Chicago Tribune: Plame's identity, if truly a secret, was thinly veiled

[sabra]

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi-0603120388mar12,1,5656740.story?coll=chi-newsnationworld-hed

Plame's identity, if truly a secret, was thinly veiled

By John Crewdson
Tribune senior correspondent
Published March 12, 2006


WASHINGTON -- The question of whether Valerie Plame's employment by the Central Intelligence Agency was a secret is the key issue in the two-year investigation to determine if someone broke the law by leaking her CIA affiliation to the news media.

Federal prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald contends that Plame's friends "had no idea she had another life." But Plame's secret life could be easily penetrated with the right computer sleuthing and an understanding of how the CIA's covert employees work.

When the Tribune searched for Plame on an Internet service that sells public information about private individuals to its subscribers, it got a report of more than 7,600 words. Included was the fact that in the early 1990s her address was "AMERICAN EMBASSY ATHENS ST, APO NEW YORK NY 09255."

...

Although prosecutor Fitzgerald has yet to accuse anyone of violating that law, he won a grand jury indictment charging former vice presidential chief of staff Lewis "Scooter" Libby with perjury and obstructing justice for allegedly making false statements under oath about how and when he learned of Plame's CIA employment, and when he told reporters.

[quiet.american]

1. Oh, brother, they've got to be kidding with that headline.

But Plame's secret life could be easily penetrated with the right computer sleuthing and an understanding of how the CIA's covert employees work.

And that's common knowledge, isn't it? :sarcasm:

[Rich Hunt]

32. that's not the headline

The headline is 'Internet blows CIA cover'. You can see for yourself on the Tribune's website.

This sort of stuff would be 'common knowledge' to anyone with a nasty far right political agenda, that's for sure.

[quiet.american]

48. That is the headline, but you're apparently referring to a different one

-- is that your point?

[NewJeffCT]

2. so, she worked at an embassy?

That doesn't mean she was a spy.

And, didn't the judge in the case say that CIA was actively trying to conceal her identity?

[sofa king]

35. ...and her husband was an ambassador?

Obviously, I'm missing something.

[yourout]

3. Who is this weasel that wrote this POS?

A little Googling needed I think.

[sabra]

5. the Trib had another piece that reported how easy it is

to find out CIA info via the internet, and it appears this report accompanies that piece. Me thinks
something is about to go down, as the timing of this is suspicious...

[yourout]

4. Self Delete...

Double post.

[The Backlash Cometh]

6. Nobody had any idea she was working on WMD in Iran.

That's pretty covert. So the Chicago Tribune is once again full of wet paper.

[leesa]

7. The Republican twits are STILL pretending she wasn't undercover??

[Call me Deacon Blues]

8. IT'S STILL ILLEGAL

It doesn't matter how easy it is. It's easy to take money from the till if you work at a McDonalds. It's easy to speed if there's not a cop around. It doesn't make it right. These media assholes continue to try to justify the unjustifiable, continue to do the bidding of their Republican masters. They make me sick. John Crewdson is just one more in the army of reporters without morals, who in pursuit of the almighty dollar, sell their souls. You will be remembered, pal.

Impeach the Media!

[quiet.american]

24. Excellent point. n/t

[Media_Lies_Daily]

9. Chicago Tribune? Say no more.

[joefree1]

15. "the leading voice of midwestern conservativism"

The Chicago Tribune, formerly self-styled as the "World's Greatest Newspaper", remains one of the principal daily newspapers of the midwestern United States. The paper has been called "the leading voice of midwestern conservativism".
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicago_Tribune

They bought the Los Angeles Times, so we canceled our subscription.

[Critters2]

38. After 5 years of reading the Des Moines Register,

I was shocked when I moved here and saw what a POS the Tribune is. I've cancelled my subscription and get state and local news from a small, local daily, and national news from the Register on line.

[boobooday]

10. Talking Points Distributed, Undigested, presented as is

to the letter. More crack journalism.

EVERYONE knew Valerie Plame was covert! Oh, wait, they didn't? Well, they could have, if they bought access to a huge database, and knew that she had a secret life . . .

[gratuitous]

11. So, if it's "easy" to uncover, it's not a secret?

And who determines how "easy" a secret is to uncover?

[Rex]

12. There is no question her cover was secret - the Chicago Trib

needs to grow some balls.

[still_one]

13. what do you expect from the chicago tribuine

[never cry wolf]

14. I read this crap at the kitchen table this morning, write to the reporter

Was it the Time article that stated that Fitz had presented evidence from the CIA that Plame was indeed covert and had done work overseas? Someone please send this "reporter" those links and ask why he is trying to gloss over the crimes that were committed.

[agincourt]

16. Again it shows,

The corruption of many newspapers in lying for the Bush/Cheney/Rove regime.

[Catrina]

17. Yes, but what's strange about this reporter (I just did a search on him)

is that he seems to be the last person you might expect to find covering for any administraion.

This article came up in a search on him including the words 'Reagan/Bush administrations'.

He didn't write the article itself, but is referenced by the reporter who wrote it.


Robert Lederers Apology to the Media

Boy, do I feel stupid. I've been blaming hard-working reporters for biased coverage of the West Nile Virus issue, their silence on the Manhattan Institute's Nazi-CIA-Eugenics link and for refusing to report on the Bush family's close connection to Hitler. In my naivete I was implying that the CIA was somehow influencing their coverage.

How ignorant can one person get?

Now I know better. After following a series of leads starting from an obscure article found on the internet the whole issue is much clearer and I can announce my findings.

The media is not influenced by the CIA-the media is the CIA.

http://www.iahf.com/20000916.html

He then referenced the following articles by other reporters backing up his theory that the media is basically owned by the CIA ~ one of them is John Crewdson:

For mainstream references to the CIA-media connection see: John M. Crewdson and Joseph B. Treaster, "The CIA's 3-Decade Effort to Mold the World's Views," New York Times, 25 December 1977, pp. 1, 12; Terrence Smith, "CIA Contacts With Reporters," New York Times, p. 13; Crewdson and Treaster, "Worldwide Propaganda Network Built by the CIA," New York Times, 26 December 1977, pp. 1, 37; Crewdson and Treaster, "CIA Established Many Links to Journalists in U.S. and Abroad," New York Times, 27 December 1977, pp. 1, 40-41.


Granted the articles referenced were written by him back in the '70s, but he also wrestled with the Reagan administration over them covering up controversies surrounding the Aids virus.

There's a lot of interesting information on him, and none of it seems to indicate that he's biased reporter ~ sometimes I don't know what to believe anymore ~

[fob]

20. So it's even more disingenuous than I thought. His article makes

it seem so easy for anyone to find this out and as proof he says even he found it out with an internet search. But in reality he's been looking into/reporting on CIA/Media connections for 30 fucking years! Yah, it's easy for him, he knows exactly what to look for and where and has the contacts to cross check.

What a bunch of shit he's spewing. Makes me think the CIA/Media connection he's been looking for has been staring at him from his bathroom mirror for a loooooong time.

[Catrina]

21. Yes, for someone who back in the seventies and eighties was fighting

'coverups' in the media, and aware of the infiltration of the CIA into the media, I don't understand what he's doing by going along with this. It seems he's either being used to help Liddy out of his predicament, or he's part of it. He seems too smart to be used unwittingly so that leaves us to conclude he's doing it willingly, but why?

His 'sources' are anonamous for the most part. And I noticed that they claim that because at one time, back in the early 'nineties, Valerie Plame was attached to an embassy, she could never have been a 'noc' because 'everyone knows that Embassy personel are CIA'!! This is the first I ever heard of that.

His sources are not at all convincing, basing their statements on 'theory' rather than factual knowledge of this case. Are they retired, were they connected to Valerie Plame or her organization? They dismiss the organization also, claiming it was 'obvious' as a CIA front. But he doesn't ask them 'obvious to whom' or how they would know this!

I wonder why he didn't ask them this question 'okay, so it became general knowledge that a person who worked for an embassy would NEVER become a NOC?' Then, 'in that case, what better person to hire as a NOC? The one who, according to you, would be the least suspicious? And surely the CIA changes its policies once they become 'obvious'?

He apparently didn't ask questions, just repeated statements, which are actually just theories, from supposed former CIA agents, one of which was 'She was never a NOC' ~ he doesn't ask this person how he would know that, considering that this is exactly what she has been officially described as. What special knowledge did this 'source' have? He left it unquestioned, giving the statement an air of official authority. On what authority did he make such a statement that totally contradicts all the evidence presented in court? That's bad reporting and not in line with his reputation at all.

My feeling about his 'sources' is they are CIA version of the Swift Boat disgruntled veterans, hired by the Libby crowd to discredit the investigation because the fact is, Libby is in big trouble and maybe others and these people will stop at nothing to save themselves. They have way too much to lose ~

I'm surprised that this reporter would put their 'theories' forward as if they were fact ~

[NYC]

26. YOU should have written the article.

We would have had some worthwhile answers.

[Catrina]

34. You know, I've just thought of something after rereading his article ~

This is what made me think of it:

When the Tribune searched for Plame on an Internet service that sells public information about private individuals to its subscribers, it got a report of more than 7,600 words. Included was the fact that in the early 1990s her address was "AMERICAN EMBASSY ATHENS ST, APO NEW YORK NY 09255."

There were several threads on DU about a week ago regarding a company ~ I wish I could remember the details, that did 'data mining' and I think it had to do with the domestic spying issue. DUers did some research into it and discovered that it had information on every American in its data base.

As I recall, this company was working with either DHS and/or the intelligence community. It got attention when it accidentally released information on several thousand people a few months ago ~ which caused huge problems with ID theft.

Also, there was the story on Americablog (I think) about being able to buy telephone records online and John Aravosis actually found he was able to buy Gen. Clark's cell phone records during the election period for about $100.00.

The question was 'how did this Internet company get the records?' No one seems to have investigated that, but the theory was the information was being sold by the big company I mentioned above ~

I'm not sure why that article reminded me of all this, and I wish I knew how to search for those threads, but if this is what this reporter is using to say that 'information was easily obtained on Valerie Plame' I don't think that would have been true three years ago, unless it was done by someone who knew at the time, that this company existed and had the information.

Now, I'm thinking that Cheney, Rove et al, may have thought of selling the info online to make it look like it was all over the place. What I don't know is for how long you could buy this information.

Gen. Clark supposedly was asking for legislation making it illegal. I would have though it should have been illegal all along.

Interestingly, this whole story has gone away, and now this reporter says he was able to get the information the same way John Aravosis got it.

So, my question is ~ did Rove et al use the Data Mining company (rightwing, as I recall) to release info to entrepreneurs who then sold it online, AFTER the Libby indictment??

I guess I'm asking 'how long has it been possible to buy phone records, CIA info etc. online?' and I would think this reporter ought to be asking the same question. Because it's very relevant to what he's claiming.

Fitzgerald shot down their (pre-planned) propaganda story that 'everyone knew, her neighbors knew' when he sent agents out to talk to the neighbors. But this would be another way to undermine his claim that this was not so.

Important questions ~

'why is no one disturbed by the fact that information on the CIA can be bought online?' and 'How long has it been possible to buy it the way this reporter says he did?' and
'Who told him he could get it online?'

Maybe he should think about how he was led to the information, and tell us who led him there. If he wasn't aware of the data-mining story ~ (I think it was on a thread started by Larisa from Raw Story) ~ it's possible he is being used ~

Shouldn't the Bush administration be super disturbed by this? So far, there's been no reaction at all from the WH. which always makes me suspicious ~ they jump on reporters, but not on people who out undercover agents ~ when they're not too upset about something like this, it makes me think it's going exactly the way they wanted it to! Or maybe I'm just getting paranoid ~

[NYC]

37. Was it ChoicePoint?

The only one I can think of at the moment.

I guess what is most striking is that if this information is available, the government should be shutting it down so that the whole world doesn't obtain the CIA records by "surfing the net." You're right. Not a sound of protest from them.

Maybe things are going according to plan.

This is really something to think about.

[mahatmakanejeeves]

39. Choice Point

took over the company that disenfranchised the 56 or 57 thousand voters in Florida in 2000.

[NYC]

43. DBT is the Florida division of ChoicePoint.

Do you remember the other company's name? Edited because I found it: DBT.

# ChoicePoint acquired the company that did – Database Technologies – after DBT had delivered the initial 2000 voter exception list to Florida officials for verification.

# DBT won the contract in late 1998 as part of a competitive bidding process...

http://www.choicepoint.com/news/2000election.html

When c. 57,000 voters were disenfranchised, someone posted a picture of Yankee Stadium (full attendance). Yankee Stadium holds 55,000 people, fewer than were disenfranchised in Florida.

[NYC]

42. Database gives access to fake firms. Is that what you mean?

...accidentally released information on several thousand people a few months ago ~ which caused huge problems with ID theft...

