A wild guess who 'Anonymous' is...

[WilliamPitt]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A16750-2004Jun4.html

CIA to Lose Deputy for Operations

Reuters
Saturday, June 5, 2004; Page A04

One day after George J. Tenet announced his resignation as CIA director, the U.S. spy agency said yesterday that James L. Pavitt, deputy director for operations, will retire soon after 31 years.

Pavitt, 58, decided to retire about a month ago, and his departure is not related to Tenet's resignation, the CIA said in a statement. With the departure of Tenet and Pavitt, new leaders will hold two of the agency's top spots at a time of heightened security.

Pavitt has served as operations director at the CIA for five years and was deputy operations director for two years before that. He joined the agency in 1973 and had intelligence assignments in Europe, Asia and at CIA headquarters. He also worked in the National Security Council of President George H.W. Bush.

...more...

==

It's difficult to gather any substantive data on this fellow, besides his rah-rah statement to the 9/11 commission. He quits, and then a book is released by a high-up, hardcore CIA person.

Hmm...

Tell me I'm wrong, or prove me right.

[Pachamama]

1. Do you have a picture of Pavitt? Me thinks your right...

...and that Anonymous II is Tenet....

:hi:

[Swamp Rat]

2. You mean the Mr. Anonymous that spoke with Blumenthal?

[WilliamPitt]

4. This guy

[Swamp Rat]

6. Well, I won't challenge you

I'll be VERY happy that you're right.

I read the 50 pg. Gonzales memorandum last night. Gonzales and his lawyer buddies can "conclude" all they want. This will not absolve them of war crimes. Their determinations are based on "extreme" interpretations and neglect any cultural implications. I wonder what their defense will be pursuant to article 87? "We're at war?"

I think Blumenthal's last statement is spot-on:

"Bush's battle is not with image, but with the unraveling of his reality."

[Pachamama]

7. Hi Swamp Rodent and WillPitt! Who are you guessing as Anonymous?

Spot on about Gonzales and the rest of those "Gentle Souls" who interpreted the law on torture...

Blumenthal is who exactly???

[Swamp Rat]

9. There's a DU post by Beetwasher in GD

Here's the Guardian article that Beetwasher posted that's making the buzz right now:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/print/0,3858,4955048-103677,00.html

How's it going Pachamama?


Edited because I can't type

[Pachamama]

10. Mui Bueno Senor Swamp....Como estas?

Mein Spanish is sehr schlecht...

Thanks for the link...I'm good - I just sent you an email (not a PM)

[Swamp Rat]

11. Bien pura vida!

Viel danke. Was ist der Unterschied zwischen einem PM und einem email?

Como posso verificar o email?

[Pachamama]

13. La Differencia..

PM goes into the DU Inbox that you can check at the top of your page...The other email goes to the email you use and registered your DU account with...these tend to work better at getting people's attention since not everyone checks the DU inbox regularly, but maybe their email prompts them that a new message has arrived...

[Swamp Rat]

12. Bien pura vida!

Viel danke. Was ist der Unterschied zwischen einem PM und einem email?

Como posso verificar o email?

[WilliamPitt]

3. Nope

[FlemingsGhost]

5. Could be.

If he turns up missing or in the trunk of a car, you'll know you are correct.

[shraby]

8. I was thinking it is probably Tenet,

but didn't think about Pavitt. The one talking is probably a stand in for Anonymous.

[paulthompson]

14. Not Pavitt

Or if it's him, he's mighty hypocritical. Here's what Richard Clarke has to say about him in his book, after saying good things about Cofer Black:

"Unfortunately, Black reported to Tenet through the CIA's Deputy Director for Operations, Jim Pavitt, and Pavitt thought both Tenet and I were exaggerating the whole al-Qaeda threat and would get the CIA in trouble."

Pavitt is mentioned one other time in the book, speaking out against the use of the Predator drone to attack bin Laden. Sounds like a real stick in the mud loser.

[SoCalDem]

15. He wears glasses, and has short hair

That's all I could tell from the silhouette:)

[paulthompson]

16. Does he look like this?

http://multimedia.lycos.com/results.asp?lpv=1&loc=searchhp&tab=image&query=james+pavitt&x=0&y=0

Pavitt is in the striped tie.

[AlCzervik]

28. Thats gotta be him!

[enough]

17. NPR interviewed him this morning, saying that his first name is MIKE.

The interviewer said it as if that was his real name, not a pseudonym. It was mentioned at the beginning and the end of the segment.

The NPR interview focused almost entirely on his super-warlike recommendations future US action, almost nothing on his criticisms of the way things have been done by Bushco

[KoKo]

18. The "super war" recommendations have turned me off "Anonymous" but

I need to read more. So much is disinformation that it takes time or really reading the book to see what the truth is.

It's odd to me that "Anonymous" keeps getting interviewed and yet is supposed to be "Anonymous." I don't remember Klien being interviewed for his book about Clinton (Primary Colors) when he was anonymous. There was speculation all over for a couple of months before it was revealed, but was focused on the book itself without the interviews.

[ClassWarrior]

30. Wolff Blitzkrieg, I think it was, said that the spooks refer...

...to any unnamed agent as Mike.

[Generic Other]

19. Does he have a beard and close cropped hair?

I saw a silhouette that revealed stubble. Also glasses.

