download part1 2.94MB
http://storage.testpad.net/freedomfiles.org/Secretgov1....
and part2 2.66MB
http://storage.testpad.net/freedomfiles.org/Secretgov2....


S-11 REDUX
Download 40MB (10:53 min)
During wartime, media & government become one
http://www.archive.org/download/redux/redux_256kb.mov


EAST TIMOR BLACKOUT
Download 30MB (8:07 min)
Savage oppression backed by U.S. ignored by news outlets.
http://www.archive.org/download/east_timor/east_timor.m...


WAR CONSPIRACY
Download 16MB (4:17 min)
The CIA, the oily elite and their manipulation of foreign policy.
http://www.archive.org/download/war/war_256kb.mov


OWNING THE PEACOCK
Download 18MB (4:53 min)
The unholy alliance of General Electric& NBC.
http://www.archive.org/download/nbc_1_/nbc_1_.mov


Many more videos avail. for download here-
http://mysite.verizon.net/res7dhyg/id3.html

----------
Audio-
Guest: John Perkins, author of "Confessions of an Economic Hit Man"
Fri., December 10, 2004
Deadline Live w/Jack Blood

mp3's-
pt1- Interview starts approx. half way through
http://mp3.rbnlive.com/Blood/0412/20041210_Fri_JackBloo...
pt2-CIA sequence of Empire (economics, assasinations, torture, vote rigging, etc.) Naming names...vote rigging!
http://mp3.rbnlive.com/Blood/0412/20041210_Fri_JackBloo...

Realplayer RAM-
http://mp3.rbnlive.com/Blood/0412/20041210_Fri_JackBloo...

======
Democracy Now!
Tuesday, November 9th, 2004
Confessions of an Economic Hit Man: How the U.S. Uses Globalization to Cheat Poor Countries Out of Trillions
Listen to Segment || Download Show mp3
Watch 128k stream Watch 256k stream
------------------------------------------------------------------------
We speak with John Perkins, a former respected member of the international banking community. In his book Confessions of an Economic Hit Man he describes how as a highly paid professional, he helped the U.S. cheat poor countries around the globe out of trillions of dollars by lending them more money than they could possibly repay and then take over their economies.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
John Perkins describes himself as a former economic hit man - a highly paid professional who cheated countries around the globe out of trillions of dollars.

20 years ago Perkins began writing a book with the working title, "Conscience of an Economic Hit Men."

Perkins writes, "The book was to be dedicated to the presidents of two countries, men who had been his clients whom I respected and thought of as kindred spirits - Jaime Rolds, president of Ecuador, and Omar Torrijos, president of Panama. Both had just died in fiery crashes. Their deaths were not accidental. They were assassinated because they opposed that fraternity of corporate, government, and banking heads whose goal is global empire. We Economic Hit Men failed to bring Rolds and Torrijos around, and the other type of hit men, the CIA-sanctioned jackals who were always right behind us, stepped in.

John Perkins goes on to write: "I was persuaded to stop writing that book. I started it four more times during the next twenty years. On each occasion, my decision to begin again was influenced by current world events: the U.S. invasion of Panama in 1980, the first Gulf War, Somalia, and the rise of Osama bin Laden. However, threats or bribes always convinced me to stop."


Excerpt:
AMY GOODMAN: John Perkins joins us now in our firehouse studio. Welcome to Democracy Now!

JOHN PERKINS: Thank you, Amy. Its great to be here.

AMY GOODMAN: Its good to have you with us. Okay, explain this term, economic hit man, e.h.m., as you call it.

JOHN PERKINS: Basically what we were trained to do and what our job is to do is to build up the American empire. To bring -- to create situations where as many resources as possible flow into this country, to our corporations, and our government, and in fact weve been very successful. Weve built the largest empire in the history of the world. It's been done over the last 50 years since World War II with very little military might, actually. It's only in rare instances like Iraq where the military comes in as a last resort. This empire, unlike any other in the history of the world, has been built primarily through economic manipulation, through cheating, through fraud, through seducing people into our way of life, through the economic hit men. I was very much a part of that.

Con't-
http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=04/11/09/152...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Samantha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 09:50 PM
Response to Reply #21
31. Thank you for that wonderfully informed response
I am going to bookmark this thread and refer back to that info. It's great.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Just Me Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 10:03 PM
Response to Reply #21
32. I have made a commitment to get Perkins book out,...
,...to as many people as possible. His experience explains so much.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
me b zola Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-09-05 03:41 PM
Response to Reply #32
99. I'm in the middle of 'Confessions' now
It connected the dots for me, and I am recomending it to as many people as possible.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FreedomAngel82 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-08-05 01:43 AM
Response to Reply #21
45. All these video's are great!
Edited on Fri Jul-08-05 01:46 AM by FreedomAngel82
Thank you. Definitley must keeps. I'll save them for sure. :hug: I found the "Spin" one interesting when Bush senior was talking to Larry King and asked if he thought Hussein was watching. I would love to have now days the Satellite feed! I found it interesting how Bush I had the highest approval raiting in history AFTER the Gulf War. Just like W with 9/11..... I also noticed they were talking about the drug he was taking for his thyroids or something. Some blue pill and it was giving people amnesia and things like that and it was taken off the market. And they're talking about how when Carter fainted the pictures haunted his campaign and helped Reagan reach the White House. This video is great! Thank you so much.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yowzayowzayowza Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-08-05 03:19 AM
Response to Reply #21
46. Most EXCELLENT collection.
Edited on Fri Jul-08-05 03:48 AM by yowzayowzayowza
>Many more videos avail. for download here-
http://mysite.verizon.net/res7dhyg/id3.html

WOW. THX!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lostnfound Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-08-05 06:43 AM
Response to Reply #21
51. The Paul Moran funeral attendees were mentioned on DN! one morning
so I do remember that, but I didn't realize Judy Miller was the parallel channel for Moran.

