Who was behind the subway hoax?

The subway "terror" threat, we are now told, was a hoax. A hoax played by whom on whom?

The information supposedly came from one or more (accounts differ) prisoners in Iraq. Can we trust any information of such provenance?

Keep in mind that a military unit supposedly found, in one of Saddam's palaces, a document "proving" that George Galloway, MP, was on the Iraq payroll. Galloway was able to demonstrate in court, in a case against Conrad Black's notorious Daily Telegraph, that the "evidence" was a fabrication. (Let's not get into a discussion of Galloway's pros and cons; the history of hoaxing is the important point here.)

In May of 2003, the NYT presented a Judy Miller tale of high adventure, in which she -- accompanied by the glorious lads of Met Alpha Unit Task Force 75 -- discovered documents proving that Saddam was after uranium, and that he had sponsored terror attacks on Israel. The documents later "disappeared" -- probably into the same Rod Serling-esque vortex in which we will find the "subway bomber" hoaxer. (When such documents don't disappear, they become open to scrutiny.) For a terrific history of this particular fraud, see this Daily Kos piece by emptywheel -- who, despite having a really weird nomme-de-net, is doing must-read work on this story.

(Incidentally, emptywheel notes that Fitzgerald's interest in Miller concerns not just her interaction with Libby but also her reporting on Iraqi efforts to obtain uranium. This is a key indication that Fitz' probe may go well beyond Plame-gate.)

As we know, Achmed Chalabi ran -- and probably still runs -- a shop devoted to the creation of forged documents. Chalabi and Miller are likethis. Perhaps more to the point, Chalabi and Michael Ledeen are likethis, and have been for ages. Ledeen has a long history of peddling disinfo. Judy seems to have stepped into the shoes once filled by Claire Sterling, the previous journalistic mouthpiece for the Ledeen network. (Back in the day, said network -- relying, as always, on fake documents -- proclaimed that the USSR controlled all terror and most of the American media.)

The point is clear: Always mistrust "evidence" coming out of Iraq. Journalists and even official investigators cannot easily double-check evidence produced in the middle of a war zone.

The question now: Why?

Hoaxes of this sort are never mere pranks. Their creators have reasons.

I have argued previously that the latest stories (which at one time had something to do with "Iraqi pharmacists" turned mad gassers) provided cover for a known Homeland Security "experiment" in gassing NYC subways with a benign substance. What if that substance wasn't so benign?