This defies all logic

[Truthmatters]

http://tinyurl.com/22t2x3


They outed Valerie Plame.

But they say it was OK because everyone knew she worked at the CIA and she wasnt really covert.

Then she writes a book and they say she cant publish certain things because they are "secret".

Including things which are already in the public record?

I just dont think we will be getting the best people in our intell if this is how we treat them.

So what have they done by outing someone the CIA its self called a Noc agent?

Distroyed current capabilities, gotten contacts likely killed,shown prospective CIA people that they can be turned out for political expediancy and punished for trying to do the right thing.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

http://tinyurl.com/22t2x3


They outed Valerie Plame.

But they say it was OK because everyone knew she worked at the CIA and she wasnt really covert.

Then she writes a book and they say she cant publish certain things because they are "secret".

Including things which are already in the public record?

I just dont think we will be getting the best people in our intell if this is how we treat them.

So what have they done by outing someone the CIA its self called a Noc agent?

Distroyed current capabilities, gotten contacts likely killed,shown prospective CIA people that they can be turned out for political expediancy and punished for trying to do the right thing.

You wouldn't know what logic is anymore then you know what truth or facts are.

 

[Truthmatters]

I see, you have no answer.

 

[hjmick]

Fact: In the public domain (due to a letter from the CIA to Plame regarding her retirement benefits which was published in the Congressional Record in connection with proposed legislation concerning Wilson's benefits and is available on the Library of Congress' Web site) are the dates of her employment with a vague reference to a period of overseas service. The letter stated she had worked for the agency since Nov. 9, 1985, for a total "20 years, 7 days," which included "six years, one month and 29 days of overseas service."

No specific dates are mentioned in the letter from the CIA.

Now, let us suppose that, in her yet to be published tome, Mrs. Plame-Wilson listed with great accuracy the dates of her overseas service, let us also suppose that without reference to locals her dates of overseas service are just a list of boring numbers. Now, with good old Valerie being all covert and everything, anyone recognizing her need only read what is bound to be her gripping memoir and they have her dates of service, areas of service, and they could (and yes I realize this could be considered a reach) put two and two together and realize that one of their cohorts had been and may still be working with the CIA.

Now, I realize that there is a bit of supposition required to consider these things, but since none of us know what is in the book, and all we know is that dates in the book are the reason for the court ruling, supposition is all we have.

 

[Truthmatters]

Judge Backs C.I.A. in Suit on Memoir
Sign In to E-Mail or Save This Print Reprints Share
DiggFacebookNewsvinePermalink

By ADAM LIPTAK
Published: August 3, 2007
Valerie Wilson may be the best known former intelligence operative in recent history, but a federal judge in New York ruled Wednesday that she was not allowed to say how long she worked for the Central Intelligence Agency in the memoir she plans to publish this fall.

Although the fact that Ms. Wilson worked for the C.I.A. from 1985 to 2006 has been published in the Congressional Record and elsewhere, the judge, Barbara S. Jones of Federal District Court in Manhattan, said Ms. Wilson was not free to say so.

“The information at issue was properly classified, was never declassified and has not been officially acknowledged by the C.I.A.,” Judge Jones wrote.

http://tinyurl.com/22t2x3



We dont really need to speculate what this is about ,its in the article.

She was going to put in her book things which already in the public, the CIA never realeased the INFO.

Which PROVES someone did without the CIAs approval huh?

who did that ?

 

[maineman]

Fact: In the public domain (due to a letter from the CIA to Plame regarding her retirement benefits which was published in the Congressional Record in connection with proposed legislation concerning Wilson's benefits and is available on the Library of Congress' Web site) are the dates of her employment with a vague reference to a period of overseas service. The letter stated she had worked for the agency since Nov. 9, 1985, for a total "20 years, 7 days," which included "six years, one month and 29 days of overseas service."

No specific dates are mentioned in the letter from the CIA.

Now, let us suppose that, in her yet to be published tome, Mrs. Plame-Wilson listed with great accuracy the dates of her overseas service, let us also suppose that without reference to locals her dates of overseas service are just a list of boring numbers. Now, with good old Valerie being all covert and everything, anyone recognizing her need only read what is bound to be her gripping memoir and they have her dates of service, areas of service, and they could (and yes I realize this could be considered a reach) put two and two together and realize that one of their cohorts had been and may still be working with the CIA.

