Re: [liberationtech] Dubious sources feed national-security reporter Eli Lake a fraudulent story for political purposes — once again
Sorry, language mismatch in "auto-corrector".. On Aug 21, 2013 8:29 AM, "Andrés Leopoldo Pacheco Sanfuentes" < alps6...@gmail.com> wrote: > Wells, what elasticidad would you expectativas from "The Washington Times?" > On Aug 21, 2013 4:40 AM, "Eugen Leitl" wrote: > >> >> How very surprising. >> >> http://harpers.org/blog/2013/08/anatomy-of-an-al-qaeda-conference-call/ >> >> Anatomy of an Al Qaeda “Conference Call” >> >> Dubious sources feed national-security reporter Eli Lake a fraudulent >> story >> for political purposes — once again >> >> By Ken Silverstein >> >> Share Single Page >> >> Cartoon by C. Clyde Squires (September 1907) >> >> Two years ago, following the raid that killed Osama bin Laden in >> Pakistan, a >> number of journalists wrote dramatic accounts of the Al Qaeda leader’s >> last >> moments. One such story, co-authored by Eli Lake in the Washington Times, >> cited Obama administration officials and an unnamed military source, >> described how bin Laden had “reached for a weapon to try to defend >> himself” >> during the intense firefight at his compound, and then “was shot by Navy >> SEALs after trying to use a woman reputed to be his wife as a human >> shield.” >> >> It was exciting stuff, but it turned out to have been fictitious >> propaganda >> concocted by U.S. authorities to destroy bin Laden’s image in the eyes of >> his >> followers. Based on what we know now, the SEALs met virtually no >> resistance >> at the compound, there was no firefight, bin Laden didn’t use a woman as a >> human shield, and he was unarmed. >> >> The White House blamed the misleading early reports on the “fog of war,” >> but >> as Will Saletan pointed out in Slate, “A fog of war creates confusion, >> not a >> consistent story like the one about the human shield. The reason U.S. >> officials bought and sold this story is that it fit their larger >> indictment >> of Bin Laden. It reinforced the shameful picture of him hiding in a >> mansion >> while sending others to fight and die. It made him look like a coward.” >> >> Many reporters uncritically rushed the government’s account into print. >> For >> Lake, though, it fit a career pattern of credulously planting dubious >> stories >> from sources with strong political agendas.[*] >> >> [*] I should disclose that Lake and I aren’t on friendly terms. We were >> until >> a few years ago, when I received a tip that led to a 2011 story showing >> that >> Lake, who regularly praised the government of the former Soviet republic >> of >> Georgia, was a close friend of one of the country’s Washington lobbyists, >> and >> that the lobbyist sometimes picked up his bar and restaurant tabs. After >> the >> story was published, Lake and his friends, some of whom had flown to >> Georgia >> on junkets paid for by the same lobbyist, took to Twitter to denounce me. >> >> Which brings us to the news story that Lake and Josh Rogin broke for the >> Daily Beast last week, in which they reported that the “crucial intercept >> that prompted the U.S. government to close embassies in 22 countries was a >> conference call between al Qaeda’s senior leaders and representatives of >> several of the group’s affiliates throughout the region.” The story said >> that >> among the “more than 20 operatives” on the call was Ayman al-Zawahiri, who >> the piece claimed was managing a global organization with affiliates in >> Africa, Asia, and the Middle East. Other Al Qaeda participants involved in >> the call reportedly represented affiliates operating in Iraq, the Islamic >> Maghreb, Nigeria, Pakistan, the Sinai Peninsula, and Uzbekistan. >> >> The sources for the story were three U.S. officials “familiar with the >> intelligence.” “This was like a meeting of the Legion of Doom,” one told >> Lake >> and Rogin. “All you need to do is look at that list of places we shut >> down to >> get a sense of who was on the phone call.” >> >> The piece also cited Republican senator John McCain, who drew a >> predictably >> grim conclusion from the news. “This may punch a sizable hole in the >> theory >> that Al Qaeda is on the run,” he said. “There was a gross underestimation >> by >> this administration of Al Qaeda’s overall ability to replenish itself.” >> The >> story was picked up widely, especially on the right. On his show, Rush >> Limbaugh charged that the Obama “regime” had leaked the story for >> political >> gain. “They leak it,” he explained, “so as to make Obama look big and >> competent and tough and make this administration look like nobody’s gonna >> get >> anything past them.” >> >> Then a number of respected national-security journalists began to question >> the motives of the leakers, and to cast doubt on the story generally. Ken >> Dilanian of the Los Angeles Times suggested that the piece was intended to >> glorify the NSA’s signals-intelligence capabilities. Barton Gellman of the >> Washington Post said there was something “very wrong” with the whole >> thing. >> New York magazine got
Re: [liberationtech] Dubious sources feed national-security reporter Eli Lake a fraudulent story for political purposes — once again
Wells, what elasticidad would you expectativas from "The Washington Times?" On Aug 21, 2013 4:40 AM, "Eugen Leitl" wrote: > > How very surprising. > > http://harpers.org/blog/2013/08/anatomy-of-an-al-qaeda-conference-call/ > > Anatomy of an Al Qaeda “Conference Call” > > Dubious sources feed national-security reporter Eli Lake a fraudulent story > for political purposes — once again > > By Ken Silverstein > > Share Single Page > > Cartoon by C. Clyde Squires (September 1907) > > Two years ago, following the raid that killed Osama bin Laden in Pakistan, > a > number of journalists wrote dramatic accounts of the Al Qaeda leader’s last > moments. One such story, co-authored by Eli Lake in the Washington Times, > cited Obama administration officials and an unnamed military source, > described how bin Laden had “reached for a weapon to try to defend himself” > during the intense firefight at his compound, and then “was shot by Navy > SEALs after trying to use a woman reputed to be his wife as a human > shield.” > > It was exciting stuff, but it turned out to have been fictitious propaganda > concocted by U.S. authorities to destroy bin Laden’s image in the eyes of > his > followers. Based on what we know now, the SEALs met virtually no resistance > at the compound, there was no firefight, bin Laden didn’t use a woman as a > human shield, and he was unarmed. > > The White House blamed the misleading early reports on the “fog of war,” > but > as Will Saletan pointed out in Slate, “A fog of war creates confusion, not > a > consistent story like the one about the human shield. The reason U.S. > officials bought and sold this story is that it fit their larger indictment > of Bin Laden. It reinforced the shameful picture of him hiding in a mansion > while sending others to fight and die. It made him look like a coward.” > > Many reporters uncritically rushed the government’s account into print. For > Lake, though, it fit a career pattern of credulously planting dubious > stories > from sources with strong political agendas.[*] > > [*] I should disclose that Lake and I aren’t on friendly terms. We were > until > a few years ago, when I received a tip that led to a 2011 story showing > that > Lake, who regularly praised the government of the former Soviet republic of > Georgia, was a close friend of one of the country’s Washington lobbyists, > and > that the lobbyist sometimes picked up his bar and restaurant tabs. After > the > story was published, Lake and his friends, some of whom had flown to > Georgia > on junkets paid for by the same lobbyist, took to Twitter to denounce me. > > Which brings us to the news story that Lake and Josh Rogin broke for the > Daily Beast last week, in which they reported that the “crucial intercept > that prompted the U.S. government to close embassies in 22 countries was a > conference call between al Qaeda’s senior leaders and representatives of > several of the group’s affiliates throughout the region.” The story said > that > among the “more than 20 operatives” on the call was Ayman al-Zawahiri, who > the piece claimed was managing a global organization with affiliates in > Africa, Asia, and the Middle East. Other Al Qaeda participants involved in > the call reportedly represented affiliates operating in Iraq, the Islamic > Maghreb, Nigeria, Pakistan, the Sinai Peninsula, and Uzbekistan. > > The sources for the story were three U.S. officials “familiar with the > intelligence.” “This was like a meeting of the Legion of Doom,” one told > Lake > and Rogin. “All you need to do is look at that list of places we shut down > to > get a sense of who was on the phone call.” > > The piece also cited Republican senator John McCain, who drew a predictably > grim conclusion from the news. “This may punch a sizable hole in the theory > that Al Qaeda is on the run,” he said. “There was a gross underestimation > by > this administration of Al Qaeda’s overall ability to replenish itself.” The > story was picked up widely, especially on the right. On his show, Rush > Limbaugh charged that the Obama “regime” had leaked the story for political > gain. “They leak it,” he explained, “so as to make Obama look big and > competent and tough and make this administration look like nobody’s gonna > get > anything past them.” > > Then a number of respected national-security journalists began to question > the motives of the leakers, and to cast doubt on the story generally. Ken > Dilanian of the Los Angeles Times suggested that the piece was intended to > glorify the NSA’s signals-intelligence capabilities. Barton Gellman of the > Washington Post said there was something “very wrong” with the whole thing. > New York magazine got in on the act by parodying the notion of an Al Qaeda > conference call. > > Despite this tide of doubt and ridicule, the Daily Beast didn’t correct the > story, though Lake and Rogin made statements that seemed designed to alter > its meaning. “We used ‘conference call’ because it
Re: [liberationtech] Dubious sources feed national-security reporter Eli Lake a fraudulent story for political purposes — once again
Blogged On Aug 21, 2013 5:40 AM, "Eugen Leitl" wrote: > > How very surprising. > > http://harpers.org/blog/2013/08/anatomy-of-an-al-qaeda-conference-call/ > > Anatomy of an Al Qaeda “Conference Call” > > Dubious sources feed national-security reporter Eli Lake a fraudulent story > for political purposes — once again > > By Ken Silverstein > > Share Single Page > > Cartoon by C. Clyde Squires (September 1907) > > Two years ago, following the raid that killed Osama bin Laden in Pakistan, > a > number of journalists wrote dramatic accounts of the Al Qaeda leader’s last > moments. One such story, co-authored by Eli Lake in the Washington Times, > cited Obama administration officials and an unnamed military source, > described how bin Laden had “reached for a weapon to try to defend himself” > during the intense firefight at his compound, and then “was shot by Navy > SEALs after trying to use a woman reputed to be his wife as a human > shield.” > > It was exciting stuff, but it turned out to have been fictitious propaganda > concocted by U.S. authorities to destroy bin Laden’s image in the eyes of > his > followers. Based on what we know now, the SEALs met virtually no resistance > at the compound, there was no firefight, bin Laden didn’t use a woman as a > human shield, and he was unarmed. > > The White House blamed the misleading early reports on the “fog of war,” > but > as Will Saletan pointed out in Slate, “A fog of war creates confusion, not > a > consistent story like the one about the human shield. The reason U.S. > officials bought and sold this story is that it fit their larger indictment > of Bin Laden. It reinforced the shameful picture of him hiding in a mansion > while sending others to fight and die. It made him look like a coward.” > > Many reporters uncritically rushed the government’s account into print. For > Lake, though, it fit a career pattern of credulously planting dubious > stories > from sources with strong political agendas.[*] > > [*] I should disclose that Lake and I aren’t on friendly terms. We were > until > a few years ago, when I received a tip that led to a 2011 story showing > that > Lake, who regularly praised the government of the former Soviet republic of > Georgia, was a close friend of one of the country’s Washington lobbyists, > and > that the lobbyist sometimes picked up his bar and restaurant tabs. After > the > story was published, Lake and his friends, some of whom had flown to > Georgia > on junkets paid for by the same lobbyist, took to Twitter to denounce me. > > Which brings us to the news story that Lake and Josh Rogin broke for the > Daily Beast last week, in which they reported that the “crucial intercept > that prompted the U.S. government to close embassies in 22 countries was a > conference call between al Qaeda’s senior leaders and representatives of > several of the group’s affiliates throughout the region.” The story said > that > among the “more than 20 operatives” on the call was Ayman al-Zawahiri, who > the piece claimed was managing a global organization with affiliates in > Africa, Asia, and the Middle East. Other Al Qaeda participants involved in > the call reportedly represented affiliates operating in Iraq, the Islamic > Maghreb, Nigeria, Pakistan, the Sinai Peninsula, and Uzbekistan. > > The sources for the story were three U.S. officials “familiar with the > intelligence.” “This was like a meeting of the Legion of Doom,” one told > Lake > and Rogin. “All you need to do is look at that list of places we shut down > to > get a sense of who was on the phone call.” > > The piece also cited Republican senator John McCain, who drew a predictably > grim conclusion from the news. “This may punch a sizable hole in the theory > that Al Qaeda is on the run,” he said. “There was a gross underestimation > by > this administration of Al Qaeda’s overall ability to replenish itself.” The > story was picked up widely, especially on the right. On his show, Rush > Limbaugh charged that the Obama “regime” had leaked the story for political > gain. “They leak it,” he explained, “so as to make Obama look big and > competent and tough and make this administration look like nobody’s gonna > get > anything past them.” > > Then a number of respected national-security journalists began to question > the motives of the leakers, and to cast doubt on the story generally. Ken > Dilanian of the Los Angeles Times suggested that the piece was intended to > glorify the NSA’s signals-intelligence capabilities. Barton Gellman of the > Washington Post said there was something “very wrong” with the whole thing. > New York magazine got in on the act by parodying the notion of an Al Qaeda > conference call. > > Despite this tide of doubt and ridicule, the Daily Beast didn’t correct the > story, though Lake and Rogin made statements that seemed designed to alter > its meaning. “We used ‘conference call’ because it was generic enough,” > Lake > tweeted. “But it was not a telephone b
[liberationtech] Dubious sources feed national-security reporter Eli Lake a fraudulent story for political purposes — once again
How very surprising. http://harpers.org/blog/2013/08/anatomy-of-an-al-qaeda-conference-call/ Anatomy of an Al Qaeda “Conference Call” Dubious sources feed national-security reporter Eli Lake a fraudulent story for political purposes — once again By Ken Silverstein Share Single Page Cartoon by C. Clyde Squires (September 1907) Two years ago, following the raid that killed Osama bin Laden in Pakistan, a number of journalists wrote dramatic accounts of the Al Qaeda leader’s last moments. One such story, co-authored by Eli Lake in the Washington Times, cited Obama administration officials and an unnamed military source, described how bin Laden had “reached for a weapon to try to defend himself” during the intense firefight at his compound, and then “was shot by Navy SEALs after trying to use a woman reputed to be his wife as a human shield.” It was exciting stuff, but it turned out to have been fictitious propaganda concocted by U.S. authorities to destroy bin Laden’s image in the eyes of his followers. Based on what we know now, the SEALs met virtually no resistance at the compound, there was no firefight, bin Laden didn’t use a woman as a human shield, and he was unarmed. The White House blamed the misleading early reports on the “fog of war,” but as Will Saletan pointed out in Slate, “A fog of war creates confusion, not a consistent story like the one about the human shield. The reason U.S. officials bought and sold this story is that it fit their larger indictment of Bin Laden. It reinforced the shameful picture of him hiding in a mansion while sending others to fight and die. It made him look like a coward.” Many reporters uncritically rushed the government’s account into print. For Lake, though, it fit a career pattern of credulously planting dubious stories from sources with strong political agendas.[*] [*] I should disclose that Lake and I aren’t on friendly terms. We were until a few years ago, when I received a tip that led to a 2011 story showing that Lake, who regularly praised the government of the former Soviet republic of Georgia, was a close friend of one of the country’s Washington lobbyists, and that the lobbyist sometimes picked up his bar and restaurant tabs. After the story was published, Lake and his friends, some of whom had flown to Georgia on junkets paid for by the same lobbyist, took to Twitter to denounce me. Which brings us to the news story that Lake and Josh Rogin broke for the Daily Beast last week, in which they reported that the “crucial intercept that prompted the U.S. government to close embassies in 22 countries was a conference call between al Qaeda’s senior leaders and representatives of several of the group’s affiliates throughout the region.” The story said that among the “more than 20 operatives” on the call was Ayman al-Zawahiri, who the piece claimed was managing a global organization with affiliates in Africa, Asia, and the Middle East. Other Al Qaeda participants involved in the call reportedly represented affiliates operating in Iraq, the Islamic Maghreb, Nigeria, Pakistan, the Sinai Peninsula, and Uzbekistan. The sources for the story were three U.S. officials “familiar with the intelligence.” “This was like a meeting of the Legion of Doom,” one told Lake and Rogin. “All you need to do is look at that list of places we shut down to get a sense of who was on the phone call.” The piece also cited Republican senator John McCain, who drew a predictably grim conclusion from the news. “This may punch a sizable hole in the theory that Al Qaeda is on the run,” he said. “There was a gross underestimation by this administration of Al Qaeda’s overall ability to replenish itself.” The story was picked up widely, especially on the right. On his show, Rush Limbaugh charged that the Obama “regime” had leaked the story for political gain. “They leak it,” he explained, “so as to make Obama look big and competent and tough and make this administration look like nobody’s gonna get anything past them.” Then a number of respected national-security journalists began to question the motives of the leakers, and to cast doubt on the story generally. Ken Dilanian of the Los Angeles Times suggested that the piece was intended to glorify the NSA’s signals-intelligence capabilities. Barton Gellman of the Washington Post said there was something “very wrong” with the whole thing. New York magazine got in on the act by parodying the notion of an Al Qaeda conference call. Despite this tide of doubt and ridicule, the Daily Beast didn’t correct the story, though Lake and Rogin made statements that seemed designed to alter its meaning. “We used ‘conference call’ because it was generic enough,” Lake tweeted. “But it was not a telephone based communications.” In another tweet he informed Ben Wedeman of CNN, “This may be a generational issue, but you can conduct conference calls without a telephone.” (Actually, you can’t, at least according to the dictionary. Moreover, the “Legion
