Ace of Spades HQ

« Aaron's Rules of Media Evidence | Main | al-Sistani Supports New Iraqi Government »

June 03, 2004

Even Joshua Micah Marshall Can't Help But Imagine Chalabi's Been Set-Up

Okay. So here's the story: Achmed Chalabi told the Iranians that we had broken one of the most important codes they use for transmitting high-level intelligence orders.

So, what did the Iranians then do? They transmitted a message back to Teheran stating that Achmed Chalabi had told them that a certain code and been broken by Americans, and that the Americans were, therefore, reading all traffic in that code.

Okay. Fine. But guess which code they used to communicate this incredibly-sensitive information?

The very same code that the message was informing Teheran had been broken.

Anyone see an, err, problem here?

This is almost childlessly transparent. It's obviously disinformation-- sending false information in an insecure code which you know has been broken and is being read by the enemy.

In fact, the only thing which makes this somewhat believable is that it's so ludicrously transparent that it's almost too obvious it's disinformation, and therefore, maybe, what the hell?, perhaps it's just a colossal screw-up by the Iranians.

I've got no particular love of Achmed Chalabi. But if this is what the CIA thinks is "evidence" against Chalabi, then we've got to clean this agency out from top to bottom.

When even left-wing conspiracy-monger and longtime Chalabi-hater Josh Marshall thinks the evidence is hinky, it's time to reconsider how strong the case against Chalabi is.

Here's Joshy:

A couple thoughts on the charges against Chalabi.

Chalabi's advocates are arguing that the case against him simply makes no sense. If Chalabi had told this Iranian in Baghdad that we'd cracked one of their codes, why would he turn around and use that code to inform his masters in Tehran?

My answer? Good question. I have no idea.

Well. Thanks for clearing that up, O Wise One.

He then goes on to argue that this doesn't make any sense, but it's true anyway.

posted by Ace at 06:15 PM

Comments

One possible explanation could be arrogance. The Iranians might have thought that Chalabi was just trying to get in good with them so he could get some info for the US and thus didn't believe him about the US having broken the code.

Or, it could be just plain ole stupidity. That well never goes dry for humanity.

I'm not saying this is a sure thing (Chalabi being guilty) but I do think that there might be a simpler explanation to all this than smoke and mirror. If it turns out that my thinking is incorrect, I'll be happy to admit it.

Phoenix

Posted by: Phoenix on June 3, 2004 07:37 PM

Look, they obviously don't know anything about intelligence work. It's an XK Red 27 technique...
http://www.moviewavs.com/cgi-bin/mp3s.cgi?Fish_Called_Wanda=fw7.mp3

Posted by: george gaskell on June 3, 2004 07:39 PM

Never attribute to malice what can adquadetely be explained by stupidity, ignorance, or a bad day.

As for Marshall, well, blind pigs and truffles, stopped clocks twice a day, etc.

Posted by: Mr. Bowen on June 3, 2004 08:18 PM

Never attribute to malice what can adquadetely be explained by stupidity, ignorance, or a bad day.

But that rule doesn't apply at all in espionage, where "malice" and deliberate deception are done 6000 times per day.

See, espionage agencies really are engaged in illegal conspiracies. That's their raison d'etre.

If they weren't conspiring to break the laws of foreign countries, you'd fire the chief.

So one isn't a conspiracy-monger to suggest that, gee, maybe when the Iranians transmitted a signal in a code they knew was compromised, maybe the intended it to be read. That kind of thing is done every day.

Posted by: ace on June 3, 2004 09:17 PM

Actually, as I said, this was done in such a flabbergastingly ham-handed manner that the only real evidence that this is NOT disinformation is that it so clearly IS.

Posted by: ace on June 3, 2004 09:22 PM

Exactly like they said in "A Fish Called Wanda" -- it's a double bluff!

Posted by: george gaskell on June 3, 2004 11:06 PM

Is it possible the Iranians were looking to a) get rid of Chalabi and also b) find out if the US had broken their code? Could we have played right into their hands?

Posted by: Golden Boy on June 4, 2004 12:06 AM

Is it possible the Iranians were looking to a) get rid of Chalabi and also b) find out if the US had broken their code? Could we have played right into their hands?

No.

Here's the thing: It's very valuable to know that the enemy has broken a secure code. You can continue using it for low-level intelligence stuff -- just to convince the enemy you still believe it's secure -- while occasionally using to pass them disinformation which is likely to be believed.

The Iranians would want to protect their own intelligence coup -- to wit, that they knew the code was broken.

Would they want to test to see if the code was broken? Would they want to pass disinformation in the broken code?

Yes and yes, but they'd do it without revealing that they knew the code was broken.

They could pass any sort of false information likely to provoke some sort of response or comment to uthe US in that code, and then wait to see if a response or comment was forthcoming.

It doesn't make sense that they would give up their intelligence asset in the process of doing so.

Plus, look, if this crap is true -- that Chalabi told them the code was broken -- then what the hell are they doing telling us that? Why are they exposing their own valuable intelligence agent? Why are they giving up their own secret that they know we're reading their traffic?

Why would they test the code's integrity by passing along true information that was so important to them?

Posted by: ace on June 4, 2004 01:27 AM

dental health is important to dentists and your oral wellbeing and healthy teeth

Posted by: dental plan on July 13, 2004 10:38 PM

my friends and I really enjoy this

Posted by: police boots on July 15, 2004 12:25 AM

Oh no! Hamas' de facto press agent at the UN complains that she can't use her credit cards or rent a card now that she's been sanctioned as a terrorist operative
Why does this keep happening to members of the "political organization" (per Tucker Carlson) of Hamas?!?!

Tucker Carlson claims that it's weird that Ted Cruz is interested in the massacre of Christians by Nigerian Muslims, because he has "no track record of being interested in Christians," then blows off the massacre of Christians by Nigerian Muslims, saying it might or might not be a real concern
Tucker Carlson enjoys using the left-wing tactic of "Tactical Ignorance" to avoid taking positions on topics. Is Hamas really a terrorist organization? Tucker can't say. He hasn't looked into it enough, but "it seems like a political organization to me." Are Muslims slaughtering Christians in Nigeria? Again, Tucker just doesn't know. He hasn't examined the evidence yet. He knows every Palestinian Christian who said he was blocked from visiting holy sites in Bethlehem, but he just hasn't had the time to look into the mass slaughter of Christians in Nigeria that has been going on since (checks watch) 2009. He doesn't know, so he can't offer an opinion. Wouldn't be prudent, you know? Don't rush him! He'll sift through the evidence at some point in the future and render an opinion sometime around 2044.
Of course, if you need an opinion on Jewish Perfidy, he has all the facts at his fingertips and can give you a fully informed opinion pronto. Say, have you ever heard of the USS Liberty incident...?
You'd think that the main issue for Tucker Carlson, who pretends to be so deeply concerned about Palestinian Christians being bullied by Jews in Israel (supposedly), would be the massacre of 185,000 Christians in Nigeria itself. But no, his main problem is that Ted Cruz is talking about it, "who has no track record of being interested in Christians at all." And then he just shrugs as to whether this is even a real issue or not.
Whatever we do we must never "divide the right," huh?
Tucker is attacking Ted Cruz for bringing the issue up because he's acting as an apologist for Jihadism, and he can't cleanly admit that Jihadists are killing any Christians, anywhere. There is no daylight between him and CAIR at this point.
One might conclude that Tucker Carlson himself isn't interested in the plight of Christians -- except as they can be used as a cudgel to attack Jews.
Just gonna ask an Interesting Question myself -- why is it that Tucker Carlson's arguments all track with those shit out by Qatarian propaganda agents and the far left? That if Jews crush an ant underfoot it is worldwide news, but when Muslims slaughter Christians it elicits not even a vigorous shrug?

Sydney Sweeney has passed from celebrity to Meme Legend

Garth Merenghi is interviewed by the only man who can fathom his ineffable brilliance -- Garth Merenghi
From the comments:

I once glimpsed Garth in the penumbra betwixt my wake and sleep. He was in my dream, standing afar, not looking my way, nor did he acknowledge me. But I felt seen. And that's when I knew I was a traveler on the right path. I'm glad he's still with us.