Now, I realize that there is a bit of supposition required to consider these things, but since none of us know what is in the book, and all we know is that dates in the book are the reason for the court ruling, supposition is all we have.

I don't think it is a reach at all. I would suggest that every intelligence agency in the world has long ago passed Valerie's picture around and has very possibly found her contacts/sources without the benefit of knowing what specific years she may or may not have served in their country. The damage was done the day it became common knowledge that she HAD been a NOC and HAD served overseas while in the CIA. Whether or not Armitage or Cheney or Libby technically violated the LAW does not change the fact that what they did damaged our nation's intelligence gathering capability, and they certainly should have been smart enough to know that...which makes their actions even more feral.

 

[Gunny]

http://tinyurl.com/22t2x3


They outed Valerie Plame.

But they say it was OK because everyone knew she worked at the CIA and she wasnt really covert.

Then she writes a book and they say she cant publish certain things because they are "secret".

Including things which are already in the public record?

I just dont think we will be getting the best people in our intell if this is how we treat them.

So what have they done by outing someone the CIA its self called a Noc agent?

Distroyed current capabilities, gotten contacts likely killed,shown prospective CIA people that they can be turned out for political expediancy and punished for trying to do the right thing.

You're trying to mix apples and oranges to present a dishonest argument. Whether or not she was "under cover" is a completely separate issue from her attmepting to use classified information in a book.

 

[Truthmatters]

Judge Backs C.I.A. in Suit on Memoir
Sign In to E-Mail or Save This Print Reprints Share
DiggFacebookNewsvinePermalink

By ADAM LIPTAK
Published: August 3, 2007
Valerie Wilson may be the best known former intelligence operative in recent history, but a federal judge in New York ruled Wednesday that she was not allowed to say how long she worked for the Central Intelligence Agency in the memoir she plans to publish this fall.

Although the fact that Ms. Wilson worked for the C.I.A. from 1985 to 2006 has been published in the Congressional Record and elsewhere, the judge, Barbara S. Jones of Federal District Court in Manhattan, said Ms. Wilson was not free to say so.

“The information at issue was properly classified, was never declassified and has not been officially acknowledged by the C.I.A.,” Judge Jones wrote.

http://tinyurl.com/22t2x3



Who released this information?

How did it become public knowledge before the CIA released it as such?

The information the Judge sited was "how long she worked for the CIA"

We know the information in question you dont have to speculate about what the judge is talking about.

Now again WHO released this secret information about her without CIA approval?

 

[Edward]

I don't think it is a reach at all. I would suggest that every intelligence agency in the world has long ago passed Valerie's picture around and has very possibly found her contacts/sources without the benefit of knowing what specific years she may or may not have served in their country. The damage was done the day it became common knowledge that she HAD been a NOC and HAD served overseas while in the CIA. Whether or not Armitage or Cheney or Libby technically violated the LAW does not change the fact that what they did damaged our nation's intelligence gathering capability, and they certainly should have been smart enough to know that...which makes their actions even more feral.

