Doubting Suskind

When I read Ron Suskind's The Price of Loyalty a few years ago--which detailed Paul O'Neill's run as Treasury Secretary--I thought it was, well, remarkably one-sourced. It read like an authorized biography.

It's not that I disagreed with the general conclusions of the book. In fact, Suskind's portrayal of the insular, insecure White House has been proven right many times over. It was the details that got my eyebrows raised--the too-perfect quotes, the too-perfect portraits of O'Neill's moves, etc.

I don't think Suskind was lying. I just think the book was a one-source pony.

Which brings me to Suskind's new book, the one making waves. I haven't had a chance yet to read the whole thing, but I've read the excerpts  that make up the  "revelations" now making the rounds. And I'm beginning to wonder how well-sourced they are and whether we're getting the full story.

Two of Suskind's anecdotes have made waves so far. The first is that al-Qaida planned a cyanide attack on New York subways and then called it off for some reason.

"In the world of terrorist weaponry," writes Suskind, "this was the equivalent of splitting the atom. Obtain a few widely available chemicals, and you could construct it with a trip to Home Depot — and then kill everyone in the store."

Sounds very scary. And maybe such an attack was on its way and maybe it would have been devastating. But in some little-noticed skepticism buried in the NYT, intel officials  suggest Suskind is, well, hyping things:

One official who was briefed at the time that the authorities learned of the threat said some in the intelligence community had been skeptical of the supposed plot, particularly of the idea that the plot had been called off by Mr. al-Zawahiri. The plot was said to involve the use of a relatively crude device for releasing the chemical gases.

"This is a simple cyanide thing, two chemicals mixed together, and it releases cyanide gas," he said. "They'd be lucky if they killed everybody on one car — you can do that with a 9-millimeter pistol." He added, "None of it has been confirmed in three years, who these guys were, whether they in fact had a weapon, or whether they were able to put together a weapon, whether that weapon has been defined and what it would cause or whether they were even in New York."

One former official said he believed the basic information about the scheme had been declassified two years ago for distribution to state and local officials.

The second wave to come from the book is that Abu Zubaydah, captured in 2002, is apparently not the top al-Qaida logistics man the administration alleges but rather a low-level flunky and mentally at that. I blogged about that,  quoting a bit from Suskind's book:

Abu Zubaydah also appeared to know nothing about terrorist operations; rather, he was al-Qaeda's go-to guy for minor logistics -- travel for wives and children and the like.

"I said he was important," Bush reportedly told Tenet at one of their daily meetings. "You're not going to let me lose face on this, are you?" "No sir, Mr. President," Tenet replied. Bush "was fixated on how to get Zubaydah to tell us the truth," Suskind writes, and he asked one briefer, "Do some of these harsh methods really work?" Interrogators did their best to find out.

I definitely wouldn't be shocked to learn that the administration has overstated Zubaydah's value. But again Suskind's narrative seems... less than a slam dunk. I  wonder whether we're getting the full story. For one thing the quotes just seem too perfect. Particularly the one everybody is now citing: "You're not going to let me lose face on this, are you?" That sounds like cartoon version of what Bush would actually say.

Then there's the contra-evidence about the value of Zubaydah. Let me quote a Jeff, who offered the following comment on my Zubaydah post:

I'm glad you're at least open to the possibility that maybe this story didn't play out as Suskind reports. Here a few facts for you to consider while asessing this story

Jordan sentenced Zubaydah to death, because they believed he played a role in the millenium bombings.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5384560

This doesn't mean that he did, but we have to ask why Jordan believes otherwise

2) The 9/11 commission report says that Zubaydah was far more involved than Suskind reports.

http://www.9-11commission.gov/report/911Report_Ch6.htm

Again, doesn't prove anything. There are obvious flaws to the commission, but it's something to take into account.

3) And I think most importantly, a terrorist we captured in 2001 said that Abu Zubaydah was in charge of recruiting, which is far more than just "minor logistics"

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/03/30/attack/main505014.shtml

Ahmed Ressam, convicted April 2001 of smuggling, terrorist conspiracy and other charges in the Los Angeles millennium plot, described Abu Zubaydah's role as a recruiter during court testimony.

"He is the person in charge of the camps. He receives young men from all countries. He accepts you or rejects you. And he takes care of the expenses for the camps. He makes arrangements for you when you travel coming in or leaving," Ressam said.

Prospective recruits in Pakistan would meet Abu Zubaydah, who would assign them to camps. When they finished training, he placed them in cells overseas.

It all adds  up to something simple: Every "revelation" that Suskind has come up with might be spot-on, but I'm not convinced yet...

Comments

[Brad DeLong]

It's the CIA's view--not Tenet's necessarily, but that of his people and the CIA career staff.

That said, it smells right, and accords with what I have heard off the record...

[Katherine]

I agree. The breathless reporting of the subway plot does not inspire confidence. I certainly wouldn't take what Bush said as gospel, and Dan Coleman is really really pissed about the torture policies-I don't think he'd be dishonest but I think it colors how he sees things. I'm not completely sold on this one--though, I am convinced that he was tortured, and even if he really was important that could of course lead to bullsh*t intelligence. Zubaydah is a major source of the allegations against a lot, a lot of people. Jose Padilla, Benyam Mohamed, the Yemeni guy in GTMO who just killed himself, it goes on and on.

I think the source of the 9/11 Commission report may be Zubaydah's interrogation logs, so I'm not sure that's an independent source, but Ressam is. Who knows what Jordan relied on.

[Swen]

It seems that a lot of the leaking has motives more political than informational. If Suskind's source is in the CIA, which seems likely, I've got to wonder whether leaking this info isn't part of their on-going feud with the administration.