What a compendium! That's excellent. Thanks.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lala_rawraw Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-08-05 08:22 AM
Response to Reply #21
55. this should be its own thread...
Amazing work!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Al-CIAda Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-08-05 11:55 AM
Response to Reply #55
69. Thanks, but I simply copy/pasted research done by others. YOU do the
real amazing work. Thank you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NVMojo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 09:18 PM
Response to Original message
25. I think this is plausible! I always thought she was a necon plant!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wallwriter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 09:28 PM
Response to Original message
28. So is she a spook or not?
Hard to imagine how someone who started out writing for the Progressive and did all that serious journalism could end up doing dirty work for KKKarl. And yet much of the evidence, at least circumstantially, suggests that. I don't know what to think...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Samantha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 10:25 PM
Response to Reply #28
33. You are right -- this is all circumstantial
Perhaps we will never know the literal truth. I have my radar out now that I am on this track, and we will have to wait to see what happens.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pgh_dem Donating Member (584 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-08-05 07:11 AM
Response to Reply #28
53. Could clear up the confusion if you go with the assumption
that there are certain people (and certain people's sons) in power today who had a vested interest in someone 'progressive' (read: no link to them and the RNC) to leak what they knew about Nixon to...

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wallwriter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-08-05 09:41 AM
Response to Reply #53
60. Plus, if you look at what a whore Woodward has turned into,
it's a little easier to fathom. Power? Access? "You underestimate the power of the dark side."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tommymac Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 10:40 PM
Response to Original message
34. Both plausible and possible.
Unfortunately, unless this info comes out in the GJI, we may never know.

Oh, that we had one true investigative reporter with integrity still out there working for the MSM who had the courage to dig deep and speak up on this issue.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hootinholler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 11:10 PM
Response to Original message
37. Since you asked...
Have I put these pieces together in a manner that paints a false picture; or is it possible these pieces naturally fall together to paint an inference of the truth? Should I be wearing a tinfoil hat as I type?


Ok, IMHO, you've arrived near where I am in thinking about this. Clearly Miller is an operative, but, the question is for whom does she work? That's the 64thousand dollar question. Clearly she is going to jail to protect something other than a source that has already been revealed. Nothing in her history that I've discovered demonstrates principled stances as she wants the world to believe she is making.

That being said, along the way there are some things you wrote that I would like to discuss...

Let's focus on Miller for a moment. She and Cooper were ostensibly in the same position until it became "show time." Cooper went left, Miller went right? Why?


Clearly they are protecting different things.


Judith Miller publicly stated she did not do backup research on the information given to her on some stories? Why? "It is not my job," is her asinine response. Her job is her reputation, or is it?


Oh boy I'd like a link to that one!

If you are familiar with the Operation Mockingbird project, revealed by Bernstein as an undertaking of the CIA to embed an agent in every substantial news subsidiary/publication in this country, one must ask, well who might that be at the New York Times? Assuming the Times has such an embedded agent (how could it not), in what direction might one look to discover who it might be. Off the top of my head, I will say, look for the person who functions as a mouthpiece for the Bush* administration agenda. Who wrote stories on weapons of mass destruction, perhaps fixing the stories about intelligence now publicly suspected as being fixed itself. Even Orin Hatch publicly remarked what tremendously wonderful work Miller had been doing (during the height of the war).


Hmmm, an agent working on behalf of the administration, sure, but CIA? I doubt that on it face, but I could be persuaded to your side if the pattern could be demonstrated prior to the shub's ascendency.

So, if one wonders why Miller might choose jail over revealing her source, perhaps it is simply not an option. Perhaps Plame is not the only undercover agent involved in this unraveling story.


Plame isn't the only agent in this story. Remember she was running a string of agents investigating WMD. It is assumed that a number of those agents are now pushing daiseys due to her cover being blown.


Perhaps Wilson got it wrong.


Got what wrong? The Yellowcake report?

Miller unlike Plame is not a victim of the administration's refusal to investigate the leak; Miller might possibly be the avenue the administration chose to explore because of information leaked by Plame.


Plame isn't the victim of a lack of investigation, in fact, the administration for once is actually investigating. That investigation is how we arrived here. Plame is a victim of the leak.

What did Plame leak?!

That information, given voice by her husband and the former Ambassador, Joseph Wilson, publicly stated Iraq did not attempt to buy yellow cake from Niger. (Yes, he took an investigative trip to look into the story, but Plame set it up so that HE would be sent.)


Plame was in no position to set Wilson up for any tasking. This is a false statement and has been demonstrated false in a number of threads here on DU.

Now in addition to Willson's yellowcake report there were 2 prior reports stating the same thing. His mission was a 'third time's a charm' kinda deal.