It's worst than that because the actions of the administration was political assassination and they released Valarie Plame's covert status to the media in an effort to discredit Joseph Wilson who was exercising his constitutional right to freedom of speech, freedom of the press and freedom of association. It is quite obvious to anyone that their actions were repugnant and that they violated the fundamental rights of Valarie Plame. Here she was doing her job and then wakes up one morning to find out that the entire world knows that she works for the CIA in a covert capacity. It is disingenous to claim that people knowing she worked for the CIA makes her fair game since people knowing this would make her overt. People who assume the word "covert" means "secret" and "overt" means public fail to understand that the same agent can have a covert role and an overt role at the CIA. It is when you reveal the covert role of an agent along with their identity that you place them, their families and their associates in harm's way. Indeed, we hear all this debate about whether Valarie Plame was or wasn't covert and yet we are supposed to believe and accept that the administration released her identity and covert status at the CIA and didn't know she was covert. That is the worst hors crap I have heard. They either knew she was covert and released her identity and covert status deliberately or they didn't know she was covert and released the identity and covert status of an agent without any knowledge about whether she was covert or not. No matter how you look at it it comes down to UNLESS THEY KNEW THE ENTIRE WORK HISTORY OF VALARIE PLAME OR ASKED THE CIA DIRECTOR IF SHE WAS COVERT THAN THEY WERE WRONG TO RELEASE HER NAME AND HER FUNCTION AT THE CIA. If it can be demonstrated that they knew her entire work history which proved she wasn't covert or that the Director of the CIA said she wasn't covert than they didn't do anything wrong but since this has been shown to not be the case they did out a covert agent. Ironically, we hear all this talk about how Valarie Plame worked at Langley and therefore wasn't covert and yet the ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF COUNTER-INTELLIGENCE IS CONSIDERED TO BE A COVERT AGENT. How Valarie Plame who worked under this person couldn't be considered a covert agent is beyond me. How someone who worked for the covert arm of the CIA could not be a covert agent is beyond me. How someone who worked for what is now known as the National Clandestine Service couldn't be a covert agent is beyond me. Common sense alone tells you that someone who works in a covert department of the CIA is probably covert and I don't see how the administration could not have figured that out themselves. I would be more than happy to exonerate all of them if they can show a letter, memo or document from the Director of the CIA saying that Valarie Plame wasn't a covert agent or a series of documents that demonstrate that they had the entire work history of Valarie Plame before them before they released her name and covert role at the CIA.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

It's worst than that because the actions of the administration was political assassination and they released Valarie Plame's covert status to the media in an effort to discredit Joseph Wilson who was exercising his constitutional right to freedom of speech, freedom of the press and freedom of association. It is quite obvious to anyone that their actions were repugnant and that they violated the fundamental rights of Valarie Plame. Here she was doing her job and then wakes up one morning to find out that the entire world knows that she works for the CIA in a covert capacity. It is disingenous to claim that people knowing she worked for the CIA makes her fair game since people knowing this would make her overt. People who assume the word "covert" means "secret" and "overt" means public fail to understand that the same agent can have a covert role and an overt role at the CIA. It is when you reveal the covert role of an agent along with their identity that you place them, their families and their associates in harm's way. Indeed, we hear all this debate about whether Valarie Plame was or wasn't covert and yet we are supposed to believe and accept that the administration released her identity and covert status at the CIA and didn't know she was covert. That is the worst hors crap I have heard. They either knew she was covert and released her identity and covert status deliberately or they didn't know she was covert and released the identity and covert status of an agent without any knowledge about whether she was covert or not. No matter how you look at it it comes down to UNLESS THEY KNEW THE ENTIRE WORK HISTORY OF VALARIE PLAME OR ASKED THE CIA DIRECTOR IF SHE WAS COVERT THAN THEY WERE WRONG TO RELEASE HER NAME AND HER FUNCTION AT THE CIA. If it can be demonstrated that they knew her entire work history which proved she wasn't covert or that the Director of the CIA said she wasn't covert than they didn't do anything wrong but since this has been shown to not be the case they did out a covert agent. Ironically, we hear all this talk about how Valarie Plame worked at Langley and therefore wasn't covert and yet the ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF COUNTER-INTELLIGENCE IS CONSIDERED TO BE A COVERT AGENT. How Valarie Plame who worked under this person couldn't be considered a covert agent is beyond me. How someone who worked for the covert arm of the CIA could not be a covert agent is beyond me. How someone who worked for what is now known as the National Clandestine Service couldn't be a covert agent is beyond me. Common sense alone tells you that someone who works in a covert department of the CIA is probably covert and I don't see how the administration could not have figured that out themselves. I would be more than happy to exonerate all of them if they can show a letter, memo or document from the Director of the CIA saying that Valarie Plame wasn't a covert agent or a series of documents that demonstrate that they had the entire work history of Valarie Plame before them before they released her name and covert role at the CIA.

No one "released" information on her supposed "covert" status. Novak reported she worked for the CIA. As some have pointed out, in fact few people that work for the CIA are in fact Covert. But do continue to spew your lies.

 

[dilloduck]

Poor, poor Valerie--just minding her own business with her husband with absolutely NO agendas whatesoever and WHAM. The evil empire comes along and screws up her entire life.

