Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Plame - Covert / Not Covert, it doesn't really matter.

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
Sal316 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-27-05 12:29 PM
Original message
Plame - Covert / Not Covert, it doesn't really matter.
Now, before y'all get yer undies twisted, here's why.

I've been arguing with this reeeeealllly stupid Freeper-like idiot on another message board. He's been stuck on the 1982 IIPA and how "she couldn't be covert because she hasn't been out of the country in the last 5 years".

(aside - I gave him Fitz's address so he can forward his proof there).

Granted, that's a point of contention that only the CIA can truly answer. Since they won't, one can only assume she was. Now, here's why it doesn't matter.

Standard Form 312 - Classified Information Non-Disclosure Agreement

This should be the linchpin of ANY investigation.

Some relevant sections include:

2. I hereby acknowledge that I have received a security indoctrination concerning the nature and protection of classified information, including the procedures to be followed in ascertaining whether other persons to whom I contemplate disclosing this information have been approved for access to it, and that I understand these procedures.

3. I have been advised that the unauthorized disclosure, unauthorized retention, or negligent handling of classified information by me could cause damage or irreparable injury to the United States or could be used to advantage by a foreign nation. I hereby agree that I will never divulge classified information to anyone unless: (a) I have officially verified that the recipient has been properly authorized by the United States Government to receive it; or (b) I have been given prior written notice of authorization from the United States Government Department or Agency (hereinafter Department or Agency) responsible for the classification of the information or last granting me a security clearance that such disclosure is permitted. I understand that if I am uncertain about the classification status of information, I am required to confirm from an authorized official that the information is unclassified before I may disclose it, except to a person as provided in (a) or (b), above. I further understand that I am obligated to comply with laws and regulations that prohibit the unauthorized disclosure of classified information.

4. I have been advised that any breach of this Agreement may result in the termination of any security clearances I hold; removal from any position of special confidence and trust requiring such clearances; or the termination of my employment or other relationships with the Departments or Agencies that granted my security clearance or clearances. In addition, I have been advised that any unauthorized disclosure of classified information by me may constitute a violation, or violations, of United States criminal laws, including the provisions of Sections 641, 793, 794, 798, *952 and 1924, Title 18, United States Code, * the provisions of Section 783(b), Title 50, United States Code, and the provisions of the Intelligence Identities Protection Act of 1982. I recognize that nothing in this Agreement constitutes a waiver by the United States of the right to prosecute me for any statutory violation.


So...there you have it.

Rove, Libby, et.al., would have signed this agreement like anyone else who works with Classified Info.

They have knowingly violated their CINDA, which clearly spells out the responsibilities for handling, Federal Laws for disclosure, and punishments for even simple negligence. They cannot say 'they didn't know'... it's bullshit.

I'm sure Fitz knows this....and now DU knows, too....if ya didn't know before.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
ET Awful Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-27-05 12:34 PM
Response to Original message
1. Also, regardless of whether she was currently working undercover
by disclosing her name and position, they disclosed and revealed the cover company for which she worked and completely destroyed ongoing covert operations under the umbrella of that company.

They not only outed her, but the cover company and all of it's connections as well.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rateyes Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-27-05 12:35 PM
Response to Original message
2. Espionage act....
is included in that. They are all guilty of it. If Fitz does his job, they are all going down. No question.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sal316 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-27-05 01:17 PM
Response to Original message
3. Punto!
:kick:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 26th 2024, 12:48 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC