Peter Lance to Patrick Fitzgerald: "Either put up or shut up"

(Peter Lance took note of my Daily Kos diary entry titled "The Wreck of the Patrick Fitzgerald", and although he and I might never agree on the true nature of "al Qaeda", there is something fundamentally wrong about the way that Patrick Fitzgerald has gone after Lance and HarperCollins, threatening legal action if the trade paperback version of Triple Cross saw the light of day. It seems to me that somebody wants the information in Triple Cross suppressed. In my opinion, it is the story of Ali Mohamed, still unknown to so many Americans, and other people around the world, that is causing such a fuss. Anyhow, take a look at Lance's latest article, and decide for yourself just what is going on here. -rep.)

"Mr. Fitz, in your threat to sue for libel, please, either put up or shut up"

by Peter Lance - July 15th, 2009

Seven weeks ago Patrick Fitzgerald, the most intimidating Federal prosecutor in America, sent my publisher (HarperCollins) and me a letter threatening to sue us for libel if Triple Cross, a book I wrote, critical of his anti-terrorism track record, was published.

Yesterday marked the four week anniversary of the book's pub date and although it's been out for a month, we're still waiting for his summons and complaint.

It was the fourth threat letter that Fitzgerald had sent since October 2007 and the man who’d succeeded in getting New York Times reporter Judith Miller jailed for 85 days in the CIA leak probe, was growing impatient.

"To put it plain and simple," Fitzgerald wrote, "if in fact you publish the book this month and it defames me or casts me in a false light, HarperCollins will be sued." ...


Good job...

Getting his attention Reprehensor.

Do these people deserve to know how and why their loved ones were murdered? Do we deserve to know how and why 9/11 happened?

What this is

(Emphasis mine)

In effect, the Feds had bought his silence with that deal. Today, Mohamed is hidden away in some kind of custodial witness protection -- perhaps the greatest enigma in the "war on terror."
This ex-al Qaeda spy is a one man 9/11 Commission who could stand witness to the failures and screw ups of the FBI and Southern District Feds on the road to September 11th, but there are seals upon seals on his case.
While no one invites litigation I, for one, would welcome a chance to sit across a legal conference table where you would be compelled to testify at a deposition under oath. Maybe then you'd tell the full truth about how it was that the best and the brightest in the FBI and SDNY were so outgunned for so long by al Qaeda and its master spy.

Witness protection?? "Failures and screw ups"?? "Outgunned"??

I don't know about you, but this is how this makes me feel:

Criminal cover-up. Protection of a mass murderer. Limited hangout, incompetence theory, basically a bunch of BULL-SHIT! Somebody tell me HOW this man ends up being "protected". He's a goddamn Al Qaeda mastermind! I know why. Because the CIA and the FBI infiltrated Al Qaeda, not the other way around.

Able Danger?

I agree with SnowCrash

You said it well.

Incidentally, why do we even use the bogus term Al Qaeda? Isn't this a bullshit propganda name made up by Americans? I think it would be more accurate to say Mujahideen or maybe CIA operatives.

I generally...

Refer to "Al-Qaeda" in quotes.

Do these people deserve to know how and why their loved ones were murdered? Do we deserve to know how and why 9/11 happened?

Look at how the treatment of Mohamed

contrasts to the use of torture. Or look at the contrast between Mohamed's treatment and that of Soviet/Russia mole Robert Hannsen. Then we have the CIA withholding information about known al Qaeda operatives for 20 months even though the CIA told us al Qaeda was one of their highest concerns.

Whose side is the CIA on?


And the CIA hasnt been the big dog in the list of alphabet agencies in a while ..

“The greatest purveyor of violence in the world today -- my own government.” -Martin Luther King, Jr.