Bring on the next victim, please.

 

[Truthmatters]

A judge just told Valrie Plame she can not mention the span of years she worked for the CIA because it was classified information that the CIA had never released: FACT!

The span of years is publicly known and has been in all major news papers: FACT!

Someone released this information to the public without clearance from the CIA: FACT!

Who was it who released classified intell to the media without CIA clearance to do so?

Maybe it was some Democrat?

Dont you want that person in jail?

It is information other countries can use to hurt our capabilities in the realm of intell.

Is it OK to release aything the CIA says it needs to keep secret?

Who gets to deside which of the CIAs secrets dont mean anything?

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Provide one shred of evidence anyone in the administration knew and released specific years that this woman worked.

And I will remind you again, Novak CALLED the CIA and THEY told him she worked for them.

 

[manu1959]

cia headquaters is in langley west virginia....it is accessed via public roads....there is a securtity gate that one must go through to get into cia headquaters......to get through the gat one must either be an employee of the cia or on the guest list.....if one goes through this gate every day and stays there all day.....not sure that would be the best behaviour for a secret agent....

 

[Truthmatters]

She did not drive through that gate every day she worked for the CIA.

Some years she was over seas.

I dont know who relased the information for sure ,that is why Libby is in jail.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

She did not drive through that gate every day she worked for the CIA.

Some years she was over seas.

I dont know who relased the information for sure ,that is why Libby is in jail.

No it isn't. Libby was not convicted of anything to do with any information released on Plame. In fact NO ONE has ever been charged with releasing any information on her AT ALL. The person that DID tell the press she worked for the CIA got a pass on it.

 

[manu1959]

She did not drive through that gate every day she worked for the CIA.

Some years she was over seas.

I dont know who relased the information for sure ,that is why Libby is in jail.

for 14 years she drove to work and parked in front of cia headquaters for 6 years and change she didn't ... i am sure no one noticed

armitage released the information...no one was charged....libby was convicted for lying to a grand jury same as bill clinton.....libby is not in jail his sentence was commuted.....

 

[CockySOB]

A judge just told Valrie Plame she can not mention the span of years she worked for the CIA because it was classified information that the CIA had never released: FACT!

Wrong answer. As I've said before, reading the actual ruling BEFORE posting can help prevent your looking like an ass.

The ruling was that Valerie Plame's CONTRACT with the CIA makes the CIA the final say on what she can and cannot publish. This is in accordance with most non-disclosure agreements wherein the contracting agency maintains the right as sole authority on what may or may not be disclosed.

 

[Care4all]

Wrong answer. As I've said before, reading the actual ruling BEFORE posting can help prevent your looking like an ass.

The ruling was that Valerie Plame's CONTRACT with the CIA makes the CIA the final say on what she can and cannot publish. This is in accordance with most non-disclosure agreements wherein the contracting agency maintains the right as sole authority on what may or may not be disclosed.

But Cocky SOB,
Isn't it in the Contract that this decision of the CIA to prevent an employee from printing about their lives is suppose to be based on Classified information....that they can not arbitrarily deny them their first amendment rights, if the information is not or no longer classified by the government???

Care

 

[CockySOB]

But Cocky SOB,
Isn't it in the Contract that this decision of the CIA to prevent an employee from printing about their lives is suppose to be based on Classified information....that they can not arbitrarily deny them their first amendment rights, if the information is not or no longer classified by the government???

Care

Not specifically, no. Non-disclosure agreements are standard operating procedure for a vast majority of the business world, as well as military and intelligence communities. Just because something is covered by an NDA does not automatically make it classified, a trade secret, or anything of the like. It could just as easily be a standardized practice for the company in order to control its public perception.

As regards the First Amendment, most NDA's include specific language regarding specific penalties for breach of contract which carry significant civil penalties. In the matter of governmental, military and intelligence agencies, the penalties also tend to include specific criminal penalties as well as civil penalties. Should a person NOT be willing to abide by the NDA, they should not sign it in the first place. Most people who sign such NDA's are doing so because the compensation from such agreements is usually significant.

In short, Plame signed her NDA's before going to work for the CIA and like anyone else, she must abide by the terms of her contract or suffer the penalties.