It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The CIA has fired one of its officers for leaking classified information, an agency spokeswoman said Friday.
The officer admitted to "unauthorized discussions with the media in which the officer knowingly and willfully shared classified intelligence including operational information," said spokeswoman Michelle Neff.
Neff declined to divulge the officer's name or position, or what specifically was leaked.
A U.S. official said the person's name has been turned over to the Justice Department, where a determination will be made on whether to file criminal charges.
www.cnn.com...
Originally posted by jsobecky
People in positions of power and trust with loose lips need to be removed from their jobs like weeds from a garden.
news.bbc.co.uk...
"US President George W Bush authorised the leak of classified material to the media to defend the invasion of Iraq, a former White House aide has testified."
I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, the only person indicted in the ongoing CIA leak investigation, told a grand jury that he had permission to discuss with reporters the National Intelligence Estimate regarding Iraq weapons systems.
Nothing in the papers indicate Bush or Cheney told Libby to reveal the name of CIA analyst Valerie Plame, nor do they suggest that either the president or vice president did anything illegal.
www.foxnews.com...
Originally posted by jsobecky
No, because he did nothing illegal. It happens all the time, as a matter of fact.
Originally posted by jsobecky
No, because he did nothing illegal. It happens all the time, as a matter of fact.
Originally posted by ekul08
Fox News? C'mon man, please. This whole thing seems VERY fishy, only days away from retirement?
And im not sure, but when exactly was the president/vice-president granted power to leak classified CIA information?
Originally posted by 5ick8oy
Right then. Fox News defends Bush and Cheney so they MUST be innocent.....
Your 'hardline stance' about removing 'weeds from the garden' suddenly seems to be softening, no? It seems to me that your CIA 'bad guy' was at least making known an issue of public interest. The same can't be said for Bush who (if true) seemed to be acting out of vindictiveness and petulance.
Originally posted by jsobecky
Your words, not mine, Sick8oy. Please don't try to deflect the debate by trying to label me as something you know nothing about.
My "hardline stance" is softening? To you, who wants to cover every conceivable case with the same brush, it seems like that.
You should take some time to learn something about the law. Pyros did, and he states the truth in his reply.
You know, I could have used any number of sources instead of Fox News for the link.
I don't have to defend Fox News. But that's the only argument that you, ekul08, and grimreaper797 can come up with. It's not even a valid argument. It's weak.
Originally posted by pavil
Everyone is jumping to conclusions one way or the other. Wait till more facts surface.
One fact that does seem to have come out already is that polygraphs were taken by many at the CIA and from the results of those it seems that Mary McCarthy was fired. The inference is that she failed a polygraph, a bad thing for a CIA employee. Mary McCarthy for her part is saying through others that she did not leak that material. Time will tell what really happened.
Though the CIA did not name the person who leaked classified material, it sounds as if the person fired did admit to leaking the said material. Put two and two together.
At the very least it seems the person the CIA fired, leaked some information that was classified, which has caused harm with some nations.
from grimreaper797
well then dont post fox news, because your right, you dont have to defend it since no matter what you say its an extremely bias news source.
Originally posted by 5ick8oy
What ARE you talking about? You are not making any sense.
Right then. Fox News defends Bush and Cheney so they MUST be innocent.....
My "hardline stance" is softening? To you, who wants to cover every conceivable case with the same brush, it seems like that.
Now who is deflecting the debate and labelling? You started the thread, please try to be constructive in your replies. I'm giving my point of view. If you cannot respond to it without slinging mud you clearly cannot have a very strong argument.
Don't be so patronising. And of COURSE you are going to be more sympathetic to Pyros as his viewpoint is more aligned with yours. A bit arrogant to declaring it 'the truth' though (IMO).
You know, I could have used any number of sources instead of Fox News for the link.
Maybe you could. But you didn't. And some of us do not consider Fox News to be an 'impartial' observer in such things.
Originally posted by jsobecky
Mud-slinging? Stop playing the poor little victim. I say something about a CIA officer breaking an oath and leaking classified info, and right away you go into your "Bush did something wrong, too" mode. That crap is getting pretty tiresome. Don't deflect the topic. If you want to discuss Bush, start your own thread.
It's the truth because it is fact. Learn your history.
See my reponse to grimreaper797. Your argument is pretty weak if you need to attack the source instead of debating the facts.