WP: CIA Yet to Assess Harm From Plame's Exposure

[DeepModem Mom]

CIA Yet to Assess Harm From Plame's Exposure
By Dafna Linzer
Washington Post Staff Writer
Saturday, October 29, 2005; Page A09


More than Valerie Plame's identity was exposed when her name appeared in a syndicated column in the summer of 2003.

A small Boston company listed as her employer suddenly was shown to be a bogus CIA front, and her alma mater in Belgium discovered it was a favored haunt of an American spy. At Langley, officials in the clandestine service quickly began drawing up a list of contacts and friends, cultivated over more than a decade, to triage any immediate damage.

There is no indication, according to current and former intelligence officials, that the most dire of consequences -- the risk of anyone's life -- resulted from her outing.

But after Plame's name appeared in Robert D. Novak's column, the CIA informed the Justice Department in a simple questionnaire that the damage was serious enough to warrant an investigation, officials said.

The CIA has not conducted a formal damage assessment, as is routinely done in cases of espionage and after any legal proceedings have been exhausted....Intelligence officials said they would never reveal the true extent of her contacts to protect the agency and its work....


http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/10/28/AR2005102801988.html

[emad]

1. Good spin. Sounds like they've already done a deal with MI6,

Mossad, Russian security/intelligence services etc, at damage limitation.

BUT>>>>

All it would take is one disaster at home for Poodle for the whole house of cards to come tumbling down.

[bpilgrim]

2. that put at SERIOUS risk EVERY american man, woman & child's LIFE of WMDs

if the allegation is true that she was working on clandestine/rouge WMDs abroad, whether currently or 10 years ago since the org and the effort is much larger than just 1 person at 1 moment in time.

psst... pass the word ;->

peace

[rodeodance]

3. pass this to all the media (we can hope they might devote a 1-2

seconds to this important issue).

[Cookie wookie]

4. Quoting a source Dafna Linzer put into her anti-American article:

"The fact is, once your husband writes an op-ed piece and goes political, you have no immunity, and that's the way Washington works," said Robert Baer, who served in the CIA's clandestine service.”

So Linzer quoted and the Post printed a statement of someone with a criminal mind who says that it’s open season on CIA operatives if a member of their family publicly disagrees with certain politicians. And they publish this as if it's a fact, not the propagation of a criminal idea.

Then Linzer makes what is a national crime into something smaller and personal thus diminishing the importance of the outing of Plame to national security by writing:

“For Plame, the most serious consequence may be professional.

'It's possible that no damage was done (brackets)"to national security"(end brackets) but she can never (brackets)"work(end brackets) overseas again," said Mark Lowenthal, who retired from a senior management position at the CIA in March.' "

Notice Linzer adds “(brackets)"to national security"(end brackets)”. Is that what Lowenthal meant or did he mean maybe no one died. Then Linzer says in the next paragraph that Lowenthal doesn't know any facts about what she just quoted him on. If that's so, why did she quote him? We know why but more importantly she tries to make it seem like no damage was done except to Plame's career.

Obviously damage was done. A whole CIA operation on weapons of mass destruction was destroyed. We are under terrorist threats. Our country and our people are in danger from WMD from around the world. But Linzer and the Post don't care about that. They not only don't care, they deliberately work to mislead the public on the subject!

So why is it that the Washington Post via Linzer is downplaying the outing of a CIA operative and the destruction of a covert network working on WMD? Why are the paper and the journalist AIDING AND ABETTING TERRORISM AGAINST THE US by publishing an article that is dishonest and through its dishonesty promotes thinking that threatens our national security?

Their position makes them no better than a communist rag printed by leftist fringers or an American nazi party publication, only they have a vastly larger audience. Their paper is on every doorstep, every news stand, every corner in Washington.

Why would anyone buy this paper unless they are a traitor? How is it that the post has more than a few crazy antiAmerican terrorists as customers?

DOWN WITH THE POST!

[gizmo1979]

5. Woodward said he did an

assessment and there was no damage.He would know because he knows all.Don't ask me how he got ahold of classified information,maybe we need an investigation?

[realFedUp]

6. What a tool Woodward's turned out to be....

I guess he has more to lose now than his
reputation and character.

[Cookie wookie]

8. People like this are

horrifying to me. And repulsive. They are the scum of the earth.

[Cookie wookie]

7. Again we shouldn't believe the information right in front of us.

All we have to know is that a CIA covert operation on WMD was compromised to know there was damage. We don't have to get the full skinny from the CIA, we don't need to see the classified documents.

We just need an ounce of common sense and the fact that Plame and her cover were outed.

So Woodward is going to tell us differently and that makes it so.

Only in bizarro world.

What has happened to that man? Is he on some kind of mind and soul destroying prescription drugs?

[realFedUp]

10. If he isn't more careful the WP will go the way of the NYT

just give us the facts, not the fantasy.

[thecrow]

11. Amen..maybe we do

[Straight Shooter]

9. Damage or no damage, it has no bearing on the crime.

The potential for damage because of the exposure is the reason why we have a law to protect agents' identities.

If I have a gun when I'm angry, and I attempt to shoot you, am I off the hook because it turns out that the bullet I fired at you is a blank? Hell no. It's still assault, because I intended to harm you.

Being lucky with the outcome is no defense. The potential for great harm existed, and may still exist.

[lovuian]

12. There WAS DAMAGE!!! GREAT DAMAGE!!!

and there was a CRIME!!!


somebody forgot that part!!! But Fitzgerald didn't!!!

[flyarm]

13. perhaps the worst crime was ..a warning message to all cia agents..

do not disagree with the * white house...we will destroy you if you attempt to do so!! and we will get away with it..and the media will destroy whatever you have left when we are done with you!!

and no court will protect you from us!!

what a sad day for our nation...but then every day has been a sad day since the supreme court annointed a president! and we have a benign nation of peoples and a malignancy in our government..a ferocious malignacy!

please i pray fitz is not done with these mother fuckers who have robbed my nation!

maybe i put to much faith in one american, who i hope and pray realizes the magnitude of the destruction of this once proud and gracious nation...but it seems all i have left ...is this one last hope..

Fitz..i am counting on you...please do not let this nation down!

fly

[wordpix2]

14. Fitz says there was damage to us all and

he should know---he's been investigating for 22 months. I trust him before I trust ANYTHING a member of media says---even Woodward.