And with that opinion, written in an Op-Ed in The New York Times, I might remind you, came the inference the weapons of mass destruction charge being levied by Bush* was a lie. To counter the lie, perhaps the administration privately asked the New York Times own Judith Miller to step up to the plate and rebut Wilson and Plame.


No he flat out stated that there was no connection to Iraq and the yellowcake. He said nothing about that which he knew not.

After all, we know Bush* had everyone in one of two Iraq-war camps: you were either for him or against him. Wilson was obviously against him. Miller was with him. Plame, the CIA agent in the I am against you camp, took steps to bring to the light of day her position on the matter.


Plame wasn't in either camp, neither was Wilson for that matter, he was just being honest. He spoke truth to power in public. They went after his wife to punish him. She (Plame) didn't leak anything and I don't see where she took those steps, although I suppose it is possible.

Countering that out steps Miller. Operation Mockingbird in action, I ask?

If Miller is a Operation Mockingbird agent, her mission would be to protect her source at all costs, fall on the sword so to speak, protect her position at The New York Times, and therefore her agenda.

It all fits with the eight blank pages in that Judge's opinion as far as the evidence which has accrued in the arena of a serious breach of national security.


My imagination can put a lot of stuff on 8 pages. Whatever it is, it seems to be rather explosive, eh?

I doubt this is operation mockingbird per se, but, I whole-heartedly believe it was a similar operation. The question is whose agent is Miller? Who is running the operation?

My guess is the PNAC cabal. You see it's not the the PNAC was implemented, it that the PNAC was implemented by breaking laws.

As to what she's protecting I seriously doubt that it's meerely a source. I suspect that it's much, much more. We have her ties to Chalabi. Her period tasking a "rogue unit" in Iraq. Allegations she tipped off terrorist funding organizations allowing them to shred evidence. Add that to information we've learned about Bolton and Cheney and who benefits from the subversion of WMD investigations and then let me know.

There's a whole bunch of stuff in this thread (and others) supporting what I've said here.

-Hoot
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Samantha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-08-05 10:16 AM
Response to Reply #37
61. We are generally in the same corner, but here are some comments
Edited on Fri Jul-08-05 10:23 AM by Samantha
about your comments:

"Let's focus on Miller for a moment. She and Cooper were ostensibly in the same position until it became "show time." Cooper went left, Miller went right? Why?


Clearly they are protecting different things."

I made exactly that point in an earlier post on a similar thread. I used the word ostensibly in this thread because I did not want to be cornered here on that specific discussion. In another thread, I specifically said I believed they were protecting two different sources. I believe Cooper got his so-called waiver because when push came to shove, the prosecutor's office pulled out a series of releases all so-called Senior White House Officials were asked to sign at the commencement of the investigation. Rove was one of those Senior White House officials. The release specially said should any of these Senior WH officials have spoken with a reporter on this matter, that reporter would be freed from keeping the name of the source confidential. I believe that Release Rove signed was the rabbit Cooper's lawyers pulled out of their hat at the eleventh hour, when negotiating with Rove's lawyers, and Rove's lawyer's backs were up against the wall.

The difference, I believe, is that Miller's source did not sign one of these releases. I think the source was higher (or more prominent on the political landscape than a "Senior White House" official).

I did not press this point in this thread since I assumed many who would join the discussion perhaps reviewed the other thread and I did not want to get derailed from the main question. I wanted the focus on that. I hope this satisfies your remark on that point. I believe we are in total agreement on this point.


Another of your comments:

"Judith Miller publicly stated she did not do backup research on the information given to her on some stories? Why? "It is not my job," is her asinine response. Her job is her reputation, or is it?


Oh boy I'd like a link to that one!"

I have no link for this quote but it's difficult to believe you have not heard this cited. I have heard it two or three times and vividly remember it due to the outrageousness of the remark. I believe I may have also read it here, but that I cannot say for sure. You can either believe I am telling you the truth, or you may disregard this due to the fact I have no proof. It's your call.

Another of your comments:

"Hmmm, an agent working on behalf of the administration, sure, but CIA? I doubt that on it face, but I could be persuaded to your side if the pattern could be demonstrated prior to the shub's ascendency."

Are you saying you are unfamiliar with Operation Mockingbird. Read Bernstein on it. This has been an open secret for years, long before George W. Bush* started occupying the White House. He probably got tips from his father in this area, inasmuch as the father ran the CIA for a couple of years during the 70s. That's probably where they studied up on stealing elections, as well ....

More of your comments:

"Plame isn't the victim of a lack of investigation, in fact, the administration for once is actually investigating. That investigation is how we arrived here. Plame is a victim of the leak."

Plame WAS a victim of a lack of investigation. The CIA was so outraged the White House refused to act, George Tenet commenced an investigation on his own. He presented his report to the White House, thinking it would force Bush* to act. His hopes were in vain. Because that statement was true at one point in this story does not mean it continues to be true today.

You asked:

"What did Plame leak?!"

Early in the runup to the war, the CIA was divided into two camps -- those that opposed the war, those who favored it. Plame made no secret internally, in her capacity as a weapons of mass destruction specialist, that she was against the war and did not believe Iraq had the WMD. I am not sure if technically that is considered a leak. She did not have the authority to speak to the public on the subject, but she was creative is finding someone who was.

