Clinton Appointment to CIA Busted for Leaking Info. to Press

[ChumpDumper]

Errrahhhh, Chump, you didn't like CNN's little article from the
inspector himself.

The one that says everyone's intel about WMDs sucked?

That also makes me feel safer.

[Clandestino]

chump, did sadamm deserve to remain in power?

[xrayzebra]

^^Another Liberal rant by the Chump!

[DarkReign]

Because, of course, foreign powers don't read the New York Times, right?

True, but I dont know exactly what was allegedly leaked. Operational intelligence would be treasonous.

If she was just whistle blowing on this Administration's misappropriation of CIA Intelligence to suit its own needs, so what. That doesnt endanger anyones lives. She should be fired, probably charged (maybe convicted), but it didnt reveal any tactical info.

Again, thats an assumption. Could be wrong....dont know.

Oh yeah, stop the WMD crap. Do we have Iraqi WMD's in our possesion? No. If they were moved and had recorded evidence to support such claims, I would think this administration would be trumpeting that around every major news organization in the world.

[ChumpDumper]

chump, did sadamm deserve to remain in power?

Try to change the subject again. Nice try.

If we're going to remove every leader we think is a bad guy out there, let's be consistent about it.

I ask you, does the Sudanese government deserve to have the US do absolutely nothing about everything they are known to have done and Yoni is claiming they have done?

Does 'lil Kim deserve to be in power?

Does the Chinese government deserve to be in power?

Do all the corrupt African govenments deserve to be in power?

If you are going to put on the white hat -- keep it on or STFU.

[Clandestino]

this thread started out about the cia leaking info.. she was wrong.. you chose to derail the topic and make it out wmds... regardless, unless you think sadamm should still be in power, then stfu about wmds... as far as the rest, give it time.. it took 12 years to get rid of sadamm.. they didn't do it overnight you stupid ...

Try to change the subject again. Nice try.

If we're going to remove every leader we think is a bad guy out there, let's be consistent about it.

I ask you, does the Sudanese government deserve to have the US do absolutely nothing about everything they are known to have done and Yoni is claiming they have done?

Does 'lil Kim deserve to be in power?

Does the Chinese government deserve to be in power?

Do all the corrupt African govenments deserve to be in power?

If you are going to put on the white hat -- keep it on or STFU.

[ChumpDumper]

then stfu about wmds

Where are they?

[Clandestino]

Where are they?

you're a joke... that is your only comment to anyone.. where are the wmds.. you're like a wind up doll..."where are the wmds?" pull, "where are the wmds?" pull

[ChumpDumper]

That wasn't an answer.

Since WMDs are the main reason we removed Saddam and considered him a threat, it has everything to do with your question to me.

So where are they, Clan?

Who has them?

In what amounts?

Which types?

Are you telling me you don't care about any of this?

[Yonivore]

Did they? They had very low level contacts if anything.

Did you even read my post that quoted Clinton officials describing a SIGNIFICANT relationship? Iraqi scientists in Sudan helping al Qaeda develop weapons? Did you read any of it? I intentionally left out everythingn BUT the Clinton administration evidence on this.

Nobody, not even the Bush administration is using your plagiarized blogs to support their policies -- you'd think they'd be shouting this from the rooftops considering their poll numbers. There simply is nothing like the "Saddam was behind 9/11" fallacies that the administration was all too happy not to discount. Ultimately, AQ and the Ba'athists are so diametrically opposed that the kind of cooperation you are dreaming of could never happen. you and your trying to make this about me. This war was about WMDs and we failed to get them or even prove they existed.

You're an idiot and this paragraph proves it. , the evidence is starting to point to the possibility -- although no on in this administration has ever made the assertion (as you untruthfully claim) -- that Iraq was, indeed, involved in the events of 9-11.

Salmon Pak, Iraq scientists in Sudan, al Qaeda fleeing Afghanistan to Iraq before we invaded Iraq, supporting other terrorist organizations, seeking uranium from Niger probably buying it from the Congo, and on and on and on.

Not to mention the words of his own officials in the posted translated memos talking about moving "special weapons" and setting up nuclear facilities in the years, months, and weeks leading up to the invasion.

You're just a ing idiot and now I remember why I had you on ignore. Welcome back.

If there was this Grand Alliance between Iraq, AQ and Sudan, why the living have we not done one thing about Sudan EVER. It fits all your criteria - WMDs and AQ contact -- oh and they just happened to have an active genocide of hundreds of thousands of people in the past couple of years - not a few hundred two decades ago?

Well, aside from destroying the relationship between Sudan and al Qaeda by (probably) threatening to bomb their asses back to the stone age, what possible strategic value is the place? Besides, I'd be asking Bill Clinton why he didn't accept delivery of Osama bin Laden when the Sudanese offered to hand him over...three times.

