CIA panel blocks book by outed agent Valerie Plame

[kskiska]

So she was covert after all?:sarcasm:

The Central Intelligence Agency has shot down a book by former undercover agent Valerie Plame, whose outing led to an investigation of the highest levels of government, a magazine reported.

According to Newsweek magazine, the CIA panel that must approve writings by former employees ruled Plame can't even mention the widely-known fact she worked for the agency because she had "nonofficial cover," posing as a private business-woman instead of a government official.

"She believes this will effectively gut the book," one of her advisors told the magazine asking not to be named.

The magazine noted that while other former CIA officers have published books, all of which cleared the panel, few with nonofficial cover have.

CIA spokesman Mark Mansfield told Newsweek the panel was still having "ongoing" talks with Plame to resolve the dispute.

more…
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20070107/pl_afp/usciaplame_070107191851

[no_hypocrisy]

1. If it weren't for the royalties, Plame should have just leaked the

story to Novak . . .

[Diane R]

2. I have no doubt it will be approved in February of '09,

[Me.]

3. You Mean She Was A NOC?

Gosh, what a surprise! :sarcasm:

[Norquist Nemesis]

4. This would help bolster her suit against Libby, Cheney, et al

since they'd been pushing the idea that she wasn't nonofficial cover. Good move on her part to try and get it published so the CIA can stop it.

[krispos42]

5. Oooo, excellent point

You have a twisty mind indeed!

:yourock:

[Norquist Nemesis]

10. It works both ways

If I were the defense atty, (and I'm NOT an attorney, thank God LOL!) I'd promote of twisted catch-22 defense of "I cannot confirm or deny she was NOC. I never said she was NOC."

[DoYouEverWonder]

8. Guess she was just

another pencil pusher after all.

[Tin Man]

6. To answer your question...

So she was covert after all?

Yes, that's been clear since the GJ first examined the case. If Plame were without cover, then clearly there would have been no violation of the Intelligence Identities Protection Act. The first order of business of the Fitzgerald GJ was to establish that an Intelligence Identity, as defined under the Act, had been unlawfully disclosed. Without this foundation, there is no violation, and hence no need for investigation by the GJ. From this in mind, it's clear from the actions of Fitz that Plame indeed met the conditions of the IIPA (was undercover & status was disclosed).

[kskiska]

7. Of course I knew that.

Should have included "sarcasm."

[Benhurst]

9. But at least she knows she's free.

[endarkenment]

11. I'm so confused.

This means, no wait I don't think I can handle this, that all those nice powerful people in high places that claimed over and over that Ms. Plame was not a covert agent and that everyone knew she was CIA were lying? I don't think I can deal with this. My head is exploding.

[bamacrat]

12. Ah freedom of speech, aint it great.

:sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :rant: :rant: :rant: :sarcasm: :rant: :rant: :rant: :sarcasm:

[Supersedeas]

13. Time for the screaming faces to come up with a new tap dance

[HuffleClaw]

14. you misquoted a bit

"the CIA panel that must approve writings by former employees ruled Plame can't even mention the widely-known fact she worked for the agency because she had "nonofficial cover,"

SHOULD READ

"the CIA panel that must approve writings by former employees ruled Plame can't even mention the widely-known fact she worked for the agency because it will embarrass the bush administration and likely lead to criminal charges against some of its highest officials."



hehehhehehehhee