White House Leaks Bin Laden Tape, Exposes Source

[LoungeMachine]

October 9, 2007, 2:16 PM
When Is A Leak Not A Leak?





Peter Maer is a White House correspondent for CBS News.


(CBS)
The White House has come up with a new euphemism for leaks.

Press Secretary Dana Perino said intelligence agencies would be responsible for investigating what she described as any "process problem " in the alleged disclosure of sensitive information from a tip the administration received in advance of Osama bin Laden's video message last month.

Perino was reacting to the Washington Post's front page disclosure that a small private intelligence-gathering group's ability to monitor al Qaeda websites was severely compromised by administration leaks. The newspaper reported that just hours after the group SITE, the acronym for Search for International Terrorist Entities, privately shared advance details of the bin Laden message with the White House and intelligence agencies, word of the video spread to news organizations. The published report quoted SITE as saying the leak caused al Qaeda supporters to block access to the web links the intel-gathering outfit had used in past successful efforts to get the jump on the terror group's communications. The Post quoted SITE founder Rita Katz as saying, "Techniques that took years to develop are now ineffective and worthless."

Spokeswoman Perino was quick to insist that the White House was not the source of the leak. The Bush administration, like its predecessors, abhors leaks except for self-serving disclosures. Now the White House is in the uncomfortable position of worrying that release of the SITE data will have a chilling effect on other commercial outfits or individuals who want to provide private tips to federal law enforcement or intelligence agencies.

Presidential Homeland Security Advisor Frances Townsend told reporters, "any time an individual or a commercial entity cooperates with us and asks to be protected and doesn't get the protection that they either sought or deserved, that's a cause for concern."Spokeswoman Perino said the administration wants people to be "alert and aware" and to provide information to the government. She promised their sources will be protected.

Perino described the leak of the bin Laden video material as "an isolated incident."

[LoungeMachine]

www.washingtompost.com

National SecurityLeak Severed a Link to Al-Qaeda's Secrets

Firm Says Administration's Handling of Video Ruined Its Spying Efforts

By Joby Warrick
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, October 9, 2007; Page A01

A small private intelligence company that monitors Islamic terrorist groups obtained a new Osama bin Laden video ahead of its official release last month, and around 10 a.m. on Sept. 7, it notified the Bush administration of its secret acquisition. It gave two senior officials access on the condition that the officials not reveal they had it until the al-Qaeda release.

Within 20 minutes, a range of intelligence agencies had begun downloading it from the company's Web site. By midafternoon that day, the video and a transcript of its audio track had been leaked from within the Bush administration to cable television news and broadcast worldwide.

The founder of the company, the SITE Intelligence Group, says this premature disclosure tipped al-Qaeda to a security breach and destroyed a years-long surveillance operation that the company has used to intercept and pass along secret messages, videos and advance warnings of suicide bombings from the terrorist group's communications network.

"Techniques that took years to develop are now ineffective and worthless," said Rita Katz, the firm's 44-year-old founder, who has garnered wide attention by publicizing statements and videos from extremist chat rooms and Web sites, while attracting controversy over the secrecy of SITE's methodology. Her firm provides intelligence about terrorist groups to a wide range of paying clients, including private firms and military and intelligence agencies from the United States and several other countries.

The precise source of the leak remains unknown. Government officials declined to be interviewed about the circumstances on the record, but they did not challenge Katz's version of events. They also said the incident had no effect on U.S. intelligence-gathering efforts and did not diminish the government's ability to anticipate attacks.

While acknowledging that SITE had achieved success, the officials said U.S. agencies have their own sophisticated means of watching al-Qaeda on the Web. "We have individuals in the right places dealing with all these issues, across all 16 intelligence agencies," said Ross Feinstein, spokesman for the Office of the Director of National Intelligence.

But privately, some intelligence officials called the incident regrettable, and one official said SITE had been "tremendously helpful" in ferreting out al-Qaeda secrets over time.

