don't get It...somebody inform me, please..I

[Penn]

Ok, somebody leaked to the press(Robert Novak), the identity of a CIA agent, Mrs Wilson(?), a wife of a former ambassador to Nigeria, I believe, who was sent there to see if any nuclear material was sent to Iraq for their program for WMDs.

Long story short, the former ambassador is outraged, the Congress is outraged(mostly the left), and then - the press is outraged, and they are challenging the current administration to reveal who the leaker is!!

"We do not want to hear anymore lies" -- tell us who in your "Senior White House advisors group" -- who is it, that gave Mr. Novak that information??

Am I totally screwed up here, or what?? The Washington Post KNOWS who the leaker is!! Mr. Novak writes for that paper(and others); HE KNOWS who that person is!! - Yet they hide behind the premise that reporters cannot ethically reveal their sources - why, because they'll never get another nugget from an "anonomous source"?

But, they still want a full accounting of who leaked the precious info, of her identity, what she does for a living, to this reporter - yet THEY already KNOW..........!

This is so much more BS from our Press Media, that at least to me, boggles the imagination!

Carl Bernstein(anybody remember him?) was on Fox News tonight, defending this position!

That the press should be able to reveal information like this, but yet, they have a right to call the White House on this to "clean up"
their act, and 'fess up" who the tattletale is, so it dosen't happen again!

Am I the only person to see the hypocracy in all this??

 

[Snickers]

Does he always think so much?

 

[Penn]

Originally posted by Snickers
Does he always think so much?

Do you always think so little?

Example: The youthful Caine queries:"Master, how is it that you hear so much of the world around you?"

The Master to the youthful Caine: "Young man, how is it that you do not?"

 

[Snickers]

Man who stand on top of toilet, high on pot.

 

[Snickers]

Knowledge speaks, but wisdom listens. I will be quiet now.

 

[Penn]

Originally posted by Snickers
Knowledge speaks, but wisdom listens. I will be quiet now.

Nah, that isn't the point.

I was just wondering if anybody else heard/saw the segment I did and came away with the same feeling.

You can't have it both ways: you already know the truth, yet you want to force another to shake up the house, and tell all?

Is that the state of things the media has come to?

 

[vraiblonde]

It's my understanding that this woman is NOT an operative or anything like that. She's just a routine employee. It's also my understanding that it was common knowledge that she works for the CIA. So there probably isn't a "leaker" at all. It's just all a bunch of crap from the Democrats who are desperate to find some scandal to pin on Bush.

Is Congress calling for an investigation or just the media and the lib talking heads?

 

[vraiblonde]

Here's what Novak says:
http://www.suntimes.com/output/novak/cst-edt-novak01.html

How big a secret was it? It was well-known around Washington that Wilson's wife worked for the CIA. Republican activist Clifford May wrote Monday, in National Review Online, that he had been told of her identity by a non-government source before my column appeared and that it was common knowledge. Her name, Valerie Plame, was no secret either, appearing in Wilson's Who's Who in America entry.

Then he says in a subsequent column:
http://www.suntimes.com/output/novak/cst-edt-novak05.html

On the same day in 1999 that retired diplomat Joseph Wilson was returned $1,000 of $2,000 he contributed to Democratic presidential candidate Al Gore a month earlier because it exceeded the federal limit, his CIA-employee wife gave $1,000 to Gore using a fictitious identification for herself.

I'm not impressed.

 

[SmallTown]

Sounds like this whole thing is a bit messed up. I haven't really kpet up with this story, so I have no idea how it will end.

But I will say that since taking my new job here, I can say the CIA is VERY sensitive about the identities of all of their employes, not just their clandestine agents. So I really think the issue of her being an actual agent or not is irrelevant.

 

[Penn]

Originally posted by SmallTown
Sounds like this whole thing is a bit messed up. I haven't really kpet up with this story, so I have no idea how it will end.

But I will say that since taking my new job here, I can say the CIA is VERY sensitive about the identities of all of their employes, not just their clandestine agents. So I really think the issue of her being an actual agent or not is irrelevant.

I agree with your claim that the CIA is very sensitive about their employees' identities, as well as it should be; however, it's the whole hypocrisy that galls me.
As vrai notes, this is not a "breaking news" tidbit - revealing this womans' identity, 'cause that fact has been out there for months.

It's the uproar from both the left and the left-leaning press.

No, Mr. Novak is not left-leaning, but it appears to be the rest of the packhounds that are pushing this farce.

There is also the premise that Mr. Novak is not under any penalty of law for reporting this news, ie., putting it in print, but yet the poor sap that confirmed the data for Mr. Novak appears to be in serious trouble if his/her own identity is discovered.

BTW, I cannot set this in stone, but I'll bet your next paycheck(and mine) that somebody in the chain of editors at The Sun Times knows d@mn well who the "leaker" is, and yet they rant and rave for the Bush administration to "leave no stone unturned" and name this person. Bunch of garbage to me

 

[Ken King]

Originally posted by SmallTown
But I will say that since taking my new job here, I can say the CIA is VERY sensitive about the identities of all of their employes

Did you just "out" yourself? Someone call Justice (and no not Tigger's baby) or maybe Mr. Novak.

 

[SmallTown]

Originally posted by Ken King
Did you just "out" yourself? Someone call Justice (and no not Tigger's baby) or maybe Mr. Novak.

Go ahead, means nothing to me. We'll just see how far that assumption takes you.

 

[Ken King]

Originally posted by SmallTown
Go ahead, means nothing to me. We'll just see how far that assumption takes you.

Talk about someone not seeing a joke. But if you are CIA and you just did out yourself, you should be ashamed. Weren't you ranting about this when the story first broke?

 

[SmallTown]

Originally posted by Ken King
Talk about someone not seeing a joke. But if you are CIA and you just did out yourself, you should be ashamed. Weren't you ranting about this when the story first broke?

I'll keep that in mind


I must say I was rather startled when I heard the news.