My personal theory on this subject is that Wilson was not a whistle blower. Plame was the whistle blower. Wilson was the venue she used to sound the alarm. When you talk about the vindictive nature of the Bush* regime, we have no disagreement. My general thoughts on the subject that the message Bush* sent was not to the mouthpieces for the whistle blowers but to the CIA operatives themselves. Speak out against the war and you will be exposed. This is a subjective area which is open to interpretation, so we can't really argue over this.


and finally, your comment:

"Got what wrong? The Yellowcake report?"

Absolutely not. I did not say that. What I did say was that perhaps Wilson got it wrong when he put his wife Plame in the same victim category as Miller. He said this week they both were victims of this Administration's refusal to investigate the leak. I think he was being too kind to Miller. Plame was a victim. Miller was a player who victimized the American people in an effort to push the Administration's propaganda. I simply do not see the parallel Wilson was attempting to draw between the two.

And in no way do I believe he got the Yellow Cake information wrong. I was simply outraged at the time this story broke. I tremendously admire Wilson. I think he has more credibility than most people on both sides of the aisle. I apologize if I gave you any other impression.


I think essentially we are in agreement in the basics. I thank you for submitting your comments. This is an incredibly important story and I hope in time we learn the simple truth.

Oh, one last thing:

"Plame was in no position to set Wilson up for any tasking. This is a false statement and has been demonstrated false in a number of threads here on DU."

Absolutely wrong. That is not a false statement but revolves around facts open to interpretation. Certainly Plame did not have the authority to dispatch Wilson on a fact-finding mission regarding the purchase of Yellow Cake from Niger. What Plame did have was connections. And she did remind people around her, including her boss, of her husband's history. Call that a tacit suggestion. That suggestion was eventually picked up and made its way to Cheney's desk. Cheney did sign off on Wilson's mission (which I believe Wilson paid for himself).

So, please do not accuse me of posting lies when obviously there are gray areas to this story open to interpretation.

Other than that, we are pretty much in sync....














Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yurbud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 11:32 PM
Response to Original message
38. William F Buckley outed himself talking about deep throat
he referred to Howard Hunt as his "sometimes boss."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ken-in-seattle Donating Member (195 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-08-05 08:30 AM
Response to Reply #38
56. details of WF Buckley with timeline. CIA ops for 1 year
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yurbud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-08-05 11:12 AM
Response to Reply #56
67. It's interesting that it OVERLAPS his writing career.
How many people have time to write a book their first year on a job?

This could still be consistent with a Mockingbird like relationship since the reference to Hunt was in the 70s.




http://www.nationalreview.com/buckley/wfb200506031316.a...

Such things happen. On January 5, 1973, Howard Hunt, an old friend and my sometime boss in the CIA, came to see me, accompanied by one of his daughters (my goddaughter, as it happened). He told me the appalling, inside story of Watergate, including the riveting news that one of the plumbers was ready and disposed to kill Jack Anderson, the journalist-commentator, if word came down to proceed to that lurid extreme.

I took what I thought appropriate measures. I do not believe Jack Anderson's life was actually imperiled...

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 11:34 PM
Response to Original message
39. I kinda thought she was for a while now
she had Challabi (sp) as her private little source (and gee guess who else did too...)

she was the first out in the press to apologize for "allowing herself to be misled by him" when reporting on reasons to attack Iraq (and gee guess who else said they were misled by him too)

when she wrote that long apology I really was suspicious of her then...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DURHAM D Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 11:52 PM
Response to Original message
41. Makes zero sense - Why would one CIA (small potatoes) assest
be a part of destroying a large thirty year old CIA worldwide corporation fronting as consulting firm (or whatever they do) with dozens and dozens of CIA employees that would have to pull back.

On the other hand, maybe PNAC or AIE.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Samantha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-08-05 10:33 AM
Response to Reply #41
62. Miller did not jeopardize that operation
The leaker did when he or she released Plame's identity to the press. And those who might have been targeted as a result of the truth of the nature of the organization surfacing to the top were those who had been observed cooperating with that organization and/or been seen conversing with employees thereof. That's the way I understand it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CoffeeCat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 11:54 PM
Response to Original message
42. My thoughts....she's not CIA. She's just PNAC scum...
If the CIA wanted to infiltrate the media with agents posing as reporters---I would think they'd be a bit more less obvious than Judith Miller.

Miller practically sang the United States into war. I'll NEVER forget her pre-Iraq war articles and also her very-public television appearances after 9/11. She scared the living daylights out of me, regarding weapons of mass destruction, which was her intent.

She was a total fearmonger--stirring up the pot for Junior--to make the case for war an easier sell.

I remember reading extensively about Miller and she has direct ties to PNAC. She received funding from an organization that is funded by PNAC (I'll look this up again and add info).

My best guess is that undercover CIA agents--working as reporters--wouldn't be so blatantly obvious! Miller's reporting of the war, was pure PR coming directly from the White House.

I don't believe Miller was CIA. I think she's a total and complete PNACer who adores and admires Junior. I think she did everything possible to help him get his war.

Then again, what do I know? :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Samantha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-08-05 10:38 AM
Response to Reply #42
63. Well, you might be right but there's another way to look at it
Reread your post not as the author but as someone observing it for the first time. Review the part about the role Judith Miller played in supporting the runup to the war. Review the part about the impact she had on those who heard. THAT PART TO ME SOUNDS LIKE AN AGENT ON A MISSION. AND SHE WAS GOOD AT IT. MANY BOUGHT IT.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Flying Dream Blues Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-08-05 12:04 AM
Response to Original message
44. It all sounds very logical to me.
Thanks for sharing this...I hadn't heard of Operation Mockingbird before this.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Backlash Cometh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-08-05 04:39 AM
Response to Original message
48. What better place to put a mole than in a "liberal" newspaper.
Right-wingers would never believe, even with a full confession from Miller, that she was a right-wing CIA plant. That would shatter every conception they have of the liberal media.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
passy Donating Member (780 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-08-05 05:01 AM
Response to Original message
49. You have just done a Rove!
If as you state Miller is a CIA agent you might just have blown her cover. Shame on you. Think of the threat to national security.
Outing a CIA agent is an act of treason is it not?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Samantha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-08-05 10:47 AM
Response to Reply #49
64. I did not state Miller is an agent - I asked if she is!
I obviously have no inside knowledge as to the truth of the matter. I am just on a search for the truth.

But that remark accusing me of pulling a Rove was a true hit below the belt. I have been totally familiar with Rove's tactics since he worked on the first campaign of George H.W. Bush (you know, the one where Bush the father lost a primary in the Northeast, so said the Baptist minister who ran against him and accused him of stealing that election.) Bush the father came out before the votes were counted -- it was a very close election and the tally was not completed -- and claimed victory. The media ran with it. Sound familiar?

So no, no, no I do not utilize the tactics of Karl Rove, I deplore them. And I accept your apology for the comparison!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
passy Donating Member (780 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-08-05 12:00 PM
Response to Reply #64
71. I should have added that it was really naughty.
I do apologize for not making my statement more humoristic.
I apologize profusely if you took it personally, I did not wish to compare you as a person to Karl Rove who is evil incarnate.
It was obviously supposed to be a joke.
I'm sorry next time I will try to be less sarcastic.
Your theory might just be on the money though, it wouldn't surprise me.
I was just wondering that if she was, would the person who told her that Valerie Plame was, know that she too was an agent?
Or is there a secret section of the CIA run by * Sr that follows its own program such as OM or even planning 9/11?
Once again I hope you forgive me for my comment which could easily be taken as been serious.
I had thought of writing "you naughty girl" at the end of my post, maybe I should have.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Samantha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-08-05 05:34 PM
Response to Reply #71
78. I knew you were teasing -- thus I extracted a "preemptive" apology!
Don't worry about it -- but please see the two posts below I have added since your response. They contain information I found on the net in response to another poster's question. The info is riveting. Please read those posts and comment. The article linked specifically mentions Miller's reliance on information for The Office of Special Plans!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MADem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-08-05 05:06 AM
Response to Original message
50. Whoever she works for, I think her source is someone
...who could be impeached. Someone misusing their office and leaking national security material for purely political gain. Someone vulnerable to a charge of conspiracy, which is where Fitzgerald is headed, I think. Maybe a monkeyish guy, or someone who gets angina a lot???????

And she's got to be HIGHLY motivated to stay silent. There's probably a massive pot of gold at the end of the rainbow for her.

Her source was surely not Rove, he could be pardoned, easily, and never do a second of time. It's someone who will get badly hurt if the name is revealed.

The payday at the end of her jail term will be substantial. A cushy book deal? A jazzy job with some crony in the private sector?

Remember, this is the dame who sold Chalabi to America. If you believed what she wrote, he was the George Washington of Iraq, not the Jordanian Bank embezzler and cretin that he actually was....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Samantha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-08-05 10:52 AM
Response to Reply #50
65. We are in total agreement
I think her source is an impeachable one OR someone with a politically, extremely high profile, such as George H.W. Bush.* I am not suggesting it was Bush the father -- it's someone of that level.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lostnfound Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-08-05 06:54 AM
Response to Original message
52. Glad you started this thread. I've been guessing about
whether she was originally CIA-Mockingbird and then shifted into a Neocon pet. But she has apparently pissed off the CIA, right? By exposing an agent?

The movie mentions that John Rendon (Rendon Group) can walk freely through the Pentagon. Wonder where the connections are between the neocons and the CIA-Mockingbird overseers. Or perhaps another poster who pointed out that multiple agencies were doing similar programs of 'sheep-dipping' Mockingbird plants in the early 70s was barking up the right tree.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leftchick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-08-05 07:38 AM
Response to Original message
54. She has a connection to Neo-Freak Laurie Mylroie
~snip~

During the 1980s, Mylroie was an apologist for Saddam's regime, but reversed her position upon his invasion of Kuwait in 1990, and, with the zeal of the academic spurned, became rabidly anti-Saddam. In the run up to the first Gulf War, Mylroie with New York Times reporter Judith Miller wrote Saddam Hussein and the Crisis in the Gulf, a well-reviewed bestseller translated into more than a dozen languages.


http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2003/0312.ber...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Samantha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-08-05 10:58 AM
Response to Reply #54
66. Richard Clarke totally disparages her theories in his book
Against All Enemies. After I read his book, I heard her speak. She is totally unimpressive.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leftchick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-08-05 11:33 AM
Response to Reply #66
68. he sure did
I read his book as well. He makes her sound like a lunatic. Wait, she is a lunatic!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mistertrickster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-08-05 09:19 AM
Response to Original message
59. I think this is a distinct possibility. I remember hearing an interview
Dame Judy on NPR before the invasion. She was going on and on about how anybody who believes Saddam is telling the truth about not having WMD's is just an idiot.