The al-Qaeda video aired on Sept. 7 attracted international attention as the first new video message from the group's leader in three years. In it, a dark-bearded bin Laden urges Americans to convert to Islam and predicts failure for the Bush administration in Iraq and Afghanistan. The video was aired on hundreds of Western news Web sites nearly a full day before its release by a distribution company linked to al-Qaeda.

Computer logs and records reviewed by The Washington Post support SITE's claim that it snatched the video from al-Qaeda days beforehand. Katz requested that the precise date and details of the acquisition not be made public, saying such disclosures could reveal sensitive details about the company's methods.

SITE -- an acronym for the Search for International Terrorist Entities -- was established in 2002 with the stated goal of tracking and exposing terrorist groups, according to the company's Web site. Katz, an Iraqi-born Israeli citizen whose father was executed by Saddam Hussein in the 1960s, has made the investigation of terrorist groups a passionate quest.

"We were able to establish sources that provided us with unique and important information into al-Qaeda's hidden world," Katz said. Her company's income is drawn from subscriber fees and contracts.

Katz said she decided to offer an advance copy of the bin Laden video to the White House without charge so officials there could prepare for its eventual release.

continued....

[LoungeMachine]

She spoke first with White House counsel Fred F. Fielding, whom she had previously met, and then with Joel Bagnal, deputy assistant to the president for homeland security. Both expressed interest in obtaining a copy, and Bagnal suggested that she send a copy to Michael Leiter, who holds the No. 2 job at the National Counterterrorism Center.

Administration and intelligence officials would not comment on whether they had obtained the video separately. Katz said Fielding and Bagnal made it clear to her that the White House did not possess a copy at the time she offered hers.


Around 10 a.m. on Sept. 7, Katz sent both Leiter and Fielding an e-mail with a link to a private SITE Web page containing the video and an English transcript. "Please understand the necessity for secrecy," Katz wrote in her e-mail. "We ask you not to distribute . . . [as] it could harm our investigations."

Fielding replied with an e-mail expressing gratitude to Katz. "It is you who deserves the thanks," he wrote, according to a copy of the message. There was no record of a response from Leiter or the national intelligence director's office.

Exactly what happened next is unclear. But within minutes of Katz's e-mail to the White House, government-registered computers began downloading the video from SITE's server, according to a log of file transfers. The records show dozens of downloads over the next three hours from computers with addresses registered to defense and intelligence agencies.

By midafternoon, several television news networks reported obtaining copies of the transcript. A copy posted around 3 p.m. on Fox News's Web site referred to SITE and included page markers identical to those used by the group. "This confirms that the U.S. government was responsible for the leak of this document," Katz wrote in an e-mail to Leiter at 5 p.m.

Al-Qaeda supporters, now alerted to the intrusion into their secret network, put up new obstacles that prevented SITE from gaining the kind of access it had obtained in the past, according to Katz.

A small number of private intelligence companies compete with SITE in scouring terrorists' networks for information and messages, and some have questioned the company's motives and methods, including the claim that its access to al-Qaeda's network was unique. One competitor, Ben Venzke, founder of IntelCenter, said he questions SITE's decision -- as described by Katz -- to offer the video to White House policymakers rather than quietly share it with intelligence analysts.

"It is not just about getting the video first," Venzke said. "It is about having the proper methods and procedures in place to make sure that the appropriate intelligence gets to where it needs to go in the intelligence community and elsewhere in order to support ongoing counterterrorism operations."

[Nickdfresh]

Perino is another retarded bimbo hired primarily because she's good looking, and incompetent...

[LoungeMachine]

Leaking information that should be classified....

after promising the source you wouldn't......

thus burning your source, and alerting Al Qaeda to the breech.......


Followed by changing your story 3 times during the press briefing, and now you have to "get back to us"

:rolleyes:

And lo and behold, WHO is the most likely leaker???

