Judith Miller and London

On this morning of tragedy in London Judy Miller may not seem important, but she is. We must ask ourselves why London happened. Like New York 911 and Madrid 311 the root cause of the London attack goes back 80 plus years when Europe and the United States recognized the importance of the oil in the middle east. Since then every attempt has been made to control that oil through tyrant's and monarchs put in place and propped up by the west. The disaster of 911 was as much about the House of Saud as it was about the United States. The disaster in London today is a direct result of Bush and Blair's misadventure in Iraq and that adventure was all about oil. That misadventure has inflamed the huge Islamic community throughout the world and made the world a much more dangerous place.

That brings us back to Judith Miller. Judith Miller has not been and perhaps never has acted like a journalist or a reporter. She has always been a right wing neocon shill masquerading as a journalist. Attywood sums up Judith Miller very well:

But the Times' Judy Miller has not been afflicting the comfortable. She has been protecting them, advancing their objectives, and helping them to mislead a now very afflicted American public. In fact, thinking again about Watergate and Deep Throat is a good way to understand why Judy Miller should not be protected today. Because in Watergate, a reporter acting like Miller would not be meeting the FBI's Mark Felt in an underground parking garage. She would be obsessively on the phone with H.R. Haldeman or John Dean, listening to malicious gossip about Carl Bernstein or their plans to make Judge Sirica look bad.

In the run-up to the Iraq war, Miller -- working with her "sources" inside the Bush administration and their friends in the Iraqi exile community like the discredited Ahmed Chalabi -- wrote a number of stories that now seem meant to dupe the American people into to thinking Iraqi weapons of mass destruction were a threat.

Turns out, as you know, there weren't any. When the Times looked back on the fiasco, it found that Miller wrote or co-wrote nine of the "problematic stories" on the topic.

The fact that The New York Times continues to to support Miller and be outraged at her incarceration says a lot for the Times and the US Media in general. Miller was not protecting a whistleblower:

Instead, the special prosecutor wants to know about conversations that Miller had with a person, or persons, who wanted to squash the whistleblowers. He wants to know if Miller, perhaps unwittingly, abetted what would have been a criminal act against the whistleblower and his family. In fact, there's a theory that Miller might even have been a person who told Bush administration officials that Plame was a CIA agent.

Is the person Judy protecting Judy herself?