Washington Post on Joe Wilson and Valerie Plame

[Mavafanculo]

Patrick Lang, ex-director of the Defense Department's Human Intelligence,:

And the obligation to protect this person is absolute, in fact. And it's not only absolute from the point of view of morality; it's absolute from the point of view of practicality as well, because if within a practicing clandestine intelligence unit the case officers believe that their superiors will not protect the identity of their sources or their own identity, in fact, in doing things which are dangerous and difficult, then a, kind of, circle of doubt begins to spread, like throwing a rock into the water.

And it spreads in such a way so that if an intelligence service that belongs to a particular country comes to be thought generally in the world as an organization that does not protect its own, does not protect its foreign assets, then the obvious is true in that people are not going to accept recruitment, are not going to work for you. And the smarter they are, the better placed they are, the better educated they are, the less likely they are to accept recruitment and to work for you if they believe that you are not going to fight in the last ditch to protect their identities.

And so, this is all completely about trust.



http://obsidianwings.blogs.com/obsidian_wings/2005/07/rove_and_plame__2.html

 

[Phenom78]

LOL

I said credible sources

Im not responding to artilces from Common Dream lol

And it isnt to be difficult bro, cause I do like you. But the fact checking alone required to examine such rags are more effort than Im willing to expend. If there charges are accurate, you should have no difficulty finding a mainstream source to corroborate. If they do not, then that should tell you something as well

 

[Mavafanculo]

Yesterday, a bipartisan group of 11 former intelligence officers -- including Col. W. Patrick Lang, the former Director of Defense Human Intelligence Services at the Defense Intelligence Agency, and Vince Cannistraro, former counterterrorism chief at the CIA -- submitted a letter to congressional leaders rebutting these claims. The officers argue that the "desk job" excuse reveals "an astonishing ignorance of the intelligence community and the role of cover." More importantly, they say, the "disclosure of Ms. Plame's name was a shameful event in American history and, in our professional judgment, may have damaged U.S. national security and poses a threat to the ability of U.S. intelligence gathering using human sources."

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/docs/intel.officers.letter.pdf

 

[Mavafanculo]

Yesterday, a bipartisan group of 11 former intelligence officers -- including Col. W. Patrick Lang, the former Director of Defense Human Intelligence Services at the Defense Intelligence Agency, and Vince Cannistraro, former counterterrorism chief at the CIA -- submitted a letter to congressional leaders rebutting these claims. The officers argue that the "desk job" excuse reveals "an astonishing ignorance of the intelligence community and the role of cover." More importantly, they say, the "disclosure of Ms. Plame's name was a shameful event in American history and, in our professional judgment, may have damaged U.S. national security and poses a threat to the ability of U.S. intelligence gathering using human sources."

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/docs/intel.officers.letter.pdf

^^ what he said.


and btw, you just did what you accused me of doing lol.

 

[Phenom78]

The hell with damage, right, left, etc.

Right or wrong?

Right or wrong what? Should they have told the press who hired him?

Yes

Why?

1) He lied about what he found
2)He lied by inference and claimed Cheney sent him. Creating the false notion that after having sent him, Cheney not liking what he said, chose to ignore it and lie to the American people.
3)He conspired with his wife to obtain the position, one for which he was completetly unqualified.
4)His "findings" were being used throughout the world to discredit American policy and at home to mislead Americans by portraying a concerted plot to lie the public into war.

If she were a covert agent I would have revoked her status and outed her. The stakes were far more important than allowing her to hide her and her husbands deception behind some technicality.

Since she wasn't a covert agent, there wasn't even that impediment.

If someone had coerced her to lie, Id call for impeachment. If someone had lied about her, I would be for hearings and public ridicule/impeachment of whomever was involved.

But all anyone did was tell the truth to counter his and her lies. She knew what her husband was up to. She shared his views. And she willingly put him in a position by wrongfully using her influence to obtain his assignment. Then she stood by while he lied about what he found and who sent him.

She is not a wronged party. She is in fact along with him an offender.

 

[Mavafanculo]

Washington Post July 10 2004

Wilson last year launched a public firestorm with his accusations that the administration had manipulated intelligence to build a case for war. He has said that his trip to Niger should have laid to rest any notion that Iraq sought uranium there and has said his findings were ignored by the White House.

Wilson's assertions -- both about what he found in Niger and what the Bush administration did with the information -- were undermined yesterday in a bipartisan Senate intelligence committee report.

The panel found that Wilson's report, rather than debunking intelligence about purported uranium sales to Iraq, as he has said, bolstered the case for most intelligence analysts. And contrary to Wilson's assertions and even the government's previous statements, the CIA did not tell the White House it had qualms about the reliability of the Africa intelligence that made its way into 16 fateful words in President Bush's January 2003 State of the Union address.

