I have not seen the movie yet since
it hasn't opened in my city yet but i'm
really looking forward to seeing it.
But whatever you're on the Bush administration's
side or on Plame's side,is it true that revealing
Plame's cover lead to the killing of about 70
informants?
I guess that information is classified but it has been stated numerous times that by outing her at least 70 of her informants were killed.
share[deleted]
The film seemed to imply all of those Iraqi nuclear physicists were killed (and perhaps their families too) - but we may never know. I heard much of those scenarios were patched together for the film from other witnesses as Plame still can not reveal all.
It's a really good film, by the way.
Check out The Schleicher Spin on FAIR GAME @
http://theschleicherspin.com/2010/11/08/weapons-of-mass-distraction/
The 70 informants is fiction for the movie.
Honesty is the best policy, but insanity is a better defense.
[deleted]
You haven't a clue how many. You are trying to mimic Fox News and making up convenient facts. I'd say the only truthful answer would have to be "nobody knows".
-----------------------
Chinese curse: May you live in interesting times.
[deleted]
I find it hilarious that you are citing logical fallacies when your entire argument is (and fox news *does* engage in this quite a bit) is entirely argumentum ad ignorantiam.
good luck with that...
...Guess What S1m0ne! We have now entered an age where we can manufacture fraud faster than our ability to detect it
[deleted]
I think you need to look up argumentum ad ignorantiam.
...and good luck with that.
...Guess What S1m0ne! We have now entered an age where we can manufacture fraud faster than our ability to detect it
No Message
shareBy the way, why don't you quote us the part of her husband's Op-Ed piece that you believe outed her, since everyone else seems to think it was Robert Novak and his White House sources who did that? (I don't think a brief quote would violate the site's Terms and Conditions.)
shareYou seem to be defending your position rather strenuously without providing any concrete, irrefutable evidence, wreckerrr. The simple fact is Ms. Plame worked for the CIA. It was not common knowledge by her friends and neighbors as you would have us believe. And even if she worked in an embassy and was no more than a clerk, as you seem to believe, and as Fox News and many other conservative outlets tried to report, you do not know the specific nature of her work. Regardless, the public outing of a CIA agent who has been, or is involved, in covert operations jeopardizes the lives of others and is against the law.
The existence of the dummy firm, Brewster Jennings, Plame worked on has never been in dispute. That alone shows that her actions had far reaching ramifications in the field.
We may never know exactly how many died as a result. It could be 70. It could be 7. It could even be 0. It doesn't matter. What does matter is the egregious misuse of executive power that came from the White House and the Vice President's office which resulted in the public persecution of two people who did their jobs, but had the temerity to disagree with cooked up beliefs of the President and his advisors.
That is what this film is really about.
Just hoping on the bandwagon to say that you are an idiot and a complete fool. Your opponent said that nobody can know for certain. This sort of answer is almost always defensible, since how can someone know something like this for sure?
You just duck and weaved when you have no proof for your position. Guess what? Only you have this burden. He doesn't. Because his position is we can't be certain. He didn't commit himself.
A friend of mine once defined an ad hominum argument this way: When you can't deal with the issue at hand by discussing it, you can always attack the other guy personally.
shareDon't mess with wrecker. He's obviously high level ex-CIA. How else could he know the precise details of Plame's jobs?
"Intelligence is overrated. What's required is diligence. And the service of a willing spirit."
[deleted]
[deleted]
[deleted]
I think Karl Rove has discovered the IMDb.
Dude means nice guy. Dude means a regular sort of person.
[deleted]
You were asked to quote where her husband outed her in his NY Times article. Instead you provided a page of sources and a long article describing the entire affair.
Reading the article took me 15 minutes and nowhere in it was it even implied that her husband outed her. I am not going to waste 2 days of my time going through all the sources.
They sentenced somebody for outing her and it was not her husband, it was Lewis "Scooter" Libby. If her husband outed her, why did he not bring that as his defence? "I did not out her, I was just discussing knowledge made public previously by her husband." Simple solution. but that did not happen because what you claim didn't happen either.
But the more important thing is that YOU claim that her husband outed her. So post the quote. Not the entire history of the world, just that quote. Just that one little sentence. "And btw, my wife is a CIA Agent."
I think humanity should be wiped out and then we can give evolution a second chance.
Complete idiot. Look at how people are making fun of you. Jesus, get a grip, dude.
shareI think Karl Rove has discovered the IMDb.
Looks like I picked the wrong day to quit shootin' smack...share
[deleted]
Bizarre and delusional.
Why exactly do you think the cia warned novak not to reveal her name? Why exactly do you think there was an investigation? Why exactly do you think Novak got very very quiet and then started lying on air about it when asked.
Novak was fed this smear on Wilsons wife as political payback. They committed treason for political gain and you, like all right wing traitors, are supporting and lying about it. It is hard to discern which is sadder.. that you are such zealots you support treason against the United States.. or that you have so little personal honor and integrity you see no problem with it.
Yeh, what the hell. To whitewash Cheney's reputation, why not destroy our whole global intelligence operation? What can the USA possibly have at stake that is more important than Cheney's giant ego? Nor the giant sensitive egoes of his fanbois?
-----------------------
Chinese curse: May you live in interesting times.
