Posted on 11/21/2005 1:05:16 AM PST by SBD1
Edited on 11/21/2005 1:31:30 AM PST by Jim Robinson. [history]
BODY: She was a CIA case officer working in Europe covertly, holding herself out as the representative of a Texas foundation that was interested in world economics.
Unlike most CIA case officers overseas who work out of U.S. embassies and purport to be diplomats, she was operating under what CIA calls "nonofficial cover" (NOC).
Pincus published this information in 1996? Am I reading this right???
WOW!
RUSH - get this out today!
Without a citation, this is unusable. Can you provide something? A title/ date/Url?
It certainly sounds like a good story but as presented it's useless to me.
There is no doubt about it at all that she bragged about her CIA status on the "third or fourth" date. JOE WILSON SAID SO (in his book, I think).
Being Joe Wilson, he can't refrain from going into all the details, including that it was during a "heavy make-out session" with Valerie (while, by the way, Joe Wilson was still married to Wifey #2), that he says Valerie got a concerned look on her face and blurted out that she was Jane Bond.
He then said that basically was a turn-on for him.
So ole Val was dating a married man, who obviously was a cocktail party circuit name dropper, and on the third date (they did not marry for another year as it took Joe that long to dispose of Wifey #2---who, I believe, may have been FRENCH), and she couldn't keep her big "secret" a minute longer under the pressure of his affection.
Some secret agent.
BFLR
Pincus may have known about Plame, but this is speculation that she wa one of the five agents ousted. The one pretending to be from Dallas was likely Baumgartner. I wonder if we could find out for sure who the others were? I'd guees not, as that is likely still classified.
Still no hint that Fitzgerald has gone back to look at the multicultural Dem stew left in charge by Hilary's Manchurian Candidate Nora Slatkin when she and Deutsch rearranged the CIA into Minority Affinity groups. Probably a direct pipeline to Dem Staffers.
Thank you, but I am interested in what PINCUS wrote in 1996. That is the subject of the thread and you will pardon me for seeming at sorts, but the point is without a citation the information is useless to me. I need a citation to the Pincus piece.
Probably this article:
The Washington Post, January 12, 1996, Friday, Final Edition, A SECTION;
Pg. A18, 1099 words, Agencies Debate Value of Being Out in the Cold; Spies Under 'Nonofficial Cover' Are Among Most Sensitive Operations, Walter Pincus, Washington Post Staff Writer
Sounds more like Super Spy Woman had problems keeping both her legs and her mouth shut.
Thanks--
"A friend of mine was in deep, business type NOC for the US Army for years during the Cold War, in Europe and in Latin America. He lived overseas for years and his work was sometimes dangerous. Because of enduring local antagonisms, there are still countries that he cannot visit."
"A few years after my friend retired from intel work, the Army sent a ranking officer to break the news to my friend's wife so that she did not keep asking awkward questions about the places they could not visit and his excessively security conscious behavior. She was furious at having been so thoroughly deceived and at first said that she would have preferred that he was with the Mafia or had a mistress and second family."
We have more insight to Pincus and why Fitzy didn't have him sworn in on Fitzy's witch hunt.
So much for that wife. Yikes. My wife and I both having had clearances in the past I know how wierd the situation can get. You want to say something, but can't. Same story with some of my other friends who have inside info, and you know they do, but they just can't/won't/don't go into details.
Rockefeller memo Here is the full text of the memo from the office of Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D-WVa.) on setting a strategy for pursuing an independent investigation of pre-war White House intelligence dealings on Iraq.
We have carefully reviewed our options under the rules and believe we have identified the best approach. Our plan is as follows:
1) Pull the majority along as far as we can on issues that may lead to major new disclosures regarding improper or questionable conduct by administration officials. We are having some success in that regard.
For example, in addition to the President's State of the Union speech, the chairman [Sen. Pat Roberts] has agreed to look at the activities of the office of the Secretary of Defense, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, as well as Secretary Bolton's office at the State Department.
The fact that the chairman supports our investigations into these offices and cosigns our requests for information is helpful and potentially crucial. We don't know what we will find but our prospects for getting the access we seek is far greater when we have the backing of the majority. [We can verbally mention some of the intriguing leads we are pursuing.]
2) Assiduously prepare Democratic 'additional views' to attach to any interim or final reports the committee may release. Committee rules provide this opportunity and we intend to take full advantage of it.
In that regard we may have already compiled all the public statements on Iraq made by senior administration officials. We will identify the most exaggerated claims. We will contrast them with the intelligence estimates that have since been declassified. Our additional views will also, among other things, castigate the majority for seeking to limit the scope of the inquiry.
The Democrats will then be in a strong position to reopen the question of establishing an Independent Commission [i.e., the Corzine Amendment.]
3) Prepare to launch an independent investigation when it becomes clear we have exhausted the opportunity to usefully collaborate with the majority. We can pull the trigger on an independent investigation of the administration's use of intelligence at any time. But we can only do so once.
The best time to do so will probably be next year, either:
A) After we have already released our additional views on an interim report, thereby providing as many as three opportunities to make our case to the public. Additional views on the interim report (1). The announcement of our independent investigation (2). And (3) additional views on the final investigation. Or:
B) Once we identify solid leads the majority does not want to pursue, we would attract more coverage and have greater credibility in that context than one in which we simply launch an independent investigation based on principled but vague notions regarding the use of intelligence.
In the meantime, even without a specifically authorized independent investigation, we continue to act independently when we encounter footdragging on the part of the majority. For example, the FBI Niger investigation was done solely at the request of the vice chairman. We have independently submitted written requests to the DOD and we are preparing further independent requests for information.
SUMMARY: Intelligence issues are clearly secondary to the public's concern regarding the insurgency in Iraq. Yet we have an important role to play in revealing the misleading, if not flagrantly dishonest, methods and motives of senior administration officials who made the case for unilateral preemptive war.
The approach outlined above seems to offer the best prospect for exposing the administration's dubious motives.
Senator Rockefeller may well be the "leak" in the Senate and perhaps a confidant of Bob Woodward; he surely is a leader of the anti-war, anti-American force now at large in Washington. Perhaps Patrick Fitzgerald will have him testify about what he knew about Wilson and Plame. Jay Rockefeller is not innocent in any of this, his efforts to lose the WOT and the Iraq war are on google for all to research.
Most of us probably have no desire to visit any restricted country.
When Castro finally quits wasting air and is replaced by a democracy in Cuba, I do want to go to Cuba for two reasons:
1. Drink some good Cuban beer and then water Castro's grave. I would pay for that experience, and I'm not alone.
2. The fly fishing around Cuba and Gitmo is incredible, I want to go there with my older son and wet a few flies and get into some gear busting fish.
Her "traveling companion" was who?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.