NY Times prints redacted version of Leveret op-ed. Black lines and all

[Dr.Phool]

Found the link to it at TPM. Credit where credit is due.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/22/opinion/22leverett.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

Op-Ed Contributors
Redacted Version of Original Op-Ed



By FLYNT LEVERETT and HILLARY MANN
Published: December 22, 2006

The Iraq Study Group has added its voice to a burgeoning chorus of commentators, politicians, and former officials calling for a limited, tactical dialogue with Iran regarding Iraq. The Bush administration has indicated a conditional willingness to pursue a similarly compartmented dialogue with Tehran over Iran’s nuclear activities.



Unfortunately, advocates of limited engagement — either for short-term gains on specific issues or to “test” Iran regarding broader rapprochement — do not seem to understand the 20-year history of United States-Iranian cooperation on discrete issues or appreciate the impact of that history on Iran’s strategic outlook. In the current regional context, issue-specific engagement with Iran is bound to fail. The only diplomatic approach that might succeed is a comprehensive one aimed at a “grand bargain” between the United States and the Islamic Republic.

Since the 1980s, cooperation with Iran on specific issues has been tried by successive administrations, but United States policymakers have consistently allowed domestic politics or other foreign policy interests to torpedo such cooperation and any chance for a broader opening. The Reagan administration’s engagement with Iran to secure the release of American hostages in Lebanon came to grief in the Iran-contra scandal. The first Bush administration resumed contacts with Tehran to secure release of the last American hostages in Lebanon, but postponed pursuit of broader rapprochement until after the 1992 presidential election.

In 1994, the Clinton administration acquiesced to the shipment of Iranian arms to Bosnian Muslims, but the leak of this activity in 1996 and criticism from presumptive Republican presidential nominee Robert Dole shut down possibilities for further United States-Iranian cooperation for several years.

(snip) much more

[alfredo]

1. Seeing the black bars should be a jarring experience

for Mr and Mrs Middle America.

[NewJeffCT]

10. Unfortunately

Mr. & Mrs. Middle America probably don't read the NY Times.

[alfredo]

24. But you can copy the document and the black bars

remain. I made mine a PDF and I have sent it out to all on my mailing list. I also add that the redacted sections were already declassified by the CIA but embarrassing to the administration. bush had them reclassified not to protect the country, but to protect him.

[Selteri]

21. I'm sure those redactions are just as important as John Lennon's

John Lennon's files which when finally fully declassified had no information that was not publicaly available.

[Newsjock]

2. We are the Soviet Union

It once was unthinkable that this would ever happen in America. Now it's greeted with a yawn.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

16. that noise you hear is the grinding of my teeth.

warrantless wiretaps? warrantless break-ins and searches in people's homes and businesses? Extraordinary renditions? Torture?

WHERE THE HELL HAS MY COUNTRY GONE?

It is as though the Boy King read Mao, Stalin, and Hitler, and decided to cherry pick their most effective operations.

[9thkvius]

3. OK, let's play detective here

I wonder how hard it will be to guess what the parts were that were blacked out. I can already make a few educated guesses, and I also discovered something that may help. When I tried highlighting a a section (I was planning to quote it) I noticed that words showed up, only with every letter as the letter "x". I have no idea whether or not this is a legitimate artifact of the redaction process, or whether it is intentionally misleading in any way.

In the second paragraph, one redaction seems pretty obvious - the short one in the third line probably says "Iran agreed" or something along those lines. It certainly makes sense once you put it in context.

Anyway, here are the redacted paragraphs as they appear when highlighted.

"But Tehran was profoundly disappointed with the United States response. After the 9/11 attacks, xxx xxx xx xxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxxx xx set the stage for a November 2001 meeting between Secretary of State Colin Powell and the foreign ministers of Afghanistan’s six neighbors and Russia. xxxx xxxxxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxx xxxx xx xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxxx xxxx xxx xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Iran went along, working with the United States to eliminate the Taliban and establish a post-Taliban political order in Afghanistan.

In December 2001, xxxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxx x Tehran to keep Gulbuddin Hekmatyar, the brutal pro-Al Qaeda warlord, from returning to Afghanistan to lead jihadist resistance there. xxxxx xxxxxxx so long as the Bush administration did not criticize it for harboring terrorists. But, in his January 2002 State of the Union address, President Bush did just that in labeling Iran part of the “axis of evil.” Unsurprisingly, Mr. Hekmatyar managed to leave Iran in short order after the speech. xxx xxxxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxx the Islamic Republic could not be seen to be harboring terrorists.

xxx xxxxxx xxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxx xxxxxxxx xxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxx xxxxx xxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxx xxxx xxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxx xxxx xxx xxxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxx xxxxxxxx xxxx xxxxxxxx xxxx xx xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxxxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxx xxxxxxx xxxxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxxxx xx xxxxx xxx xx xxxxxxx This demonstrated to Afghan warlords that they could not play America and Iran off one another and prompted Tehran to deport hundreds of suspected Al Qaeda and Taliban operatives who had fled Afghanistan."

