| Submit your comments on this article | |
| Home Front: Politix | |
| WaPo Falls for "Secret" Story | |
| 2005-07-21 | |
| A classified State Department memorandum central to a federal leak investigation contained information about CIA officer Valerie Plame in a paragraph marked "(S)" for secret, a clear indication that any Bush administration official who read it should have been aware the information was classified, according to current and former government officials. Rest at link. I have seen secret documents, (but, true, they were not memos!)many years ago. As I recall, parts of dcouments are not marked "S", for secret. Documents are secret. And the word is spelled out, in big bold letters. What BS. Somebody embellishing here? And this is a "document" discussed with a reporter (who did not see it) by the proverbial "unnamed source". Even if is IS a SECRET document, it doesn't mean Valerie's name is or was-once-upon-a-time a secret.
| |
| Posted by:Bobby |
| #12 Question is - was it truly SECRET or was it misclassified? Plame/Wilson had already had her cover blown by Aldrich Ames, and had been withdrawn to the US to a desk job, out in the open. The only reason that her name may have been classified is inertia and the failure to remove her from the covered section properly. As I originally said, someon is doing some ass-covering at CIA and is using the opportunity to also try to smear the administration. In my opinion, Its symptomatic of whats rotten at CIA and why Director Goss has so much to do to renew the agency from the rot and politicization of the Clinton years. |
| Posted by: OldSpook 2005-07-21 23:06 |
| #11 And just to state the obvious, the purpose for it is to make sure people know what info must NOT be shared ..... |
| Posted by: too true 2005-07-21 22:54 |
| #10 Folks its called "Portion Marking". The overall document is classified to the highest level, and individual paragraphs are classified to thier highest content level. like this: Document is SECRET (U)This is unclassfied (S) This is secret (U) and this isnt google for it. or try this link (so I can say thats where I found it, wink wink) http://rf-web.tamu.edu/security/secguide/S1class/Marking.htm |
| Posted by: OldSpook 2005-07-21 22:49 |
| #9 Desperation makes for some pretty silly assertions and logical gymnastics. Blind faith is an attribute of all zealots. For example, though the Kool Aid Kids think the Rosemary Woods Oval Office tape erasure episode makes their point about whatever evil Govt conspiracy they're peddling, it clearly makes the point against their treasured apologist bullshit, just as effectively... Bullshit is bullshit and Kool Aid is, apparently, forever. |
| Posted by: .com 2005-07-21 22:17 |
| #8 NPR did a piece on this today, too. While the reporter did make a big fuss about it, a key point was that it was originally some sort of internal memo, and was reprinted for Colin Powell the day after Wilson's New York Times op-ed came out. The reporter emphasized that Powell was on Air Force One that day, as was Karl Rove, so KR could have seen it at the same time as Powell did. The journalistas are really digging deep on this thing. |
| Posted by: trailing wife 2005-07-21 21:56 |
| #7 Well, in that CIA overseas works hand in glove with foggy bottom, it would figure that somebody at state would know Plame was a spook. However, that being said, in that Washington produces 1x10 to the 50,000th power memoranda in a single day, the odds of *anybody* reading the thing are miniscule. Plus, there is the omnipresent "need to know" thingy, and, come to think of it, how come a CIA operative doesn't even merit a TS? I mean, heck, paper gets classified secret just because it's in the same room as secret paper, literally. Secret is not for diddly. Almost all Army junior NCOs (E-5) have a Secret clearance. |
| Posted by: Anonymoose 2005-07-21 14:36 |
| #6 I'm afraid I have to disagree here. The stuff I've seen (not State Dept or CIA, granted) does indeed have that kind of marking. Yes, every page has SECRET top and bottom, but the individual paragraphs will have a (S) or (U) or (C) next to them. The WaPo article does say classified State Department memorandum, so that sounds consistent. The whole document is classified, with individual sections marking their level of classification. But, of course, I haven't seen the actual document. |
| Posted by: Jackal 2005-07-21 13:37 |
| #5 And this is a "document" discussed with a reporter (who did not see it) by the proverbial "unnamed source". No doubt the source was Lucy Ramirez. Christ, it's time to start holding journalists to the standards they have for everyone else. |
| Posted by: Robert Crawford 2005-07-21 13:25 |
| #4 "Note to reader of this document: avert your eyes from the next four (4) sentences, which are highly secret, in fact, double secret, and must not be read. Skip to the next paragraph" wotta crock of shit. |
| Posted by: Frank G 2005-07-21 12:38 |
| #3 Problem is, this article is on the front page of the Austin TX paper (along with Lance, of course). And, it will be believed here in a blue spot of a red state! |
| Posted by: Sherry 2005-07-21 12:27 |
| #2 How many ways do they want to aproach this before they figure out that he didn't break the law and GW isn't going to do shit about it. Get over it, this is going to go nowhere! Do you honestly think crazy Carl would do anything as stupid as this? If he did, he surely wouldn't leave a paper trail. |
| Posted by: bigjim-ky 2005-07-21 12:04 |
| #1 The State department has the same thing. If something is secret, the whole document is secret, not just one stupid paragraph...with an S. "Classified" is marked in big, bold, RED letters. This is a hoax, or a fraud. |
| Posted by: mmurray821 2005-07-21 11:43 |