raw story link alternet link (text below) in my mind, there are two stories here. the first is that the NYT did not end up running the story. reading through the article (a lot more than i posted), i get the sense it was a typical journalist/editor debate about whether enough was known to run it. the second story is that the information was leaked to ms miller in the first place. i'd like to know if that's the typical kind of information she got from the source, or if this was more along the scooter libby line of leaking. and if so, just how much was known about the coming 9/11 attack that we have yet learn?