FRED FIELDING
WHITE HOUSE COUNSEL TO THE PRESIDENT

unfuckingbelievable

:gulp:

[LoungeMachine]

Originally posted by Nickdfresh
Perino is another retarded bimbo hired primarily because she's good looking, and incompetent...

But she's so fucking hot....

[Nickdfresh]

I'd fuck her, then throw her out in the morning...

Same thing with Bush's "Iraq Adviser."

http://media3.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/photo/2007/04/02/PH2007040201746.jpg
Meghan (I haven't a fucking clue what I'm doing in this job) O'Sullivan...

[Blackflag]

Are you serious? These people aren't decision makers, they do what they're told. :rolleyes:

[Nitro Express]

Originally posted by Nickdfresh
I'd fuck her, then throw her out in the morning...

Same thing with Bush's "Iraq Adviser."

http://media3.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/photo/2007/04/02/PH2007040201746.jpg
Meghan (I haven't a fucking clue what I'm doing in this job) O'Sullivan...

They probably got the job because the fucked somebody.

[Nickdfresh]

Originally posted by Blackflag
Are you serious? These people aren't decision makers, they do what they're told. :rolleyes:

O'Sullivan was Bush's advisor on the Iraq War, her sole credential was being one of the incompetents under Bremer's "Authority."

She's had enormous input on the Iraq War policy, and the fact that she's clueless Neocon fembot is indicative of the fact that the "decider" has surrounded himself with useless eye candy...

[Ellyllions]

This is so shameful. I actually heard about it yesterday morning. Although this isn't exactly as i heard it. I heard that it was given to the media by an "outside source". And I'd read this article a couple of weeks ago:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20895966/?gt1=10357
S.C. mom prowls Internet to hunt terrorists
Laura Mansfield scooped al-Qaida on recent bin Laden video
By Sagar Meghani

Updated: 7:02 p.m. ET Sept 20, 2007
WASHINGTON - Once her three kids are off to school, Laura Mansfield settles in at her dining room table with her laptop and begins trolling Arabic-language message boards and chat rooms popular with jihadists.

Fluent in Arabic, the self-employed terror analyst often hacks into the sites, translates the material, puts it together and sends her analysis via a subscription service to intelligence agencies, law enforcement and academics.

Occasionally she comes across a gem, such as when she found a recent Osama bin Laden video — before al-Qaida had announced it.

"I realized, oh my gosh, I'm sitting here, I'm a fat 50-year-old mom and I've managed to scoop al-Qaida," said Mansfield, who uses that name as a pseudonym because she receives death threats.

She sometimes spends 100 hours a week online, and she often finds items after word has begun spreading on the Arabic forums of an imminent release.

"It's really important to understand what the jihadists think and how they're planning on doing things," she said. "They're very vocal. They tell us what they're going to do and then they go out and do it."

Mansfield tips off her intelligence sources when she does find something new, part of an informal working relationship with the government.

"When I send them something, it's welcome," she said. "They thank me."

There have been times when an impending video release has kept her from a planned shopping trip with her daughter.

"It gets really challenging when you're trying to do that and cook spaghetti at the same time," she said.

Copyright 2007 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.



So be wary if it all tries to get pointed to the White House. If this woman is talking so freely to the press and she's the one who found the latest Bin Laden message, then there's plenty of room for leaks to occur outside the White House.

I'd say this article has a lot to do with the network going dark.

[LoungeMachine]

For Immediate Release
Office of the Press Secretary
October 9, 2007

Press Briefing by Dana Perino
James S. Brady Briefing Room





12:37 P.M. EDT

MS


Q Dana, you said this morning in the gaggle that the White House did not leak the information about the bin Laden tape. How do you know that?

MS. PERINO: Well, this is -- let me take you back. This is the -- there was a private company that contacted the White House to let us know that they had found the Osama bin Laden tape, asked us if we wanted to have the federal government review it. When -- the standard practice at the White House is to take that phone call -- to take that request and direct it to -- directly to the DNI's office. So we do not ask to have that information just solely reviewed at the White House, we immediately turn it over to the National Center for Counterterrorism.