The next section:

" xxx xxxxxx xxxxxxxx xxxxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxx xxxxxxxx x xxxxxx xxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxx xxxxxxx xxx xxxxxxxxx xxx xxxxxx xx xxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxx xxxxxx xxx xxxxxxxx x xx x x xxx xxxxxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxxxx xx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xx xxxxxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxx xxxxxxx xxxxx xx xxx xxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxx xxxxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxx xxxxxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxx xxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxx xxxxx xxxxxxxx xx"

And the last one:

"Our experience dealing with xxxx xxxx Iranian diplomats over Afghanistan and in more recent private conversations in Europe and elsewhere convince us that Iran will not go down such a dead-end road again. Iran will not help the United States in Iraq because it wants to avoid chaos there; Tehran is well positioned to defend its interests in Iraq unilaterally as America flounders. Similarly, Iran will not accept strategically meaningful limits on its nuclear capabilities for a package of economic and technological goodies."

[TexasProgresive]

7. The EXes are place markers and the black bars are black

highligting. There is no other way to show the black bars in a text format.You can attempt to do the same thing in Word. The other thing they could do is usa a graphic image of the article from the actual newspaper.

[originalpckelly]

22. What you don't get is that these are words. We know how many letters...

there are. We just need to figure out what they said. It's like a crossword puzzle.

[NorthernSpy]

11. compare the ratios of one-, two-, and three-letter words in the revealed text...

... with the one-, two-, and three-X strings in the redacted portions. The discrepancies may indicate how much the count of Xes deviates from a simple one-to-one placemarker-to-letter representation. Keeping in mind that it is plausible the redacted portion contains a higher percentage of proper nouns, such as names, which may skew the total X count upwards.

Also, we could compare letter-count patterns on a sentence-by-sentence basis, and look for similarities and differences between the redacted and revealed portions.

Finally, we could start fleshing in some of the erasures with lists of likely references that would seem to fit with the proximate revealed portions.


Just some suggestions, if we're keen on guessing what's behind all that carbon black.

[cui bono]

4. Do you have a link to the background of this?

I'm a bit behind the news since one of my dogs had to get a pacemaker a couple days ago.

Was there a controversy about this and why would they have the black lines on the internet?

[PATRICK]

8. Some lines have been read

I am not sure of the technique but the stupid assumption, especially with original documents, that blackouts are forever failed to account for more sophisticated methods. I am sure that copies are harder to uncover and take into account earlier embarrassments which, of course, you will rarely hear even mentioned in the media. Imprints, indentations, darker areas indicating a dark layer underneath paper, amateurish e-mail masking stripped and recovered, and the old favorite- analytic guessing.

[babylonsister]

12. Here's a thread to catch you up:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=364&topic_id=2926774

[Ilsa]

15. Thank you, I was a little lost in this. nt

[cui bono]

26. thanks. :) n/t

[freefall]

13. The first I heard of it was on Wednesday morning. The co-author,

Flynt Leveret was on the Diane Rehm show discussing the censorship as well as Iran, the issue the op-ed was about. It was interesting and, as pretty much everything we learn about the incompetence, and bullheadedness of this administration, frightening.

You can listen here:

http://www.wamu.org/programs/dr/06/12/20.php#12841

Peace,

freefall

[Up2Late]

5. The parts that were redacted should help fuel more Conspiracy theories...

...and other such things.

Man do they suck. (and by they I mean the Bush Cabal)

[Roland99]

6. I wonder how many Iran-Contra names appear in those redacted passages.

[Pachamama]

9. You mean the White House made the NYT's redact these?

Wow....I'm thoroughly creeped out...we really are not a free democracy, are we?

Pravda News....who would ever have believed this would happen here, in America..... :scared:

[farmbo]

14. Big Wup....the paper that spiked NSA surveillance and Earpiece-gate...

...that is to say...THE PAPER THAT GAVE BUSH HIS SECOND TERM THROUGH SHEER EDITORIAL COWARDICE!!...has finally grown some.

A little late now isn't it Greylady?

:shrug:

[Bobbie Jo]

17. This should be done more often....

To demonstrate the extent and nature of the censorship that exists.

Is this an example of one of those "known unknowns?" :eyes:

[Zambero]

18. How does "Putin" translate into English?

"Bush" perhaps?

Soul-mates and censor-mates, always and forever

[ChairmanAgnostic]

20. W R O N G !

Cheney, perhaps, but the boy king is NOT CAPABLE of such strategic actions. Remember, he is the decider. Planning takes place elsewhere, and is spoon fed to him.

[MasonJar]

19. Good for the Times. This is more powerful than the op-ed had

any chance of being. Let the people see in BLACK and white the Bush government at work.

[truth2power]

23. go to bugmenot...

The first login is still working. www.bugmenot.com

[Up2Late]

25. UPDATE: NPR interviews Flynt Leverett regarding what's missing and where to read it!!!

Here's the links:<http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=6665735>

And he said this Op-Ed was basically a summery of this paper he released a few weeks ago for "The Century Foundation" at this link:

<http://www.tcf.org/list.asp?type=PB&pubid=595>

Or just download you copy here before it's redacted in a few months: <http://www.tcf.org/publications/internationalaffairs/leverett_diplomatic.pdf>

[Poiuyt]

27. Rawstory has decoded it:

http://www.rawstory.com/news/2006/The_redacted_Iran_oped_revealed_1222.html