Can someone explain the difference in Valerie Plame's security

[Maraya1969]

or covert position as opposed to what the repugs are saying is real covert position? I don't remember the job titles but the right is using this as an excuse for outing her - like she didn't have anything to be outed from.

[Merlot]

1. The fact is, no matter what her position was

(and they like to say she had a "desk job" at langley) by putting her name out there, they jepordized all the contacts she had made over the years and everyone else who worked with her on an undercover status. All her undercover work will now be scrutinized by anyone who worked with her. This is SO much bigger than her job status. She worked in WMD's - I'm not sure of the exact nature of her work.

Personally, I think exposing her had larger implications than just getting even with Joe Wilson. I think it had something to do with her WMD work.

[Spazito]

2. Valerie Plame was a NOC, which means she was under deep

cover with no protection, subject to being executed if discovered in whatever country she was in at the time of discovery. She was doing one of the most dangerous jobs in the CIA, not just the usual covert activity while protected.

"Plame was a classmate of mine from the day she started with the CIA. I entered on duty at the CIA in September 1985. All of my classmates were undercover -- in other words, we told our family and friends that we were working for other overt U.S. government agencies. We had official cover. That means we had a black passport -- i.e., a diplomatic passport. If we were caught overseas engaged in espionage the black passport was a get-out-of-jail-free card.

A few of my classmates, and Plame was one of these, became a non-official cover (NOC) officer. That meant she agreed to operate overseas without the protection of a diplomatic passport. If caught in that status she would have been executed."

Above quote from this article by Larry C Johnson, former CIA:

http://www.startribune.com/stories/1519/5509192.html

[Maraya1969]

4. Why would anyone chose to be a NOC? eom

[Spazito]

6. Because they are truly courageous and want to serve

their country in the best way they can. Few are so courageous and the outrageous acts by the bush cabal in blowing her cover is all the more traitorous because of her being a NOC.

[TexasProgresive]

5. And Larry Johnson only knew her

as Val P. They didn't know each other's last names. I think Bolton outed Plame to destroy the credibility and ability to work in the WMD field. Bolton may have used Rove or other WH types to put this out. I never quite made the connection that outing Plame discredited Wilson, it just didn't make sense. But whoever did this destroyed a whole network of intelligence and I think they did that on purpose because the intelligence did not jive with the policy.

[Spazito]

7. I agree, this was less to do with Wilson than the whole issue

of WMDs, her 'front' company and their mission. Trying to discredit Wilson was just icing on the cake to the bush cabal. Their hubris has finally caused their own 'outing', imo.

[skids]

3. Exposing her exposed brewster-jennings.

Look for "shades of cover" published in many news periodicals yesterday. That gives you an idea of how this whole cover game works.

But what isn't discussed in that article is the ripple effect of her exposure on the front company she "worked" for. That was found out because she was required to list it as her employer on a political contribution. What damage the exposure of Brewster-Jennings has done is anyone's guess -- you can't trust the media or the CIA and least of all the Republicans to give an accurate answer to that.

But as far as I'm concerned, I'm happy to let the CIA state the level of damage and leave it at that -- even if they downplay it, it is probably best that we let them decide what they want known and when. Too much sniffing around that tree could further compromise our anti-terrorism efforts.