Ever? Bill Clinton bombed the "Aspirin Factory." And, as it apparent in the post below as well as bin Laden's quick departure from the country, I'd say we probably did some significant ass-kicking in Sudan. You don't read very well, do you? You get an idea in your head and not even facts will dislodge it. Amazing.

Why have you not clamored for regime change there?

EVER?

One ing evil regime at a time. Let's deal with those that actually pose a risk to our security first, shall we? I'm willing to talk about Sudan...just as soon as the mad mullahs of Iran and that idiot in North Korea have reached room temperature.

[Clandestino]

no, the 10+ years of un violations, attacking us and british planes, etc didn't have anything to do with anything.. dude, what ing planet are you from??? and besides, everyone believed he was dangerous, from demos to repubs, to foreign countries... not just the u.s.....

so, did it not bother you that sadamm fired on us and british planes?

did it not bother you that iraq was paying off the un so sadamm could be rich and continue to kill anyone who disagreed with him?

That wasn't an answer.

Since WMDs are the main reason we removed Saddam and considered him a threat, it has everything to do with your question to me.

So where are they, Clan?

Who has them?

In what amounts?

Which types?

Are you telling me you don't care about any of this?

[Yonivore]

Well, that sucks! I can't put ChumpDumper on ignore because of his Mod status.

[xrayzebra]

Well, that sucks! I can't put ChumpDumper on ignore because of his Mod status.

Why would you want to. Everyone needs a little humor in life and he is
a riot. Not everyone gets to see a liberal in full rant mode.

[Yonivore]

Here's another thing to consider about this McCarthy traitor.

Mary McCarthy's position--the post from which she is likely to have learned the most sensitive information at the heart of the leak controversy--was inside the CIA's inspector general's office. This is the unit that investigates internal misconduct. This is the unit to which government employees are encouraged to report government abuse or illegality so it can be investigated, potentially reported to Congress, and prosecuted if appropriate.

That is, it is the legal alternative to leaking national secrets to the media.

It is, therefore, the process that has to be protected if our intelligence community is to have credibility with the public and with the foreign intelligence services on which we are so dependent. If it becomes just another Washington sieve--a place where people who comply with their oaths and exercise professional discretion may nevertheless expect to find the information they confide trumpeted on Page One of the Washington Post--we are guaranteed to have much more leaking. And much less security.

If Mrs. McCarthy leaked information that came her way as part of an inspector general's investigation, there also is no reason to assume that it--or the Pulitzer prize-winning story it helped produce--is true. Investigators often gather material that does not pan out or that turns out to be false or exaggerated. And indeed, before her firing last week, the New York Times was casting doubt on the secret-prison tale:

The European Union's an errorism chief told a hearing on Thursday that he had not been able to prove that secret C.I.A. prisons existed in Europe.

"We've heard all kinds of allegations," the official, Gijs de Vries, said before a committee of the European Parliament. "It does not appear to be proven beyond reasonable doubt."

But Mr. de Vries came under criticism from some legislators who called the hearing a whitewash. Kathalijne Buitenweg, a Dutch member of Parliament from the Green Party, said that even without definitive proof, "the cir stantial evidence is stunning."

Ooops! Could she have actually leaked a lie?

[ChumpDumper]

Let's deal with those that actually pose a risk to our security first, shall we?

You just said Sudan did - to say nothing of the hundreds of thousands of people being hacked to death, right? I know they don't count because they aren't unborn or brain dead.

seeking uranium from Niger probably buying it from the Congo

There you go again with your "probably" mantra -- hey, say he had uranium -- where is it?

You're an idiot and this paragraph proves it.

We failed to get any WMDs or prove they even existed. All we got were pieces of paper that can lead us to think they may have existed and may have been moved to, well you don't know so you might as well leave it at that. And putting me on ignore will not change that.

no, the 10+ years of un violations, attacking us and british planes, etc didn't have anything to do with anything.. dude, what ing planet are you from??? and besides, everyone believed he was dangerous, from demos to repubs, to foreign countries... not just the u.s.....

Why did we believe he was dangerous?

WMDs.

That was the main selling point of the war, you simply can't deny that.

so, did it not bother you that sadamm fired on us and british planes?

Every time he did that, we took out the radar site that tracked our planes - he was actually doing us a favor.

did it not bother you that iraq was paying off the un so sadamm could be rich and continue to kill anyone who disagreed with him?

Not to the level that I'd blow $315,000,000,000 on him when Osama was still out there.

[Yonivore]

Speaking of Sudan and Osama bin Laden...

The purported Osama bin Laden audio press release aired on al-Jazeera over the weekend, if it's for real, it's pretty encouraging. He has developed a sudden interest in his former home of Sudan. From the BBC's excerpts:

Britain . . . separated Sudan from Egypt. Then it returned once again to Sudan and sought to separate the south. It formed an army there from the people of the south and supported them with money, weapons, and expertise. It directed them to demand secession from Sudan. America then adopted this army through material and moral support and through its international tools, like the United Nations.