[never cry wolf]

20. Don't think so

Unless he is being less than truthful about his service time in his interview with Andrea Mitchell:

Anonymous: "Well, I've been in the intelligence community for 22 years. My background is I was trained as a historian, British imperial history. But I've been here since 1982 and have had a very good career."

Mitchell: "Starting in 1996, the CIA decided to create a station devoted to Osama bin Laden. Why?"

Anonymous: "I think it was created because the intelligence community had turned up bits and pieces of information in multiple areas of the world, after the end of the Afghan war, that indicated bin Laden was involved in one way or another with various Islamist groups who were opposing the Egyptian government or the Saudi government, the Yemeni government. And it was decided to try to make a concerted effort against this individual, to see where it would lead, to see if he was either a spendthrift billionaire, or if he was a serious military-minded opponent of the United States. And that was, I think, the genesis of the effort."

Mitchell: "Now, you were placed in charge of this station, the first time that the CIA developed a station just devoted to a man, to a person, not to a country."

Anonymous: "That's what I understand, yes."

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5279743/

[PurityOfEssence]

21. Why on earth would you want to "out" this person?

Do you want to endanger him? Assuredly, many nasty sorts already know who he is, but until he's named--and hence has his credibility enhanced--he's at least somewhat safe. The CIA is closing ranks and going after the administration, as many of us on this board have predicted for a couple of years now, but I'm sure it's far from a unanimous effort. What this person has done is brave and VERY serious; if the right can marginalize him as someone who either doesn't really exist or isn't all that important, he's safer and more may come forward. If people try to identify him, this is much more uncertain.

Yeah, this is normal human nature, but please stop. If this is in any way vanity compelled, please stop; you're good enough, credible enough and famous enough without doing this.

[WilliamPitt]

22. Heh

Yessss, precious, it is vanity-compelled. Or maybe I'm just posting on a message board.

[DrBB]

25. Go ahead and out the bastid

From Anonymous, via TPM:

Without the option to work for reform, a large portion of what Anonymous advocates is essentially a policy of brutal and unforgiving war:

To secure as much of our way of life as possible, we will have to use military force in the way Americans used it on the fields of Virginia and Georgia, in France and on Pacific islands, and from skies over Tokyo and Dresden. Progress will be measured by the pace of killing …

Killing in large numbers is not enough to defeat our Muslim foes. With killing must come a Sherman-like razing of infrastructure. Roads and irrigation systems; bridges, power plants, and crops in the field; fertilizer plants and grain mills--all these and more will need to be destroyed to deny the enemy its support base. … Such actions will yield large civilian casualties, displaced populations, and refugee flows....

I posted this on another thread as well. I think people need to start taking a clearer look at this guy. Not all who criticize the Chimp are necessarily allies.

[indigobusiness]

26. His anonymity is procedural, not actual.

His identity will be known by all soon. He was just forced to play by the rules, and the controversy only helps.

[DrBB]

23. Whoever he is, he ain't MY hero

Given that what he's been saying is that we now have no choice but to engage in all-out, scorched-earth war against Islam, I'm like, not so utterly thrilled with him. Kinda outweighs all that stuff about what a clusterfuck Bush has made of our ME policy, important as it is.

[Redleg]

27. I think Anonymous was being a bit tongue in cheek.

My sense of his statement is that now that things are all balled up in Iraq it will take a scorched earth action to end it. I may be wrong.

[DrBB]

32. Whatever it is, it isn't a joke

There's been a lot of discussion of this question in the blogosphere. Kevin Drum talked to Ackerman (who did the TPM interview), and here's Ackerman's reply, including a quote from Anonymous:

While it’s not totally clear, I think a fair reading is that Anonymous thinks the choice we face is between more-total war and less-total war. He writes on page 250 (of my galley copy of Imperial Hubris):

So, what does it mean to be at war with Islam? First, it means we must accept this reality and act accordingly. Second, it means a U.S. policy status quo in the Muslim world ensures a gradually intensifying war for the foreseeable future, one that will be far more costly than we now imagine. Third, it means we will have to publicly address issues — support for Israel, energy self-sufficiency, and the worldwide applicability of our democracy — long neglected and certain to raise bitter, acrimonious debates that will decide whether the American way of life survives or shrinks to a crabbed, fearful, and barely recognizable form.

As that passage indicates, and as he reiterates in the portion of the interview I posted, he thinks there indeed are steps we can take to mitigate the scope of the war: namely, seeking energy independence and disengaging ourselves (to an unspecified degree) from Israel, Russia, China, India and Arab/Muslim tyrannies.

It's a bit nuanced. But I DON'T think this guy is on "our" side. He's among the hawkiest hawks out there.

[Beetwasher]

24. I Thought I Read That Anonymous Is Still An Active Agent?

:shrug:

[GiovanniC]

29. So 'Anonymous' Is a CIA Agent

Currently active, served since 1982, named Mike (hi Other Agent Mike!), with access to certain kinds of information and the ability to write this kind of book.

We're talking about the CIA -- how hard would it be for them to figure out who this guy is?

Is this another "intelligence failure"?

[never cry wolf]

31. Not only that

From my post above from his interview his backgroung was as an historian.

Anonymous: "Well, I've been in the intelligence community for 22 years. My background is I was trained as a historian, British imperial history. But I've been here since 1982 and have had a very good career."


I am afraid that those who are in the know in the intel community would not have a hard time figuring this one out.