This is false information from wreckerr!
share[deleted]
Notice how when you bring scads of material to the conversations, all the big mouths scatter. What is left are two line responses about how all that is wrong. I especially like the loser who states "In the CIA, everyone rotates from desk jobs to secret jobs!" How precious.
It goes to show the mentality of some who post here. I am not even a big Bush fan, but the Bush/Cheney Derangement Syndrome is hilarious in its full focus here. Wow, 2012 is going to give these people heart attacks!
[deleted]
Plame was not an undercover operative in charge of anything. If she were, Richard Armitage would have been jailed for revleaing her name to the press.
Armitage was a critic of the Bush administration and the Iraq war.
Hmmm. Like Ollie North was? Amazing the silly things people will say with a straight face.
-----------------------
Chinese curse: May you live in interesting times.
"Armitage was a critic of the Bush administration and the Iraq war."
Simply not true. At all!
Armitage has long standing ties to Bush I and Bush I cronies like Shackley, dating back to Vietnam, Laos and Iran - Contra. Armitage was SERVING IN THE BUSH II GOVERNMENT. Because Armitage served in the Powell State Department, many are associating him with Powell's so called "moderate" (but still supportive) stance on the Iraq War. In fact, Armitage is a long time player in military-industrial circles and was a member of the Neocon group PNAC during the 1990's, a group which rabidly supported the Iraq War since the Clinton era.
Plame was not a covert CIA operative AT THE TIME SHE WAS OUTED. The neocons who use this fact don't want you to think beyond that point, because if you did you'd come to understand that it was her past and possible future covert operations that were jeopardized by her outing. CIA operatives at her level often alternate between desk jobs and covert jobs. Obviously (as the conservatives trying to discredit this movie don't want you to consider) it was not her job to go undercover in her operations -- she was a handler for those agents who were undercover. She was SUPPOSED to seem unimportant in the CIA hierarchy so that she could operate as a handler without attracting undue attention. THIS is what was destroyed when she was outed.
shareThe movie does not actually state, in so many words, that many of her Iraqi informants were "killed". It does indicate however, that several of them, and their families "disappeared", and some could interpret that to mean they were killed. The US government obviously had scant regard for the lives of these people, which indicates they don't generally have a high regard for human life. If they did, they would have treated these people differently.
shareThe US government obviously had scant regard for the lives of these people, which indicates they don't generally have a high regard for human life.Of course, because the number they provided in the film wasn't true or at the very least is using information that doesn't appear to be backed by any legitimate source. I mean, if this film was grounded in absolute reality, where's Richard Armitage? The only things "killed" around here were probably martinis.
However, in the real world, it'll just a matter of time before we find out how many Afgani informants and contacts along with their families "disappear" because of Wikileaks and their distribution of those informants and contacts' names. Of course, the same people up in arms over non-covert CIA operatives being outed will likely be completely silent over this other fiasco.The day, the first person dies because of Wiki-Leaks, I am going to be the first one to bash it. But the guy who runs Wiki-Leaks (and whose name I am never able to remember) stated in an interview, he checked all the documents and did not release those that contained information which was sufficient to trace back sources.
When Plame's employment by the CIA was revealed, she was a "non-official cover" operative, meaning she was not protected by diplomatic immunity when she worked outside the US. Although many sources have confirmed that she worked on nuclear counter-proliferation, the exact nature of her work remains classified.
Since the exact nature of her work is classified, and revealing what operations were compromised by revealing her status would be a crime. It probably wouldn't be a crime to reveal how many people died because her cover was blown, unless specific victims were named. But that sort of revelation, without context, would not accomplish anything (except maybe to inspire more denials by former Bush officials and right wing apologists), because without context there would be no way to prove the statements.
Since the movie couldn't portray the real damage done to operations under her supervision, the film-makers dramatized a different operation that was publicly known through numerous sources, and gave her credit for it. Naturally, right wingnuts call that lying, but since they don't hide the fact that they couldn't portray the actual damage (other than the personal harm to Plame and Wilson) they're well within reasonable exercise of dramatic license.
[deleted]
[deleted]
My neocon logorrhoea was fiction and rubbish... sufficent cr4p has been CnPed from rightwingipedia.com to show I'm a (unt.
Wreckerrr, go ahead and believe the movie was rubbish, but even with your own evidence you can not deny that it is not fiction, or at least you shouldn't be able to.
Nowhere in your long diatribe is there evidence that she was NOT a CIA operative. George Tenet went on record admitting she was a member of the Counterproliferation department. She was not a clerk, or secretary, or receptionist. She worked in an important capacity in a highlt sensitive and classified division of the CIA.
But, actually this is so much wasted space, really. You have made up your mind. You have gleaned the information that supports your narrow view and admirably cut and pasted one of the most impressive list of references I have seen in IMDB. Why for a minute I thought I had stepped into to the Libray of Congress. or at least its card catalog.
Get off the fact/fiction train. Every government official involved with the case has acknowledged Plame's work and position. Frankly, I find the argument that Ms. Plame was not a covert operative at the time of Novak's article, therefore no harm was committed, to be like a little kid denying responsibilty for a broken window because he/she wasn't the one throwing the ball, but the one supposed to catch it.