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/6969799/

ChoicePoint warns more than 30,000 they may be at risk

...Criminals posing as legitimate businesses have accessed critical personal data stored by ChoicePoint Inc., a firm that maintains databases of background information on virtually every U.S. citizen, MSNBC.com has learned.

The incident involves a wide swath of consumer data, including names, addresses, Social Security numbers, credit reports and other information. ChoicePoint aggregates and sells such personal information to government agencies and private companies...

...The Atlanta-based company says it has 10 billion records on individuals and businesses, and sells data to 40 percent of the nation's top 1,000 companies. It also has contracts with 35 government agencies, including several law enforcement agencies.

That article is dated February 14, 2005.

[Catrina]

44. Yes, yes, thank you! That's what I was trying to remember. I just tried

to find the threads but had no luck. I think Lala raw raw from Rawstory started one that led to the research that turned up Choicepoint.

You are great! And there was way more about this company and its gathering of information. Larissa may have written a story about it since then ~ I don't know but she had asked people to watch Meet The Press I think, and to pay attention to what companies were mentioned. DUers, being the great researchers they are, came up with a lot of information ~

So why is this information allowed to be out there? This reporter should have all this information ~ maybe he needs to be investigating his 'sources' ~ and wondering why the Bush administration is not at all concerned about the whole world know knowing what the CIA is up to. This article leaves a lot of questions out there.

[NYC]

47. Maybe they truly don't care about the information being available.

They don't care about the country or its citizens.

Or, it could be what you said. The timing of the availability would be very interesting.

[Ouabache]

51. Maybe he got an offer he couldn't refuse ??

from the BFEE...

[Catrina]

52. Yes, I thought about that ~ or, he's been taken in by someone telling him

he could find information on the Internet. He's probably not as familiar with the Internet as a lot of us are, and just assumed if it was there, it was always there.

Maybe we ought to email him and ask him to please check out these data mining companies and who runs them!

Also, I thought it was illegal to sell people's personal information, period. When did this become legal? Gen. Clark was supposed to be filing a complaint against the company who sold his info to Americablog.

Also, it was only a few weeks ago that John Aravosis found out you could buy anyone's info and he published a story about it, and obviously thought it something new, something he just discovered.

So, why did this reporter just accept that because it is now available, it would have been three or more years ago?

If he was made an offer he couldn't refuse though (Bush is trying pass laws that will put reporters in jail for reporting the truth about him after all), then he may just be going along with them. He does seem to have been a really good investigative journalist, until now though ~

[Rich Hunt]

33. that's the point

I thought we Democrats were well-aware that we have traitors in our midst, people who would compromise security in the service of their own extremist agendas. Given that they are so motivated, if the information is out there, you can bet they'll try to access it.

[MrPrax]

18. The link is a subscriber link...

But oddly enough, the same reporter with the same story has it listed under another headline at the same newspaper...

Internet blows CIA cover
It's easy to track America's covert operatives. All you need to know is how to navigate the Internet.

By John Crewdson
Tribune senior correspondent
Published March 12, 2006




Same story basically--Cheney, Rove, Liddy all surfed the net; they're NOT criminals, they are cyber-sleuths!!!

[fob]

19. I wonder what this reporter would have to say regarding the article

about bush* upping the penalty for reportng stuff like this? It seems like this guy is "helping the enemy" by explaining how to fiure out who our CIA operatives are!

Hey John, you're either with us or agin us right?

[Moderator]

22. Kick

[stepnw1f]

23. Trying to Weaken the Prosecution?

What a bunch of bullshit. They commited TREASON! Plain and simple.

[brentspeak]

25. Sheesh, talk about a deliberately misleading headline

The headline makes it sound as if Valerie Plame herself was making little or no effort to keep her CIA indentity secret, when in fact it's just that the CIA as an agency has done a poor job keeping private info about its agents away from info-gathering tools.

[Up2Late]

27. Internet blows CIA agents' cover (BBC News)

(I'm did a search and I'm fairly sure this is new information, Here's the New Chicago Trib article they are referring to: <http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi-060311ciamain-story,1,123362.story?coll=chi-news-hed&ctrack=1&cset=true>

I tried to start a new thread with this article, but it was Locked, but this is a different article.)

Sunday, 12 March 2006, 15:19 GMT

Internet blows CIA agents' cover

The Chicago Tribune says it has compiled a list of 2,653 CIA employees, just by searching the internet.

