Originally Posted by PJ24

Why? She wasn't undercover, and hadn't been for some time. She took no effort to hide her identity. Maybe, just maybe, it is a good idea to learn all of the actual facts, before getting out the rope on hearsay.

The GOP keeps making that point in order to excuse its illegal behavior. She wasnt undercover (as a spy overseas), but she was NOC (no-official covert). We also know that a reason she was a NOC was because she had informants in Pakistan that were keeping tabs on Islamic fundimentalists there. We dont know what her role was, but what we do know, what is undeniable, is that her name was classified for a reason. And that Bush betrayed this for political payback. According to Washington sources, ex-CIA director George Tenent was furious about the leak.

Its totally unexcusable (not to mention illegal) for ANY president to act this way. There are even Republicans like Arlen Spector and John McCain who agree with this. But once again, we see the president act in total disregard for American law. Incidently, some of those informants in Pakistan were murdered as soon as Plame's identity was made public. So obviously blowing her cover did have an effect on US National Security.

Lastly, the Judge in the Libby case has stated that the Fitzgarld indictment (which is sealed) makes several clear references that Plame was 'covert', and that Libby knowing blew her cover.
So Fitzgareld clearly has something concerning Plame's status as a covert officier.

Originally Posted by mmarsh

The GOP keeps making that point in order to excuse its illegal behavior. She wasnt undercover (as a spy overseas), but she was NOC (no-official covert). We also know that a reason she was a NOC was because she had informants in Pakistan that were keeping tabs on Islamic fundimentalists there. We dont know what her role was, but what we do know, what is undeniable, is that her name was classified for a reason. And that Bush betrayed this for political payback. According to Washington sources, ex-CIA director George Tenent was furious about the leak.

Its totally unexcusable (not to mention illegal) for ANY president to act this way. There are even Republicans like Arlen Spector and John McCain who agree with this. But once again, we see the president act in total disregard for American law. Incidently, some of those informants in Pakistan were murdered as soon as Plame's identity was made public. So obviously blowing her cover did have an effect on US National Security.

Lastly, the Judge in the Libby case has stated that the Fitzgarld indictment (which is sealed) makes several clear references that Plame was 'covert', and that Libby knowing blew her cover.
So Fitzgareld clearly has something concerning Plame's status as a covert officier.

Bravo Sierra again!

Instead of repeating useless anti-Bush rhetoric, let us know (prove) where and when Pres Bush acted against the American law?

Originally Posted by mmarsh

Its totally unexcusable (not to mention illegal) for ANY president to act this way. There are even Republicans like Arlen Spector and John McCain who agree with this. But once again, we see the president act in total disregard for American law. Incidently, some of those informants in Pakistan were murdered as soon as Plame's identity was made public. So obviously blowing her cover did have an effect on US National Security.

Your statements don't mean anything without proof to back them.

Phoenix

You have repeatively been asked to cite sources by several members (including myself) on other threads and have never done so. I have provided plenty in the past. So you have some nerve to ask from it from me when you don't do it yourself.

PJ24

Ok From Wikipedia

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plame_affair (to summerizes the case to-date)


Concerning the deaths of infomants (minor error, I said pakistan in fact it was the Middle East)

"It was revealed today that the Vice President's decision to out Mrs. Wilson(Plame) resulted directly in the deaths of two undercover operatives in the middle east who were linked to her undercover corporate position"


http://www.unconfirmedsources.com/?itemid=1278

Edit: See below. For some reason it was splitting my quote.

MarinerRhodes

I'm not sure I understand your point. Can you clarify please?

Phoenix

You have repeatively been asked to cite sources by several members (including myself) on other threads and have never done so. I have provided plenty in the past. So you have some nerve to ask from it from me when you don't do it yourself.

Like what? When? Where?

I don't remember that.

But you, so-called wise man, should provide us some proof for your hatred of Bush and his actions and when you don't give us a proof it means a lot.

The simple meaning of it, is that your rhetoric is nothing but your personal feelings and ideas about a great president.

Originally Posted by mmarsh

Its totally unexcusable (not to mention illegal) for ANY president to act this way. There are even Republicans like Arlen Spector and John McCain who agree with this. But once again, we see the president act in total disregard for American law. Incidently, some of those informants in Pakistan were murdered as soon as Plame's identity was made public. So obviously blowing her cover did have an effect on US National Security.

Lastly, the Judge in the Libby case has stated that the Fitzgarld indictment (which is sealed) makes several clear references that Plame was 'covert', and that Libby knowing blew her cover.
So Fitzgareld clearly has something concerning Plame's status as a covert officier.

This is from one of my responses from earlier in the thread(The source is linked in the original post):

Originally Posted by Marinerhodes

However, the sections of the N.I.E. that Mr. Libby said he was freed to discuss make no mention of Valerie Plame, the C.I.A. officer who was exposed in the course of the arguments over the intelligence, prompting the leak investigation.

Originally Posted by phoenix80

Like what? When? Where?

I don't remember that.

But you, so-called wise man, should provide some proof for your hatred of Bush and his actions and when you don't give us a proof it means a lot.

The simple meaning is that your rhetoric is nothing but your personal feelings and ideas about a great president.

P80: your response is like the pot calling the kettle black. If you have no idea what I am talking about then maybe you should reread some of your posts from the anti-Bush camp's point of view.


mmarsh:

The name of your link says it all: unconfirmed sources
This is the disclaimer of the site named above:

Disclaimer

In case you didn't get it, none of the stories are real.
It's all fake.
We made it all up.
It's satire.
The people might be real but the quotes are not.
If it gets you mad, get a life.(see first amendment)

http://www.unconfirmedsources.com/disclamer.htm

Originally Posted by mmarsh

"It was revealed today that the Vice President's decision to out Mrs. Wilson(Plame) resulted directly in the deaths of two undercover operatives in the middle east who were linked to her undercover corporate position"

And this has what to do with the President? You still haven't shown proof of the President's involvement, yet, you've already said things like:

Its totally unexcusable (not to mention illegal) for ANY president to act this way.

Sorry, but I think your bias is getting the best of you here.