The bit about a mole in al Qaeda would have been kept under their hat by anyone principally concerned with furthering the WOT. Whether the mole had been burned or retrieved, or not, it would be best if we didn't hear about such things until long after the fact.

Unless there was no mole. About the time Suskind's informant figures that every al Qaeda named "Ali" has been killed, he can slap his forehead and tell Suskind "Geez I've got a bad memory! The mole's name is actually "Abu". (I'm sure Suskind and Time would be happy to publish a correction.) Of course that would require a degree of evil genius we haven't seen much of...

[Okay, that didn't seem to work. I'm going to hit Post again and I'll apologize in advance if I double post.]

[David]

Reading the two versions of Zubaydah, this looks like two different views of the same basic facts. Both agree that Zubaydah was the guy who made travel arrangements for low-level Qaida - relatives and recruits - going from country to country, and I wouldn't be surprised if that responsibility naturally included paying other bills. The question is how much authority he had to choose who got money and logistical support, and how much was just him doing what he was told. I'd hesitate to take a member of al-Qaida at his word on this as much as I would for Suskind; it would be pretty clearly in the leadership's interests to make it look like a certifiable lunatic was actually a mastermind.

[Jeff M]

Abu Zubaydah is the guy who informed us that Khalid Sheik Mohammed was the architect of the 9-11 attacks. I think that puts him at the top of the management team, not the bottom.

[TallDave]

Zubaydah is also interesting because he confirmed Zarqawi was friendly with Hussein. Again, something that says he was more than a gofer.

[EDH]

Made Me Think of Another Famous "Nutcase"

'Oddfather' Ends Insanity Ruse
NEW YORK, April 7, 2003 (AP) Vincent "The Chin" Gigante, the powerful mafia boss who authorities said feigned insanity for decades in an attempt to avoid prosecution, ended the ruse Monday by admitting he misled doctors evaluating him...

Between May 1990 and December 1997, Gigante, former boss of New York's Genovese crime family, "knowingly, intentionally misled doctors" evaluating his mental competency to face trial, Judge I. Leo Glasser said.

[Wax Banks]

Skepticism is well and good, but (a) you haven't read anything beyond a tiny sliver of the book and are merely voicing suspicion, and (b) the following quote -

That sounds like cartoon version of what Bush would actually say.

- is just dumb. 'You're not going to let me lose face...' wouldn't even be among the top 100 ludicrous things out of George Bush's mouth since taking office. Imagine him saying it with that glass-eyed press-gaggle smile of his - or with his faux-thoughtful Serious Face, the one he puts on when pantomiming lucidity at a speech or public event. This is the man who said, 'Brownie, you're doing a heck of a job.' If it's the combination of wannabe-shrewdness and apparent total disconnection from reality that's throwing you, don't be thrown - everyone else noticed it too.

[erg]

Zubaydah is also interesting because he confirmed Zarqawi was friendly with Hussein. Again, something that says he was more than a gofer.

Yup, that means that he was giving the interrogators exactly what they wanted to know.

[blue]

Yes, he's said a good many stupid things, Wax (although a good many attributed to him were fake Quaylisms). I don't think America's pronunciation of nuclear will ever recover.

But just as I wouldn't trust information about nuclear material in Iraq from one source until I had confirmation, I wouldn't trust a partisan hack like Suskind to be completely truthful without more proof than what he's shown.

I'm a little curious about the theoritical subway attack system. HCN doesn't boil until 26 degrees Celcius, decently above room temperature. What was the air like in New York in middle or early March?

[jw]

Eric is right to note that the now-infamous quote -- "You're not going to let me lose face on this, are you?" -- is not something Bush would actually say. Instead, he'd say, "I'm not going to lose face on this, right? Cuz I'm not a face-loser. Plus, I looked you in the eye, Georgie, and was able to get a sense of your soul: you're no face-loser-letter."

[Omri]

blue, HCN does not need to boil. It just needs to evaporate. HCN's vapor pressure at temperatures about 0 degrees C is high enough to be lethal to mammals.

That's why the Nazis used it.

The problem with deploying HCN in a binary package is that it causes people to be more than sufficiently alarmed to get the hell out of whatever subway station before it can kill them. That is why the Aum Shinrikio cult preferred sarin.

[WPB]

At least one aspect of Suskind's account seems to be corroborated:

Waas, Suskind, and Aluminum Tubes

[WPB]

Oops:

http://anewerworld.org/?p=537

[bob]

I am the decider not the face loser-er.

[Anderson]

Abu Zubaydah is the guy who informed us that Khalid Sheik Mohammed was the architect of the 9-11 attacks.

Source, please? What Suskind has Z. telling us (under standard interrogation, not torture) is that "Mukhtar," whom CIA was linking to the 9/11 attacks, was actually KSM. Which fits the above without making Z. a hotshot.

Over at ObWi, I provided this from Suskind's book (which I'm midway through):

As for Zubaydah's being "in charge of recruiting," or sentenced by Jordan, he had a substantial role & might have seemed to some recruits as a bigshot, b/c he was the one telling them where to go, etc.

Dan Coleman (100): "He was like a travel agent, the guy who booked your flights. You can see from what he writes how burdened he is with all thse logistics--getting families of operatives, wives and kids, in and out of countries. He knew very little about real operations, or strategy. He was expendable, you know, the greeter ...."

A "top CIA official" (101): "He was, in a way, expendable. It was like calling someone who runs a company's in-house travel department the COO."

So maybe that helps with Jeff's worries. Surely Z. was criminally implicated with Qaeda, but he wasn't the # 3 or whatever that we were led to imagine.