What was so remarkable about the interview was that she had absolutely no reporter's "distance" or objectivity from her subject at all, not only what she said, but HOW she said it--her voice was just OOZING contempt for people who disagreed with her.

She exuded a cocksure, patronizing tone that you just don't hear with professional journalists, who know that nothing can be proven true or false until AFTER all the facts have been gathered, and sometimes not even then either.

Miller just didn't ring true--she didn't sound like a Bernstein or a Ben Bradlee or an Edward R. Murrow or a David Broder. She sounded like a political hack.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SeattleRob Donating Member (893 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-08-05 12:26 PM
Response to Original message
72. More food for thought - Her Relationship with David Kelly
Apparently she knew David Kelly, the British Scientist who "killed himself." There are a lot of intriguing possibilities here. We need someone to connect all the dots.

From the Daily Kos:

"All of this brings to mind another story that Judith Miller may have played a larger role in than her readers realize. You may recall the story of David Kelly, the British scientist and expert in WMD, who committed suicide in July 2003 while being investigated as the possible source for a BBC story that suggested (of all things) that the Blair government had doctored the intelligence about Saddam's WMD programs.

Judith Miller filed a story about Kelly on July 21, 2003:
Scientist Was the 'Bane of Proliferators'. The article painted a sympathetic portrait of Kelly and hinted that he believed Saddam did indeed maintain a WMD program despite the fact that no evidence of it had yet been found. Nothing in the article suggested that Miller had had contact with Kelly, nor that she had ever known him. Her story concluded with this passage:

Dr. Kelly's wife, Jan, said he had been under enormous pressure, but in e-mails sent hours before his death, he gave no hint of that, telling an associate, for instance, that he looked forward to returning to Iraq.

Thanks to news articles written by others we know more about Kelly's e-mails than Judith Miller revealed to readers of The New York Times... and more importantly, we know that Kelly wrote at least one e-mail that Miller failed to write about."

Link:

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2005/7/3/17138/30618
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Samantha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-08-05 06:23 PM
Response to Reply #72
85. Excellent observation
I believe the more we "talk" the closer we get to unraveling exactly who Judith Miller is and what role she played in her disinformation campaign. I hope you will take a moment out to read the article I found below containing much background material about her. It discusses the fact she interacted with The Office of Special Plans.

She appears to be an integral part of the disinformation campaign which has surrounded a lot of the controversial "reporting" we have been fed to propagandize the preemptive attack on Iraq. I am starting to wonder if the question I originally asked in this thread -- Is Judith Miller Mockingbird related -- is a naive question. Perhaps the question should have been Is Judith Miller Office of Special Plans connected? And For Whom is she covering up?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sattahipdeep Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-09-05 12:44 PM
Response to Reply #85
96. The Downing Street Memos (Ahmed Chalabi)
In an email to American author Judy Miller, sent just before
he left his home for the last time....(Dr David Kelly)

http://nuttymango.dailykos.com/story/2005/7/3/17138/306...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Samantha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-09-05 01:22 PM
Response to Reply #96
97. Wow, this article zeroes right in on something I was going to look up
I wanted to find the exact date Wilson's piece was printed and try to find out when Miller had contact with her White House source. This link you provided hones right in on it:

"The new element in this to me is that Miller apparently had some contact with someone at the White House on or about July 6, 2003, the day Joe Wilson's op-ed piece appeared in the New York Times revealing that he had investigated the yellow-cake rumors for the CIA and found them to be untrue. We also know from recent news stories that the Times is not in a position to do what Time, Inc. did relative to Cooper, namely turn over its (Miller's) reporter's notes." (Emphasis supplied).

Another poster brought up the Kelly connection, but this article really reminds us of the questions of Miller's association with Kelly and the email she received right before his death. His quote about the fixed intelligence flows very nicely with the theme of this thread, as it has developed: Did Miller work closely with Pearle, Wolfowitz, the Office of Special Plans and even a top White House source to publish disinformation about the WMD program in Iraq, and specifically did she make an effort to offset the Wilson Op-ed piece which attempted to bring to the light of day the propaganda being spread by the Administration to justify its illegal, preemptive attack on Iraq.

Norah O'Donnell recently mentioned a scandal bubbling underneath the surface which has the potential to be a huge setback for Bush* and others. I can't help but think this is the story she is referencing -- proof that the intelligence was fixed and the identities of those that fixed it. With recent terror events in London, perhaps this story will take a backseat for a few days. I hope we can keep our eye on the ball, though, since those attacks in London were indirectly at least provoked by the aggressive behavior of Blair and Bush, and the background set to emerge seems intertwined with the why and the how they were able to promote their agenda.

Thank you so much for posting this. I read the entire article. It's very provocative.