Yesterday's report said that whether Iraq sought to buy lightly enriched "yellowcake" uranium from Niger is one of the few bits of prewar intelligence that remains an open question. Much of the rest of the intelligence suggesting a buildup of weapons of mass destruction was unfounded, the report said.

The report turns a harsh spotlight on what Wilson has said about his role in gathering prewar intelligence, most pointedly by asserting that his wife, CIA employee Valerie Plame, recommended him.

Larry Johnson, former CIA Officer:

But don't take my word for it, read the biased Senate intelligence committee report. Even though it was slanted to try to portray Joe in the worst possible light this fact emerges on page 52 of the report: According to the US Ambassador to Niger (who was commenting on Joe's visit in February 2002), "Ambassador Wilson reached the same conclusion that the Embassy has reached that it was highly unlikely that anything between Iraq and Niger was going on." Joe's findings were consistent with those of the Deputy Commander of the European Command, Major General Fulford.

The Republicans insist on the lie that Val got her husband the job. She did not. She was not a division director, instead she was the equivalent of an Army major. Yes it is true she recommended her husband to do the job that needed to be done but the decision to send Joe Wilson on this mission was made by her bosses.

At the end of the day, Joe Wilson was right. There were no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. It was the Bush Administration that pushed that lie and because of that lie Americans are dying. Shame on those who continue to slander Joe Wilson while giving Bush and his pack of liars a pass. That's the true outrage.



http://www.tpmcafe.com/story/2005/7/13/04720/9340

 

[Phenom78]

^^ what he said.


and btw, you just did what you accused me of doing lol.

No

I quoted generally credible sources. The Washington Post for example is such an organization.

You quoted sources which you should have learned in high school, if not college, dont meet that standard. Then you presented them in an elephantine manner hoping to give them a credibility which they individually lack. I also suggest you did so because no credible news organization would print those views, and therefore you couldnt find any to quote.

To quote jenevin you're better than that

But if you'd like I can go quote Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity to counter your propoganda?

 

[gjohnson5]

I think that's a wrap...

Larry Johnson, former CIA Officer:

But don't take my word for it, read the biased Senate intelligence committee report. Even though it was slanted to try to portray Joe in the worst possible light this fact emerges on page 52 of the report: According to the US Ambassador to Niger (who was commenting on Joe's visit in February 2002), "Ambassador Wilson reached the same conclusion that the Embassy has reached that it was highly unlikely that anything between Iraq and Niger was going on." Joe's findings were consistent with those of the Deputy Commander of the European Command, Major General Fulford.

The Republicans insist on the lie that Val got her husband the job. She did not. She was not a division director, instead she was the equivalent of an Army major. Yes it is true she recommended her husband to do the job that needed to be done but the decision to send Joe Wilson on this mission was made by her bosses.

At the end of the day, Joe Wilson was right. There were no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. It was the Bush Administration that pushed that lie and because of that lie Americans are dying. Shame on those who continue to slander Joe Wilson while giving Bush and his pack of liars a pass.

That's the true outrage.



http://www.tpmcafe.com/story/2005/7/13/04720/9340

 

[Mavafanculo]

Is this accepatable collateral damage?????

Come on.



According to current and former intelligence officials, Plame Wilson, who worked on the clandestine side of the CIA in the Directorate of Operations as a non-official cover (NOC) officer, was part of an operation tracking distribution and acquisition of weapons of mass destruction technology to and from Iran.

Speaking under strict confidentiality, intelligence officials revealed heretofore unreported elements of Plame's work. Their accounts suggest that Plame's outing was more serious than has previously been reported and carries grave implications for U.S. national security and its ability to monitor Iran's burgeoning nuclear program.


...Three intelligence officers confirmed that other CIA non-official cover officers were compromised, but did not indicate the number of people operating under non-official cover that were affected or the way in which these individuals were impaired. None of the sources would say whether there were American or foreign casualties as a result of the leak.

Several intelligence officials described the damage in terms of how long it would take for the agency to recover. According to their own assessment, the CIA would be impaired for up to "ten years" in its capacity to adequately monitor nuclear proliferation on the level of efficiency and accuracy it had prior to the White House leak of Plame Wilson's identity.

 

[Phenom78]

I think that's a wrap...

Bra be brighter than that. Not because it matters who comes out "on top" in some chat debate, but for yourself.

The reason these sources arent credited by credible sources is because they aren't proven or vetted.

I can quote from conservative sources a few dozen "intelligence officers" who would state the exact opposite.

Hell I can quote former Iraqi generals and Saddam insiders who assert to this day that he possessed WOMD's and that they were moved out of the country. Does that constitute evidence that they existed? Can we then assert that there were WOMD's and that one of the original justifications for war was indeed accurate, and that dems are lying every time they say they didn't exist?

This is pretty basic stuff. If you don't know by now that either side can find hundreds, if not thousands, to support whatever position they want then you need to reexamine your analysis prowess.