The Washington Independent - Latest Comments in Intelligence Matters: Oh Dear God Not Jami Miscik

Re: Intelligence Matters: Oh Dear God Not Jami Miscik

Isamar — Thu, 18 Dec 2008 17:29:17 -0000

Obviously, you don't know Jami Miscik. I worked directly with her at the CIA a few years ago, and I can honestly say that personally, Ms. Miscik is one of the most honest, responsible, intelligent, and righteous person I have ever worked with. She's been wrongly accused. In my opinion, it was the Bush Administration that distored things. Think about it, it's not unlikely. Just imagine the scandal; it's always easier to blame it on somebody else.

Re: Intelligence Matters: Oh Dear God Not Jami Miscik

Tue, 25 Nov 2008 17:39:04 -0000

WRONG ON 9/11
WRONG ON WMD
WRONG AT LEHMAN BROTHERS....

Re: Intelligence Matters: Oh Dear God Not Jami Miscik

Tue, 25 Nov 2008 17:37:06 -0000

absolutely true! amazing that she can still have lunch in this town

Re: Intelligence Matters: Oh Dear God Not Jami Miscik

Northern_Virginian — Mon, 24 Nov 2008 17:41:10 -0000

Spencer: You try hard, you write provocative pieces in generally clear narrative prose, and I enjoyed your coverage of the disastrous Goss regime at CIA - but you have some very, very lousy sources, which plagued even your generally admirable Goss-era reporting, who are probably several degrees of separation from people and events and who apparently report rumint and grousing back to you. One immense problem in most media reporting on intelligence topics is that the incomplete mosaics journalists put together and that finally "make sense" to them after having turned the compilation this way and that, trying to find the best angle, remain woefully incomplete - yet you're down for having to say something against your deadline or simply to close off a story you know you'll never really be able to conclude satisfactorily. (Not unlike actual intelligence writing, which characteristically draws on incomplete, contradictory, fragmentary sources.) You're very wrong on Miscik - full disclosure: I know her and may thus be considered biased - and, I would surmise from your incompletely-baked opinion of her, that you have neither spoken to her nor to any one of her direct reports (or even indirect reports) or superiors but instead have gleaned your views from all the old hangers on who pretend to still have "connections." And since when have any politicized congressional or special committee reports been an absolute window on truth? (And by the way, I share your admiration for Siobhan Gorman, a terrific, and very careful, national security reporter.)

Re: Intelligence Matters: Oh Dear God Not Jami Miscik

Steve Williams — Fri, 14 Nov 2008 08:50:29 -0000

You could not be more wrong. Miscik is an Americanhero. She was forced out of the CIA by Cheney et al after she refused to release partial data that would have misled the American people into believing Al Qaeda was in Iraq before the war. This is public knowledge. Your journalist skills are lacking.

Re: Intelligence Matters: Oh Dear God Not Jami Miscik

at — Wed, 12 Nov 2008 22:15:39 -0000

You are flat out wrong on this. Miscik was a fair and honest analyst in the Iraq fiasco. Check your facts with someone who knows.

Re: Intelligence Matters: Oh Dear God Not Jami Miscik

joe styles — Wed, 12 Nov 2008 01:56:21 -0000

What I heard is not what you accuse Miscik of. Bush Administration and Cheney wanted Iraq, Al Qaeda analysis to be their way and did not give Miscik time and right resource to give the best accurate intelligence. The administration misused the Pentagon to misinfor America and the rest is history.

Re: Intelligence Matters: Oh Dear God Not Jami Miscik

aaaaa — Tue, 11 Nov 2008 23:04:56 -0000

Enjoy your imaginary president!

Re: Intelligence Matters: Oh Dear God Not Jami Miscik

scott — Tue, 11 Nov 2008 15:50:01 -0000

On the Saturday night before the election, my wife & I were out to dinner with her friends and their husbands. I was roundly criticized for my intention to vote for Nader.

When after 20 Jan may I expect an apology? Probably about half-past Never O'clock, I presume.