And who exactly, do you think Miller is protecting?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
donkeyotay Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-08-05 12:26 PM
Response to Original message
73. You'd have to strap on the tinfoil to suppose she's a reporter
The theory that she's otherwise employed makes much more sense than to believe she's just an incredibly lousy reporter. So bad, her editors had to write an apology for her. So bad, she relied on Chalabi without any confirming sources. So bad... it makes me wonder why she wasn't fired. But noooo, her boss stands behind her and says she's bravely fighting for our freedom. Hmmmm, kind of makes you wonder about the NYT. I think their credibility is about as good as hers.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
emcguffie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-08-05 01:56 PM
Response to Original message
74. this could explain her continued employment.
and why she now has been sicced on the UN.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Samantha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-08-05 05:17 PM
Response to Original message
76. HOOTINHOLLER -- LOOK -- HOLY YELLOW CAKE FROM NIGER!
I was out doing a little RESEARCH on my own looking for that link you requested when I happened across this article:

http://newyorkmetro.com/nymetro/news/media/features/922...

"And, most memorably, she co-wrote a piece in which administration officials suggested that Iraq had attempted to import aluminum tubes for nuclear weapons. Vice-President Dick Cheney trumpeted the story on Meet the Press, closing the circle. Of course, each of the stories contained important caveats. But together they painted a horrifying picture. There was just one problem with them: The vast majority of these blockbusters turned out to be wrong."

This does make the point that Valerie Plame and Judith Miller were not both victims of the Administration's failure to investigate the leak (discussed above), as Wilson so generously pondered this week. But it raises a very big question for me:

IS IT POSSIBLE DICK CHENEY IS HER "SOURCE" or conversely:

PERHAPS SHE ACTED AS A "SOURCE" FOR CHENEY TO CONTRADICT THE ASSERTIONS MADE BY WILSON? That now is an interesting possibility! Your comments?

(to be continued below)



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Samantha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-08-05 05:27 PM
Response to Original message
77. Continued from the above post
The article I mentioned in my last post is riveting (see link above):

"Theres an important difference in reportorial style between Miller and her colleagues. Risen and Bergman are diggers, excavating documents and sources hidden deep in the bureaucracy. Miller, on the other hand, relies on her well-placed, carefully tended-to connections to nab her stories. In February, on the public-radio show The Connection, she said, My job was not to collect information and analyze it independently as an intelligence agency; my job was to tell readers of the New York Times, as best as I could figure out, what people inside the governments, who had very high security clearances, who were not supposed to talk to me, were saying to one another about what they thought Iraq had and did not have in the area of weapons of mass destruction.

This paragraph supports the claim she did not do her own independent research to buttress the assertions made in the stories she wrote. For purposes of obeying the copyright rules, I have to limit what I post here, BUT LOOK AT THIS:

"Her Iraq coverage didnt just depend on Chalabi. It also relied heavily on his patrons in the Pentagon. Some of these sources, like Richard Perle and Paul Wolfowitz, would occasionally talk to her on the record. She relied especially heavily on the Office of Special Plans, an intelligence unit established beneath Undersecretary of Defense Douglas Feith. The office was charged with uncovering evidence of Al Qaeda links to Saddam Hussein that the CIA might have missed. In particular, Miller is said to have depended on a controversial neocon in Feiths office named Michael Maloof. At one point, in December 2001, Maloofs security clearance was revoked. In April, Risen reported in the Times, Several intelligence professionals say he came under scrutiny because of suspicions that he had leaked classified information in the past to the news media, a charge that Mr. Maloof denies. While Miller might not have intended to march in lockstep with these hawks, she was caught up in an almost irresistible cycle. Because she kept printing the neocon party line, the neocons kept coming to her with huge stories and great quotes, constantly expanding her access." (All bolded emphasis added)

Your comments?


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Al-CIAda Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-08-05 05:46 PM
Response to Reply #77
81. Good find.
:thumbsup:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Justice Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-09-05 06:44 AM
Response to Reply #77
91. Great find, thanks for posting
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Samantha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-09-05 07:32 AM
Response to Reply #91
92. Don't you find it interesting sources include The Office of Special Plans
and Perle, Wolfowitz, and others. Don't you think this might truly be the "slam dunk" of the Bush* disinformation efforts? Don't you think this is truly an amazing revelation? Do you think most Americans simply reading the story in the news regarding Miller going to jail have any idea Judith Miller was simply a talking piece for the neocons, made no effort to independently fact-check what they were telling her, and her articles were simply printed in The New York Times as literal news. I find this riveting and I am tremendously disappointed this article has generated so little interest here.

It once again raises the question, exactly whom is Miller protecting? Cheney?

Do you have any thoughts on this?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sadiesworld Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-09-05 08:04 AM
Response to Reply #77
94. Interesting article.
The overall feeling I get from the article is that Miller is just a conniving, self-important hack looking for professional rehabilitation following the Iraq/WMD debacle, but the following statement by a co-worker got my attention: "There was always the sense, true or not, that she had a benefactor at the top". Of course, she also appears to have slept with half of NY and DC, so who knows?

There's almost something a little too pat about the whole piece. And why is Keller pulling out all the stops to cover for her? Maybe he is looking for a little rehabilitation for the Times as well, but I sure as hell am not buying the "he's just a nice guy" angle. What do we know about Keller?

Good find.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Samantha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-09-05 11:48 AM
Response to Reply #94
95. Here's some basic info
http://web.ask.com/fr?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.thestreet.com%...

