Quote:
|
Originally Posted by powerclown
Elphaba, I think all of us here would be very interested to hear about these alterior motives you speak of. I do wonder if she is ONLY standing on priniciple. Some have been known to voluntarily go to jail to escape something or someone. Do tell!  |
I gave up on searching my trash and googled for "Judith Miller WMD" and found numerous articles. The first article is far too long to post here, but here is a relevant snippet. (I can't get a good link for some reason).
______________________________________________________________
The Source of the Trouble
Pulitzer Prize winner Judith Miller’s series of exclusives about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq—courtesy of the now-notorious Ahmad Chalabi—helped the New York Times keep up with the competition and the Bush administration bolster the case for war. How the very same talents that caused her to get the story also caused her to get it wrong.
By Franklin Foer
:snip:
The phrase “among others” is a highly evocative one. Because that list of credulous Chalabi allies could include the New York Times’ own reporter, Judith Miller. During the winter of 2001 and throughout 2002, Miller produced a series of stunning stories about Saddam Hussein’s ambition and capacity to produce weapons of mass destruction, based largely on information provided by Chalabi and his allies—almost all of which have turned out to be stunningly inaccurate.
For the past year, the Times has done much to correct that coverage, publishing a series of stories calling Chalabi’s credibility into question. But never once in the course of its coverage—or in any public comments from its editors—did the Times acknowledge Chalabi’s central role in some of its biggest scoops, scoops that not only garnered attention but that the administration specifically cited to buttress its case for war.
The longer the Times remained silent on Chalabi’s importance to Judith Miller’s reporting, the louder critics howled. In February, in the New York Review of Books, Michael Massing held up Miller as evidence of the press’s “submissiveness” in covering the war. For more than a year, Slate’s Jack Shafer has demanded the paper come clean.
But finally, with Chalabi’s fall from grace so complete—the Pentagon has cut off his funding, troops smashed his portrait in raids of the INC office—the Times’ refusal to concede its own complicity became untenable. Last week, on page A10, the paper published a note on its coverage, drafted by executive editor Bill Keller himself. The paper singled out pieces that relied on “information from a circle of Iraqi informants, defectors, and exiles bent on ‘regime change.’ ” The note named Ahmad Chalabi as a central player in this group.
________________________________________________________________
The short of it is that Miller's reputation was seriously damaged. Marching into jail holding her head high may serve to burnish her reputation. Honorable? Perhaps. Cooper's source has released him. Considering the Miller claimed to have talked to sources, but never wrote anything about the Plame case strikes me as very odd.
My apologies if this has gone too far off from the original thread.