Re: Plame not covert
- From: Bruce Morgen <editor@xxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2005 17:21:37 -0500
Going from actively covert
to classified is meaningless
in terms of its effect on
national security. I'll
show you why in the simplest
possible manner: if Valerie
Plame Wilson was at any time
associated with CIA assets
who are still operating as
such, her identity becoming
known *endangers the liberty
and/or lives of those people*
-- it connects people risking
their lives with the U.S. and
CIA, thereby putting them in
danger whether or not Valerie
Plame Wilson was running the
operation at the time of the
disclosure. Got it yet?
Can we please put this
utterly idiotic "Plame not
covert" talking point out of
its misery now? Thanks in
advance!
"Green/Pace" <1wise@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>not to split hairs, but covert & classified are to different levels of pay
>grade. She was a supervisor when she was outed. Illegal but to a different
>degree.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>"play on" <lordkoos@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
>news:1130648572.905840.176460@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> >From page 3 of the indictment:
>>
>> At all relevant times from January 1, 2002 through July 2003, Valerie
>> Wilson
>> was employed by the CIA, and her employment status was classified.
>> Prior to
>> July 14, 2003, Valerie Wilson's affiliation with the CIA was not common
>> knowledge outside the intelligence community.
>>
>
.................................................................
Posted via TITANnews - Uncensored Newsgroups Access
>>>> at http://www.TitanNews.com <<<<
-=Every Newsgroup - Anonymous, UNCENSORED, BROADBAND Downloads=-
.
- References:
- Plame not covert
- From: Lars Overshank
- Re: Plame not covert
- From: timepixdc
- Re: Plame not covert
- From: Lars Overshank
- Plame not covert
- Prev by Date: Re: Speakers for 4x???
- Next by Date: Re: data vs datum
- Previous by thread: Re: Plame not covert
- Next by thread: Re: Plame not covert
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|