That's what Fred Fielding and Joel Bagnal did, the two people who were aware of the link. And it went to the DNI -- I'm sorry -- it went to the NCTC. And to the extent that we have Americans coming forward to provide us information, whether it be a private citizen or a private cooperation, or anybody in America that can provide the government information, we take it very seriously that they should, one, feel comfortable that in providing that information, that their sources will be protected; and that we will act on it, if necessary. We appreciate what they did. This was a cause of concern that the information was leaked. And I would have to refer to the DNI's office in regards to any possible investigation into that leak.

Q But I guess my question is, Fielding and Bagnal both knew about the information; you're positive they didn't leak it or take it --

MS. PERINO: Correct.

Q -- or take it further than the DNI's office?

MS. PERINO: We asked that the company contact NCTC directly and get that information to them directly.

Q So they didn't contact NCTC, the SITE company did. Who did Fielding and Bagnal contact? DNI?

MS. PERINO: I would check on that. I know that they asked for the company that called to contact NCTC directly. I don't know who else they might have called within our government -- possibly the DNI's counsel's office. But I'm not positive. I can check.

Q My question is, you're saying they contacted these other places. The company asked them not to. So how do you know that the leak didn't come --

MS. PERINO: No, no, we asked --

Q -- from Fielding or --

MS. PERINO: Because I've talked to Fred.

Q Okay, that's my question.

MS. PERINO: I have talked to Fred. And what we do is we ask -- the call comes in from the company, and then Fred said, we'd like for the federal government to be able to look at this, thank you, but don't send it to me, send it directly to the NCTC -- the National Center for Counterterrorism -- which was what was -- taken place here.

Q Dana, following on something else in the gaggle this morning -- Deputy Prime Minister in Iraq is quoted in a recent Washington Post article as saying, "I don't think there is something called reconciliation. There will be no reconciliation as such." And in the same article, a Vice President says, "There's been no significant progress for months." When you're asked about this, you often point to this agreement in -- I think it was late August -- this statement of purpose, which is now six weeks old. It's getting really hard to find any evidence of forward progress in reconciliation. Would you agree with that?

MS. PERINO: I can understand how some people would see it that way, and I know that the Iraqis are --

Q What other way is there to see it?

MS. PERINO: Excuse me?

Q What other way is there to see it?

MS. PERINO: Sorry?

Q What other way is there to see it?

MS. PERINO: Well, I said that -- well, I think that if you're in the Iraqis' shoes and you're looking at what is a complex situation, and you have a de-Baathification law that's in front of parliament, and that parliament needs to act, you have a president, President Talabani, who is bringing people together to work on the national oil law, and you have provincial elections that are moving -- that they're trying to move forward as well -- those are the three big key issues.

But on the -- at the provincial level, at the local government level, there is reconciliation taking place. And there -- in practice, some of these things are working. For example, I've pointed to before, the central government is providing the provinces with funds in order to run their services so that there is a buy-in from the local public, that they feel that they are getting response from their government, and it's starting to really take hold in those local provinces. And the central government, the federal government, is starting to take notice. And they know that they need to get this work done. I believe that they're committed to it. The President presses them on it, and he believes that they'll get it done.

Helen.

Q -- White House has a driving interest in keeping nuclear arms out of Iran. I'd like to ask you, does any country in the Middle East have nuclear arms?

MS. PERINO: Oh, I would leave it to those countries to announce whether they do or not. I think that there's public information about that, Helen.

Q No, no, no, I want to know if the White House knows that there -- what do you mean? They're not going to announce it.

MS. PERINO: I'm not prepared to say anything beyond what has been publicly stated --

Q You don't know whether any other country in the Middle East has nuclear arms?

MS. PERINO: Helen, I will let those countries speak for themselves.

Q Or do you refuse to say?

MS. PERINO: I'll just refuse to say it.

Kathleen.

Q Dana, I have a question on the timing of the National Strategy for Homeland Security memo put out by the White House this morning.

MS. PERINO: Okay.

Q Why now? Why today? Does it have anything to do with an effort to influence lawmakers who are taking up FISA legislation on the Hill today?

MS. PERINO: No. No, I -- not that I'm aware. This is a document that -- it's not unusual for a strategy document to be updated every five years. The first one was done in 2002, it's now 2007. The document was finished and soon as it was finished and all the "i"s were dotted and the "t"s were crossed, we were able to get that information out to you today.

Q So it's just a mere matter of coincidence?

MS. PERINO: I've not heard anything otherwise, no. There is a FISA debate coming up. We would have liked to have ended that debate in August by having the Intelligence Surveillance Act law become permanent. Unfortunately, Congress only gave us a six-month window, so we have to take that up again. And I think we'll start -- tomorrow I think there's a mark-up on Capitol Hill. So we'll take it from there.

Q Do you think anything in this report that comes out today should speak to members of Congress as they begin that debate?

MS. PERINO: Well, I think that -- I think that it's a thoughtful and well-discussed document within not just the federal government, but working with state and local governments, pulling in the different pieces of intelligence that we have from the National Intelligence Estimate and other places to find out what is our threat, how is it evolving and how do we make sure that we have a strategy to keep up with it; and that we're planning not only for terrorist attacks, but also for natural disaster catastrophes that could have struck our country, as well. We learned a lot from the Katrina lessons learned document, that was able to be inputted into this. Remember, the first document was 2002; Katrina happened in 2005; it's now 2007. So it's an appropriate time to update the document.

Mark.

Q The al-Masri case that the Supreme Court ruled on today -- since it's no longer before the courts, are you able to say anything more about it? Was this man, indeed, abducted? Was he mistreated? Was this a case of mistaken identity?

MS. PERINO: I am not in a position to say anything different, no.

Q Nothing at all?

MS. PERINO: I'll check and see if there's anything else, but I would doubt it. But let me check and see if there's anything more we can give. I am not prepared to at the moment.

Q What do you say to those who point to the history of the state secrets doctrine that was litigated in this case, and say this administration has used that doctrine far more than the previous ones?

MS. PERINO: Well, I would say that this is a country that's facing unprecedented threats that we've not dealt with before, in terms of al Qaeda and other terrorists. I believe that the Justice Department is judicious in applying the State Secrets Act when it goes in front of the courts. And the fact that the Supreme Court agreed with us is, in our opinion, a good thing.

Wendell.

Q When you refer questions about the leak of the bin Laden tape to DNI, is that a way of suggesting the leak might have come from DNI?

MS. PERINO: No, no. The Director of National Intelligence, as the overseer and coordinator of all intelligence agencies, that's the appropriate place for me to refer you.

Q You expressed concern about the leak. Is it because of the damage it may have done to SITE, or the damage it may have done to national counterterrorism efforts?

MS. PERINO: I think it would be both. I'm not an expert in -- as regards to how it affected this one particular company, though I read their account of it in the paper and have no reason to disagree with it. But I think from the larger context, what the President wants is to make sure that to the extent that the American public is alert and that they hear about a threat that they think that their federal government should know about, we want them to come forward and tell us about that.

Q And so the leak could discourage those efforts?

MS. PERINO: President Bush and this administration has felt strongly about leaks about classified information and intelligence. We don't think that it serves the American people well. And so that is the concern -- concern from that standpoint, as well, just on the overall issue of leaking of classified or intelligence information.

Q Following up on that, to what extent are you concerned that this story splashed on the front page of the Post and discussed here is going to put a chill into anyone's desire to share anything with the White House or with intelligence agencies?

MS. PERINO: I don't make editorial decisions at any of the nation's newspapers. This is a story that they had, and they ran with it. And I don't disagree with that.

Q I'm not talking about their motives. I'm talking about the fact that somebody in this administration leaked it. To what extent does that put a chill into anyone else --

MS. PERINO: As I said, we're concerned about it, and what we want is for the American people to know that if they have information they should feel comfortable to give it to us, and to make sure that their sources are protected. And so that's why I refer you to the department of national intelligence -- I'm sorry -- Director of National Intelligence and his office to see if there's going to be any additional follow-through or process evaluation or a leak investigation. We just don't do leak investigations out of here.

Q But can these people be assured of that, based on what's happened in this instance?

MS. PERINO: I think that -- well, I would hope so. I think that this is a very isolated incident, and I'm sure that the intelligence community takes it very seriously, as well.

Q Can I follow on that? Has it happened before? Is this the first time this has ever happened?

MS. PERINO: I don't know -- the first time that I'm aware of. I don't know if it's ever happened before.

Les.

Q Yes, thank you, Dana. Two questions. New York Governor Spitzer's approval of state driver's licenses for illegal aliens has been deplored by New York Mayors Koch, Giuliani and Bloomberg. And my question: Does the President agree with them, or with Spitzer?

MS. PERINO: We'll stick with our REAL ID Act which the President encouraged Congress to pass and that he signed into law.

Q The Washington Examiner reports that the White House has declined to comment on Chris Matthews' statements, "God help us if we had Cheney during the Cuban missile crisis. We'd all be under a parking lot," and the Bush administration has "finally been caught in their criminality." Why does the White House allow itself to be silenced by such accusations from this person?

MS. PERINO: I don't feel silenced. I just feel like it's not necessary for me to comment on a commentator's point of view.

Q Are you also silenced by the new Hillary Clinton campaign --

MS. PERINO: That's three. No more. (Laughter.) Goyal.

Q Wait a minute --

MS. PERINO: No, you tricked me -- you tricked me, I'm going to Goyal.

Q What about Sandy Berger? I mean, they had three --

MS. PERINO: I'm not commenting on Sandy Berger, either.

Q No comment on Sandy Berger?

MS. PERINO: No.

Q Two quick questions. One, there was a presidential election in Pakistan and General Musharraf received more votes, but there is no official statement yet. But last week, former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto was here and I talked to her, and what she said was -- a deal between the two are there, and she is returning -- but she said that U.S. should support the democracy in Pakistan, full democracy, not the General's military.

MS. PERINO: What's your question?

Q Well, what do we --

MS. PERINO: We do support full democracy.

Q -- the Prime Minister --

MS. PERINO: We do support the full democracy in Pakistan. We wanted there to be free and fair elections. And the Supreme Court is now -- in Pakistan -- is currently looking at that. And so until there's a final decision, we will decline to comment from here.

Q Second, on Burma. As far as the situation in Burma is concerned, it's not the first time this general, or dictator, in Burma -- in 1988 also he killed 3,000 innocent democratic people there -- democracy there. Now each time he does that, and then after killing scores of people and putting thousands in prison, and then everything is quiet and nobody talks about -- after 15 years.

MS. PERINO: What's your question, Goyal?

Q So where do we stand on this? And we'll continue like this, like innocent people will get killed, and then we'll just keep quiet after --

MS. PERINO: The President and Mrs. Bush feel very strongly that there should be an immediate move to a peaceful transition to democracy in Burma. And we are calling for an immediate return of U.N. Envoy Gambari to Burma in order to start to forge that peace.

Q Thank you.

END 12:47 P.M. EDT

Printer-Friendly Version Email This Page

President | Vice President | First Lady | Mrs. Cheney | News & Policies
History & Tours | Kids | Your Government | Appointments | Jobs | Contact | Text only
Accessibility | Search | Privacy Policy | Help | Site Map

[LoungeMachine]

Originally posted by LoungeMachine




Q Dana, you said this morning in the gaggle that the White House did not leak the information about the bin Laden tape. How do you know that?

MS. PERINO: Well, this is -- let me take you back. This is the -- there was a private company that contacted the White House to let us know that they had found the Osama bin Laden tape, asked us if we wanted to have the federal government review it. When -- the standard practice at the White House is to take that phone call -- to take that request and direct it to -- directly to the DNI's office. So we do not ask to have that information just solely reviewed at the White House, we immediately turn it over to the National Center for Counterterrorism.

That's what Fred Fielding and Joel Bagnal did, the two people who were aware of the link. And it went to the DNI -- I'm sorry -- it went to the NCTC. And to the extent that we have Americans coming forward to provide us information, whether it be a private citizen or a private cooperation, or anybody in America that can provide the government information, we take it very seriously that they should, one, feel comfortable that in providing that information, that their sources will be protected; and that we will act on it, if necessary. We appreciate what they did. This was a cause of concern that the information was leaked. And I would have to refer to the DNI's office in regards to any possible investigation into that leak.

Q But I guess my question is, Fielding and Bagnal both knew about the information; you're positive they didn't leak it or take it --

MS. PERINO: Correct.

Q -- or take it further than the DNI's office?

MS. PERINO: We asked that the company contact NCTC directly and get that information to them directly.

Q So they didn't contact NCTC, the SITE company did. Who did Fielding and Bagnal contact? DNI?

MS. PERINO: I would check on that. I know that they asked for the company that called to contact NCTC directly. I don't know who else they might have called within our government -- possibly the DNI's counsel's office. But I'm not positive. I can check.

Q My question is, you're saying they contacted these other places. The company asked them not to. So how do you know that the leak didn't come --

MS. PERINO: No, no, we asked --

Q -- from Fielding or --

MS. PERINO: Because I've talked to Fred.

Q Okay, that's my question.

MS. PERINO: I have talked to Fred. And what we do is we ask -- the call comes in from the company, and then Fred said, we'd like for the federal government to be able to look at this, thank you, but don't send it to me, send it directly to the NCTC -- the National Center for Counterterrorism -- which was what was -- taken place here.




How many times did she change her story there ???

:confused:

[Ellyllions]

I'd like to see that interview footage.
Then we could tell if she was lying, dodging, or just ill-informed.

That article on MSNBC on 9/20 made it pretty clear how the Bin Laden video was aquired. Whether the mom in that article works for a company contracted to troll the internet or not, remains to be seen. But if I were a terrorist and saw that article I'd know exactly what was going on.

[LoungeMachine]

Originally posted by Ellyllions
I'd like to see that interview footage.
Then we could tell if she was lying, dodging, or just ill-informed.



She was so obviously lying....

I've seen the vid.

Let me see if I can find it again

[LoungeMachine]

Here's the little hottie, lying through her pretty teeth...


<object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/SSBqJJ33Cy4"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/SSBqJJ33Cy4" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"></embed></object>

[FORD]

There's a reason why Malloy calls her "Too Much Cappucino Perino"


Didn't she graduate from Pat Robertson's Regent "University", or was that some other BCE Valley Girl?

[ODShowtime]

still incompetent after all of these years

[Ellyllions]

Ok, after watching the video, here's what I think...

She's trying real hard for everything she says to be "positive". She does a couple of public speaking tactics before she's even asked the first questions. She smiles surreptitiously several times. She takes a long look at her notes while a question is being asked. Both of these indicate that she's trying to remind herself to stay on target with the target being that she's been instructed to create a "positive" appearance on anything she says. Kind of like a "no bad news allowed today" instruction.

I think that lady in that MSNBC article found the "tape". Called the White House and the White House said, "Thanks but we don't want it, call the Counter-Terrorism unit and tell them."

Then the Counter-Terrorism unit was given the "idea" that it would be cool if the public knew that common American citizens were "united in the War front". Besides, the President's approval ratings have bottomed out because of the War, and the White House refuses to be wrong...so, the lady in the article was contacted by a reporter.

What they failed to perceive is that Al-Queda has internet access too, and even though the communications from Al-Queda has proven time and time again that they're educated on current events here in the US. So the White House's plan backfired yet again and this time it cost them a complete blackout.