Now that's some Merenghian prose.
Garth Merenghi on the writer's craft

Greetings, Traveler. If you still have not experienced Garth Merenghi -- Author, Dream-weaver, Visionary, plus Actor -- the six episodes of his Darkplace are still available on YouTube and supposedly upscaled to HD. (Viewing it now, it doesn't appeared upscaled for shit.)
I think the second episode, "Hell Hath Fury," is the best by a good margin. Try to at least watch through to that one. It's Mereghi's incisive but nuanced take on sexism.

TJM Returns with a discussion of Auteur Theory.

Podcast: The elections! NYC, Virginia, New Jersey, Texas, California, and the future prospects of the Republican party...

Update on Scott Adams:

Scott Adams had approval for this cancer drug but they hadn't scheduled him to get it. He was taking a turn for the worse. Trump had told him to call if he needed anything, so he did. Talked to Don Jr (who is in Africa) , then RFK Jr, then Dr Oz. Someone talked to Kaiser and he was scheduled. Shouldn't have needed it but he did and he says it saved his life.
Posted by: Notsothoreau

"Trump" goes trick-or-treating

Funny retro kid costumes, thanks to SMH
Good to see people honoring Lamont the Big Dummy

Four hours of retro Halloween commercials and specials
The first short is the original 1996 appearance of "Sam," the dangerous undead trick-or-treater from Trick r' Treat.

ICYMI: Australian journalist actually presses Kamala Harris when she repeatedly dodges questions about Biden's mental fitness
Kamala admits she didn't have the stamina to run for president, while continuing to insist he had the mental capacity to serve as president. He was too frail to run but perfectly strong enough to govern. Yeah sure whatever lying whore.

On Wednesday, we'll see the "Beaver Super-Moon." Which sounds hot.

Podcast: Historian and Pundit Robert Spencer joins us for a wide-ranging discussion about the Islamists in our midst: Mamdani in NYC, all across Europe, and others.

Full Episode: The Hardy Boys (and Nancy Drew) Meet Dracula
I don't remember this show, except for remembering that Nancy Drew was hot and the opening credits were foreboding and exicting

According to Grok, Latrine John-Pissoir has never failed to mention she is "black" (or "queer") during her book interviews
She may not know what the hell her book is about, but she definitely knows that "every day I wake up black and queer." Join the club, sister!

Schmoll: 53% of New Jersey likely voters say their neighbors are voting for Ciattarelli, while 47% say the cheater/grifter Mikie Sherrill
The "who do you think your neighbors are voting for" question is designed to avoid the Shy Tory problem, wherein conservative people lie to schmollsters because they don't want to go on record with a likely left-winger telling them who they're really voting for. So instead the question is who do you think your neighbors are voting for, so people can talk about who they themselves support without actually having to admit it to a left-wing rando stranger recording their answers on the phone.

Hackers take over University of Penn website, calling the school a "dogshit elitist institution full of woke retards" and threatening to release its admissions files to prove illegal racial discrimination
No lies detected so far

Live Now: Dana Loesch is interrogating Heritage President Kevin Roberts on his insistence that the gay Nazi Nick Fuentes is an absolutely essential "conservative" voice whose ideas we must take seriously and who we must absolutely not exclude based on his Naziism

TJM Complains about Wreck-It Ralph The very topical premiere of TJM's YouTube Channel.

Interesting football history: How the forward pass was created in response to the nineteen -- 19! -- people killed playing football in 1905 alone
The original rules of football did not allow forward passes. The ball was primarily advanced by running, with blockers forming lines with interlocked arms and just smashing into the similarly-interlocked defensive lines. It was basically Greek hoplite spear formations but with a semi-spherical ball. As calls to ban the sport entirely grew, some looked for ways to de-emphasize mass charges as the primary means of advancing the ball, and some specifically championed allowing a passer to throw the ball forward.