I particularly find it amusing bin Laden believes the U.N. is an American tool.

It pressured the Khartoum government into signing an unfair agreement which allows the south to break away six years after signing the agreement. Let [Sudanese President Omar Hassan Ahmad] al-Bashir and [US President George W.] Bush know that this agreement is not worth the ink with which it was written. It does not bind us in the least.

Not satisfied with all these intrigues and crimes, America moved on to stir up more strife. One of the areas of gravest strife was western Sudan, where some differences among the tribesmen were used to trigger a ferocious war among them that consumes everything in its way, in preparation for sending Crusader forces to occupy the region and steal its oil under the cover of maintaining security there. It is a continuous Zionist-Crusader war against the Muslims.

So, that's our plan! I wonder if McCarthy leaked this to bin Laden.

In this respect, I urge the mujahidin and their supporters in general, and in Sudan and the surrounding areas, including the Arabian Peninsula, in particular, to prepare all that which is necessary to fight a long-term war against the Crusader thieves in western Sudan. Our aim is clear: that is, defending Islam, its people, and land, and not defending the Khartoum government, although there could be common interests between us. Our differences with it are great. Suffice it to say that it failed to implement sharia law and relinquished the south.

Blogger TigerHawk offers some context:

Less than 2 1/2 years ago, al Qaeda broke the news to the Taliban that it was diverting resources to Iraq so as to humiliate the American "Crusaders." . . .

Al Qaeda drew a line in the sands of the Sunni Triangle, and the United States Army and Marines walked right across it. First, al Qaeda tried to kill Americans, per bin Laden's orders. It largely failed. Then al Qaeda went after America's allies, and succeeded only in turning public opinion against itself in every Muslim country it attacked. After thirty months of battlefield defeats and political embarrassments, bin Laden won't even mention Iraq in one of his rare public utterances, and he rallies his troops to fight a war where American soldiers aren't. How humiliating. How delightful.

Al Qaeda has lost in Iraq, and bin Laden is desperate to change the subject. He and his organization are at grave risk of being discredited, and when that happens it will be much harder for al Qaeda to attract recruits, raise money, or deal with governments.

It may have the added benefit of encouraging America to do something about the horrors in Sudan...just so Chumpy will shut the up already.

[Ocotillo]

Washington Post is reporting that the CIA is backing off claiming McCarthy was connected to the secret prisons "leak".

Maybe the neo-con mob in here might want to douse the torches and let an investigation take place before they burn someone at the stake.

link

Not saying she is innocent. Not saying she is guilty. None of you have all the facts either.......just your own personal agendas.

[ChumpDumper]

If she did leak something the agency has every right to fire her. What is it all about? I'll wait for the book.

[Yonivore]

Washington Post is reporting that the CIA is backing off claiming McCarthy was connected to the secret prisons "leak".

Maybe the neo-con mob in here might want to douse the torches and let an investigation take place before they burn someone at the stake.

link

Not saying she is innocent. Not saying she is guilty. None of you have all the facts either.......just your own personal agendas.

Here's news for you...as far as I can find, the CIA never said her dismissal was related to the secret prisons leak. Just that she'd been fired for disclosing secret information to the media.

I think we all jumped to the conclusion it was the prison leak. But, now, I'm more inclined to believe she just told the media anything she came across while at the IG's office...well, as long as it was damaging to President Bush.

And, it's possible some field CIA people used her as a tool...errr, fool...by making bogus complaints to the IG's office knowing she'd share.

I think this may go much deeper than anyone imagines.

[Ocotillo]

Here's news for you...as far as I can find, the CIA never said her dismissal was related to the secret prisons leak. Just that she'd been fired for disclosing secret information to the media.

I think we all jumped to the conclusion it was the prison leak. But, now, I'm more inclined to believe she just told the media anything she came across while at the IG's office...well, as long as it was damaging to President Bush.

And, it's possible some field CIA people used her as a tool...errr, fool...by making bogus complaints to the IG's office knowing she'd share.

I think this may go much deeper than anyone imagines.

My thoughts and this is only a gut feeling. This is a message to others within the CIA. Goss is a partisan and that is one of the reason he was appointed.

[Yonivore]

NYTimes

A C.I.A. spokeswoman, Jennifer Millerwise Dyck, said: "The officer was terminated for precisely the reasons we have given: unauthorized contacts with reporters and sharing classified information with reporters. There is no question whatsoever that the officer did both. The officer personally admitted doing both."

The CIA's spokeswoman says that McCarthy "personally admitted" that she had "unauthorized contacts with reporters" and shared "classified information" with them.

This flies in the face of what Ms. McCarthy's surrogates are telling their contacts in the press.

Here's a good Andrew McCarthy piece on the whole matter.

[Yonivore]

So, Chumpy, was there a significant relationship between the Ba'athist regime of Iraq and Osama bin Laden's al Qaeda in 1998?