The newspaper said it gathered the information from online services that compile public data, that any fee-paying subscriber can access. It did not publish the names, at the CIA's request. Many of the agents are believed to be covert. The paper also located two dozen "secret" facilities.

A CIA spokeswoman admitted the internet had scuppered some of its methods. "Cover is a complex issue that is more complex in the internet age," said Jennifer Dyck.

"There are things that worked previously that no longer work. Goss is committed to modernising the way the agency does cover in order to protect our officers who are doing dangerous work." Ms Dyck declined to detail the remedies "since we don't want the bad guys to know what we're fixing".

Terror targets?

The Chicago Tribune article was headlined: "Internet blows CIA cover." It began: "She is 52 years old, married, grew up in the Kansas City suburbs and now lives in Virginia, in a new three-bedroom house."


(more at link below)
<http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4799174.stm>

[OKNancy]

46. This info was posted yesterday as well

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=102&topic_id=2161001

[drthais]

28. a little late for that headline

don't you think?
like, about two years too late?

[Catrina]

36. Exacttly!! He found it NOW! Who put it there and when?

These little information selling companies have sprung up over the past few months ~ ie, the cell phone records one. That was shut down, wasn't it after Gen. Clark went after them for selling his info to Americablog?

Is it legal to sell this info? Did he ask that? Who's selling it and where did they get it Why wasn't it for sale before Libby was indicted? This really stinks. I just posted above about some DU threads on all this about a week ago which I'm going to try to find. This reporter is being set up, I think ~ another Rovian trick to try to cover their crimes, imo, until proven otherwise!

[Up2Late]

49. I found a Data Mining website the other day, it's kind of scary what...

...finds if you have a name that is not very common. I did a search and it had my addresses going back 20 years, all for $9.99. For $39.99 they will sell just about ALL your personal info (and that includes most of your Mother's, Father's, brother's and sister's info too).

Here's the link: <http://www.veromi.info/>

[HuffleClaw]

29. IF truly a secret ?????

oooookay, nice spin. *puke*

[Mandate My Ass]

31. There is no "if" about this. The CIA said she was covert!!! Fitz would not

be conducting an investigation if she was not.

That caught my attention too. What a load of crap. :eyes:

[magellan]

30. My reply to Crewdson

"Dear Mr. Crewdson,

Re your article, "Plame's identity, if truly a secret, was thinly veiled", my response is simple.

If no crime was committed, if you are so certain that what the administration did in outing Plame is justified because a few anonymous sources contend she wasn't really a NOC, and because her true function was already 'widely' known by others in her field and such information is 'readily available' on the internet, then I dare you to print the names of other covert CIA operatives, and identify them as such, in the Chicago Tribune.

Sincerely..."

[magellan]

40. Damn faulty logic

I screwed up the last sentence and lost the whole point of my email.

SIGH.

Oh well, if he even bothers to read these things then I'm sure he won't mind if I send again! lol

[daleo]

41. It's like saying X robbed a bank

But A, B, C, and D robbed banks too. Big deal - X still robbed a bank.

[OKNancy]

45. Another article about their ( the Tribune's) methods and investigation

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi-060311ciamain-story,1,123362.story?coll=chi-news-hed&ctrack=1&cset=true

TRIBUNE INVESTIGATION

Internet blows CIA cover
It's easy to track America's covert operatives. All you need to know is how to navigate the Internet.

By John Crewdson
Tribune senior correspondent
Published March 12, 2006


WASHINGTON -- She is 52 years old, married, grew up in the Kansas City suburbs and now lives in Virginia, in a new three-bedroom house.

Anyone who can qualify for a subscription to one of the online services that compile public information also can learn that she is a CIA employee who, over the past decade, has been assigned to several American embassies in Europe.

The CIA asked the Tribune not to publish her name because she is a covert operative, and the newspaper agreed. But unbeknown to the CIA, her affiliation and those of hundreds of men and women like her have somehow become a matter of public record, thanks to the Internet.

When the Tribune searched a commercial online data service, the result was a virtual directory of more than 2,600 CIA employees, 50 internal agency telephone numbers and the locations of some two dozen secret CIA facilities around the United States.

[WhiteTara]

50. sniff sniff sniff...I smell Rove

this stinks. Saw Larry Johnson CBS evening news; he calls bogus.