(Note: a print request pops up when I click this link. I hit cancel and the article appears)

Here's some info about ONE story he killed (and we all remember this one):

http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=2012

"Oddly, though, despite Kellers having taken such a position, the Times apparently chose not to run the Nelson pictures story on the grounds of proximity to Election Day. Even more oddly, despite the fact that the Times had thoroughly researched and reported Nelsons story before deciding not to run iteven after the story had run in both Salon and Mother Jonesthe Times still ducked (and continues to duck) the whole bulge story itself, ignoring an important issue that it knew to be factually substantiated."

Perhaps others know more about Keller than I.

What do you think? Bush protector?

Who do you think Miller is protecting?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
David Zephyr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-08-05 05:34 PM
Response to Original message
79. You make an intriguing observation.
It is worthy of contemplation. Certainly, Miller was the National Press Champion for cheer leading the war in Iraq and for facilitating the White House deception to the public.

In any event, she is a no hero.

Her activities as a journalist were vile. She investigated nothing, she reported nothing, she was merely an extension of the White House publicity machine.

She belongs in jail for helping protect a criminal in the White House...a criminal who is her patron.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Samantha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-08-05 05:51 PM
Response to Reply #79
84. David, did you have a chance to read my last two posts?
Edited on Fri Jul-08-05 05:55 PM by Samantha
She received information from The Office of Special Plans . I know you must know this, but for those who do not, The Office of Special Plans is an organization (illegally, quietly established by those in the Bush* regime -- I believe the Pentagon ?) to review the intelligence generated by the CIA and other government agencies. Its mission was to cherry pick that intelligence and put it together in a manner which buttressed the Bush* Administration's agenda. Intelligence which contradicted the Bush* agenda ended up on the cutting room floor.

The Office of Special Plans was beyond the control of Congress. That is UnConstitutional.

If Miller received her information from that organization, I believe we may have gotten to the bottom of this question: is she CIA (whether official or tacit relationship). She was worse than that if this is true!

I totally agree with everything you said in your response. I too believe she is in jail protecting a source (and I use that term loosely) the identity of which would make most of us scoff. He or she (the "Source") is obviously totally enmeshed in the Bush disinformation network. In that regard, Miller's facilitation of that disinformation is patently worse than any theorized Mockingbird affiliation. That's my opinion.

(Footnote to above response): Speaking of the Office of Special Plans and the fact that it is beyond the control of Congress, as I said above, which is Unconstitutional), is there any chance Miller's notes reflect information from that organization and that is referenced in the eight blank pages of the Court's opinion which is withheld for reasons which pertain to a national security issue? Just a thought to ponder....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Chicago Democrat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-08-05 05:37 PM
Response to Original message
80. It seems quite likely Miller, then really isnt a journalist
Right?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Samantha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-08-05 09:00 PM
Response to Reply #80
87. Looks like from the article linked below
She has developed friends in high places all over the world. Looks like she has made a pattern of cultivating these friendships and "reporting" conversations with those friends without the process of actually fact-checking the details. Does that comport with your definition of a "reporter?"

Please read the article for further info and let us know whom you think she is shielding.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sterling Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-08-05 05:47 PM
Response to Original message
82. Seems like the whole media is "Mockingbird Related"
The coverage of London reeks of the aftermath of a false flag operation.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stepnw1f Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-08-05 05:50 PM
Response to Original message
83. No Shit?!
If this is the truth, the Republican Party can kiss it's ass GOODBYE!

How many are involved in this?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Samantha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-08-05 08:00 PM
Response to Original message
86. Looking for Hootinholler
and some other DU'ers to contemplate the later posts on this thread. Hoping to get some more comments, I am once again, kicking my own thread. Color me shameless.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Al-CIAda Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-08-05 10:02 PM
Response to Reply #86
88. .
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Samantha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-08-05 10:27 PM
Response to Reply #88
89. Thank you
Perhaps you will check out that article on Miller and her connection to The Office of Special Plans. I am so disappointed I can't get anyone to focus on this truly interesting info I found after my post to hootinholler.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Samantha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-09-05 03:12 PM
Response to Original message
98. Kicking this thread
Hoping for more comments on Miller and The Office of Special Plans and speculation on who she might be protecting ....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Al-CIAda Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-10-05 02:23 AM
Response to Original message
101. .
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Samantha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-10-05 07:50 AM
Response to Reply #101
102. Thanks for kicking my thread, Al-CIAda
I think a lot of important information has evolved in this thread since its inception. I personally have learned a lot. I am hoping to keep this thread afloat for two or three more days because I have a gut feeling something big is going break on this subject. I believe there will be a terrible backlash against the White House as a result. Hopefully, Judith Miller's role will become more apparent as the days progress.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Al-CIAda Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-11-05 04:22 AM
Response to Reply #102
103. I will assist you, Kick. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Al-CIAda Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-11-05 11:29 AM
Response to Original message
104. .
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Al-CIAda Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-11-05 07:12 PM
Response to Original message
105. .
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Al-CIAda Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-11-05 08:33 PM
Response to Original message
106. ,
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Al-CIAda Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-12-05 12:13 PM
Response to Original message
107. .
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Al-CIAda Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-12-05 06:00 PM
Response to Original message
108. .
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Al-CIAda Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-12-05 08:53 PM
Response to Original message
109. .
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Jul 31st 2014, 09:13 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC