28 November 2005

Judith Iscariot: Miller sells journalism down the river. Again.

Reason: Judith Iscariot: Miller sells journalism down the river. Again.:

"To put it as plainly as possible, Miller didn't want to testify about the Vice President's right hand man not because he forbade her to—on the contrary, he gave her his authorization from the get-go—but rather because she had good reason to believe Libby wanted her to lie. And in Judith Miller's bizarre, journalistically compromised world, it is less important to catch a powerful official in a blatant lie than it is to protect your friendly relationship with a productive, high-ranking source."

27 November 2005

Miller present at 1993 torture of Salah

Miller Could be Called to Testify in Terror Case:

"Sun-Times staff reporters Annie Sweeney and Lisa Donovan reported that a filing in U.S. District Court in Chicago by Salah's attorneys alleges that Salah was beaten, threatened with rape and forced to sit handcuffed in a painful condition during interrogations by Israeli soldiers in 1993. Salah signed several incriminating statements and spoke on an audio tape saying the confessions were true, according to the filing.

'In an odd twist, the interrogation was witnessed by embattled New York Times reporter Judith Miller, and defense attorneys suggested Monday the best way for the U.S. government to prove its case -- and prove Salah wasn't abused -- is to call the controversial journalist to the witness stand,' the Sun-Times story says."

26 November 2005

`Dishonest and reprehensible' words from Dick Cheney

KR Washington Bureau | 11/23/2005 | `Dishonest and reprehensible' words from Dick Cheney:

"What Cheney et al. wanted in that speech [Powell's at the UN], and what Tenet vouched for, and what Miller wrote about, turned out to be bogus. It didn't exist, although the Department of Defense spent a year and millions of dollars combing the deserts and cities of Iraq searching for it with Miller looking over their shoulders and urging them on."

'Scoops' and Truth at the Times

'Scoops' and Truth at the Times:

From the June 5, 2003 issue of The Nation.

"Miller and the Times consented to prepublication approval of her piece by the military. 'Those officials asked that details of what chemicals were uncovered be deleted,' Miller wrote. 'They said they feared that such information could jeopardize the scientist's safety by identifying the part of the weapons program where he worked.' (Why his safety would be in question with Saddam vanquished was not explained.)"


"Miller allows sources to hide their identities in order to advance a self-serving agenda. Using unnamed sources is a common and necessary technique in journalism. But sources should not be allowed to remain unnamed when the information they are imparting serves to directly advance their own and their employers' objectives. In other words, a reporter needs a very good justification for not naming a source--usually because a source is saying something that could get him or her in big trouble with some powerful entity. But what kind of trouble could befall some unnamed Pentagon source who is leaking material in accord with the objectives of the current Administration? The principal motive for remaining under cover in such circumstances, besides preserving deniability, is to gain greater currency for the leaked material, as something that has received the imprimatur of our internationally recognized "newspaper of record," the New York Times."

The Man Who Sold the War -- and the cunt who helped...

RollingStone.com: The Man Who Sold the War : Politics:

"The INC's choice for the worldwide print exclusive was equally easy: Chalabi contacted Judith Miller of The New York Times. Miller, who was close to I. Lewis Libby and other neoconservatives in the Bush administration, had been a trusted outlet for the INC's anti-Saddam propaganda for years. Not long after the CIA polygraph expert slipped the straps and electrodes off al-Haideri and declared him a liar, Miller flew to Bangkok to interview him under the watchful supervision of his INC handlers. Miller later made perfunctory calls to the CIA and Defense Intelligence Agency, but despite her vaunted intelligence sources, she claimed not to know about the results of al-Haideri's lie-detector test. Instead, she reported that unnamed 'government experts' called his information 'reliable and significant' -- thus adding a veneer of truth to the lies.

Her front-page story, which hit the stands on December 20th, 2001, was exactly the kind of exposure Rendon had been hired to provide. AN IRAQI DEFECTOR TELLS OF WORK ON AT LEAST 20 HIDDEN WEAPONS SITES, declared the headline. 'An Iraqi defector who described himself as a civil engineer,' Miller wrote, 'said he personally worked on renovations of secret facilities for biological, chemical and nuclear weapons in underground wells, private villas and under the Saddam Hussein Hospital in Baghdad as recently as a year ago.' If verified, she noted, 'his allegations would provide ammunition to officials within the Bush administration who have been arguing that Mr. Hussein should be driven from power partly because of his unwillingness to stop making weapons of mass destruction, despite his pledges to do so.'

For months, hawks inside and outside the administration had been pressing for a pre-emptive attack on Iraq. Now, thanks to Miller's story, they could point to 'proof' of Saddam's 'nuclear threat.' The story, reinforced by Moran's on-camera interview with al-Haideri on the giant Australian Broadcasting Corp., was soon being trumpeted by the White House and repeated by newspapers and television networks around the world. It was the first in a long line of hyped and fraudulent stories that would eventually propel the U.S. into a war with Iraq -- the first war based almost entirely on a covert propaganda campaign targeting the media."

25 November 2005

The Man Who Sold the Iraq War -- link to audio interview.

The Man Who Sold the Iraq War: John Rendon, Bush's General in the Propaganda War (Video) | MediaChannel.org:

"JAMES BAMFORD: That's right. And how this comes full circle is that the Rendon Group created the I.N.C., put in Chalabi in there, and then now we have December of 2001, right after the September 11 attacks, and while the administration is gearing up to sort of get the public behind the administration in going into war in Iraq. So up until this time it had been all speculation about what had been going on in terms of Saddam's use of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, and now the I.N.C., the Iraqi National Congress, comes up with this defector who is telling this huge lie about where all of these weapons are being hidden.

AMY GOODMAN: And they know it’s a lie?

JAMES BAMFORD: Well, I don't know when they knew it, but they certainly should have known it at some point, that the C.I.A. person who walked out of the room wasn't smiling about all of the happy news he was hearing –

AMY GOODMAN: And the guy who did the lie detector test said, “He is not telling the truth.”

JAMES BAMFORD: That’s right, exactly, and it didn't seem to make much difference, because they called in the press, and the two people that they called in, ironically one of them was Paul Moran who had formerly worked, not only for the I.N.C., but also for the Rendon Group. So you have a journalist who has the worldwide broadcast exclusive for this interview with this defector who is telling a lot of lies, who actually had formerly worked for the group putting this show on the road, and then they called in Judy Miller, who was going to be granted the worldwide print exclusives. And Judy Miller, in her own words in a memo she wrote to her bureau chief in Baghdad at one point, mentioned that for a decade Chalabi had been one of her key sources and that he was responsible for many of the front page stories on W.M.D. in The New York Times.

So, they called in these two very sympathetic journalists to broadcast this story, and it made huge news. It came out, I think it was December 20, 2001, and again it made a great impact, because this was the first time that an actual eyewitness was able to say that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction, including nuclear weapons.
So, this was a major milestone in the road to the war. And from then on, the I.N.C. began coming up with other defectors, and The New York Times and other organizations started promoting the war. But a lot of it had its origins with this first defector, al-Haideri."

Embedding and the Road to Disgrace: The Bob and Judy Show

PopPolitics.com: Embedding and the Road to Disgrace: The Bob and Judy Show:

"When the Pentagon first announced its plan to “embed” reporters into military units, back in those heady days shortly before the beginning of the War in Iraq, when visions of weapons of mass destruction and flower throwing Iraqis were still dancing in Neocon heads, the idea was widely described in the press as a major innovation; it wasn’t, of course. It was merely the next logical step in a process that had long since become standard operating procedure in the Bush Administration’s relationship with the media.

Judith Miller, for example, became embedded in the Bush Administration’s war machine beginning almost immediately following the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks. Bob Woodward signed on somewhat later. From its inception, the relationship between the White House and these two Alpha journalists was a symbiotic one: To the aging media luminaries, the relationship offered the insider access that is the most coveted of all prizes in today’s lazier-than-a-pig-wallowing-in-mud-non-investigative-journalism. And with access came goodies: Front page stories in The Times for Miller; rich book deals for Woodward."

A black mark for media

Judith Miller's WMD reporting - New York Times war reporting - Hunt for WMD

Judith Miller's WMD reporting - New York Times war reporting - Hunt for WMD

For the next two years, she supplied the paper with a string of grim exclusives. There was the defector who described Saddam Hussein’s recent renovation of storage facilities for nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons. There was her report that a Russian virologist might have handed the regime a particularly virulent strain of smallpox. To protect themselves against VX and sarin, she further reported, the Iraqis had greatly increased the importation of an antidote to these agents. 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.

“She’s a shit to the people she works with,” says one. “When I see her coming, my instinct is to go the other way,” says another. They recite her foibles and peccadilloes, from getting temporarily banned by the Times’ D.C. car service for her rudeness to throwing a fit over rearranged items on her desk.

20 November 2005

The Sins of Judith Miller

AlterNet: MediaCulture: The Sins of Judith Miller

Perfect: "She's Inspector Clouseau turned loose by the Perle/Cheney gang, bumbling her way through a fragile and dangerous world, leaving reputations shredded, international relations damaged, and facts scattered far and wide. Why top management at an institution that is normally fierce about staff errors continues to tolerate this is a continuing mystery."

Miller Time (Again) - The New York Times owes readers an explanation for Judith Miller's faulty WMD reporting. By Jack Shafer

Miller Time (Again) - The New York Times owes readers an explanation for Judith Miller's faulty WMD reporting. By Jack Shafer:

An inspired article from Jack Shafer from Feb. 2004--interesting that he uses the 'stenographer' reference Maureen uses in her piece.

"Indeed, it's Miller who seems clueless about how investigative reporting works. Earlier in the program, she describes her role as the conveyor of official news rather than a skeptical reporter:

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.

Where did Miller learn the art of journalism? The job of a good reporter—investigative or otherwise—is more like that of an intelligence analyst than a stenographer. A good reporter is supposed to dig for the truth, no matter what 'people inside the governments' with 'very high security clearances' might say. The very point of Massing's objections about the prewar WMD coverage is that Knight Ridder folks got closer to the truth with blue collar sources than did Miller with all of her 'inside' sources."

16 November 2005

bob woodward is a cunt too...

Woodward Apologizes to Post for Withholding Knowledge of Plame:

"The disclosure has already prompted critics to compare Woodward to Judith Miller, the former New York Times reporter who left the paper last week--after serving 85 days in jail in the Plame case--amid questions about her lone-ranger style and why she had not told her editors sooner about her involvement in the matter. Miller discussed Plame with I. Lewis 'Scooter' Libby, who was Vice President Cheney's chief of staff and has now been indicted for perjury and obstruction of justice. Woodward said he testified that Libby did not discuss Plame with him.

Both Woodward and Downie said they are not sure that The Post could have done anything with Woodward's 2003 conversations because they were conducted on an off-the-record basis. Woodward said the unnamed official told him about Plame 'in an offhand, casual manner . . . almost gossip' and that 'I didn't attach any great significance to it.'"

15 November 2005

Daily Kos: More About Judith Miller

Daily Kos: More About Judith Miller:

"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.

Jamie Macaskill, for example, filed a story in The London Sunday Mail on July 20, 2003 entitled: Dark Actors Playing Games:

SUICIDE scientist Dr David Kelly warned a friend that 'dark actors' were working against him just hours before his death. Dr Kelly revealed his fears shortly before killing himself after being dragged into the row over the Government's justification for war in Iraq. In an email to American author Judy Miller, sent just before he left his home for the last time, he referred to 'many dark actors playing games'.

But, according to Miller, Dr Kelly gave no indication he was depressed or planning to take his own life.
He told her he would wait 'until the end of the week' before deciding his next move following his traumatic appearance before a House of Commons select committee...

In fact, Judith Miller apparently knew David Kelly rather well. She had quoted him in several of her earlier articles going back to 1998, and according to the Globe article referenced above, Kelly had helped her write her book about Weapons of Mass Destruction published several years before.

One would have thought that Miller would have regarded her relationship with Kelly as well as her contact with him just before his death as 'scoop' material. Instead she failed to let her readers even know that she had enjoyed a long and close association with him. Even more odd, she left out the provocative e-mail he had written her just prior to his death while writing about a more innocuous one sent to an 'associate.'

I find Miller's behavior in the Kelly story rather odd, to say the least. Unlike the Plame story, Miller did ultimately write about Kelly, but she camouflaged her own involvement and left much of what she knew out of the piece. I can't pretend to know what role Miller played in the Plame saga, but I am now wondering whether she is being looked at as a possible accessory, rather than as a journalist who is protecting her sources. If that is the case, her efforts to rally the journalistic community to her aid represent a cynical charade."

12 November 2005

Participant List: Aspen Strategy Group Summer Workshop - Aspen Institute

Participant List: Aspen Strategy Group Summer Workshop - Aspen Institute

This from August 2000...What was she doing there?

09 November 2005

Top 10 Career Moves for Judith Miller

08 November 2005

Daily Kos: Judith Miller: 3 Decades of Disinformation

Daily Kos: Judith Miller: 3 Decades of Disinformation

A very well-written, researched post showing the pattern and practice of Miller...

'WSJ' Seeks 8 Pages of Redacted Info in Judith Miller Case