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.

 

Valerie Plame Sues Libby, Rove, and Cheney

page: 5
1
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 19 2006 @ 05:42 PM
link   
quote by ShakyaHeir


You're deluding yourself if you think that. For someone who claims to do research it sounds like your simply parroting what George Bush and Faux News have said about the matter.

If you actually did some research you would know that the vast majority of scientists agree that global warming is real and that humans are causing it. The scientists that don't agree are usually the ones getting lots of money from oil and coal companies to do their research.


REPLY: Sadly, it is you who have not done the research. Is GW happening? Most definately, and I never said it wasn't. However, most of the claims of the possible results are crap-ola. Hundreds of scientists disagree with Algores predictions. There is no concensus as to the speculation that humans are the cause. As has been posted, data from TYROS-2 shows a




posted on Jul, 19 2006 @ 08:18 PM
link   
Oh geeze, some rich socialite gets outed on their status ties with the CIA. Whoop de doo! I'm sure someone outside of our super duper secret intelligence gathering society knew she was "in" the CIA. Geeze, I think even the guy who delivered my pizza knew she was "in" the CIA because it was in "who's who in America".

What's not a big secret is the fact that the CIA has become a status for rich socialites. That's why we don't know that Saddam had wmd's before the invasion or not and if he did, where are they? George's biggest mistake was not clearing house.

Rich gal 1: I'm in the CIA.
Rich gal 2: Good for you darling. You're nobody here without that.
Rich gal1: Excuse me darling, I've been CIA for awhile now, I'm even listed in "who's who in America" darling.
Rich gal 2: But are you in the NSA? Thought so. I believe your caviar is over there, the other room.

Hey, politics aside, even the hardest conservative wouldn't even think about defending the outing of a real spook. This story is so dead even the flies don't bother.



posted on Jul, 19 2006 @ 08:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by notbuynit
Oh geeze, some rich socialite gets outed on their status ties with the CIA. Whoop de doo! ....

...Hey, politics aside, even the hardest conservative wouldn't even think about defending the outing of a real spook. This story is so dead even the flies don't bother.


Wait, so are you saying that you feel it is ok to out a out a CIA agent? I mean, maybe I am not picking up on the context correctly, and I missed some sarcasm that I was supposed to catch, but I didn't see it. No CIA agent should be outed, even if this wouldn't have happened, and another agent was just outed from nowhere. That is not good at all. Intelligence on other countries is vital, especially when you're the US right now. I hope that it was a joke, but apparently I'm not catching too much appreciation of jokes today, so forgive me if you were.



posted on Jul, 19 2006 @ 09:32 PM
link   

Wait, so are you saying that you feel it is ok to out a out a CIA agent?


My Bad...... I replied to the wrong poster; correction follows.

[edit on 20-7-2006 by zappafan1]



posted on Jul, 19 2006 @ 09:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by zappafan1

Wait, so are you saying that you feel it is ok to out a out a CIA agent?


REPLY: Geez..... catch up!!! Mr. Fitz didn't/couldn't charge anyone with the "outing" because she wasn't covert, hence no outing was possible.


Ok, deep breath in, deep breath out. Deep breath in, and deep breath out. We ready now? Good.

Please read the post again. And in your words, "catch up." I was responding to the person before me. Not you. The person that said that he/she didn't care if any agent was outed. That is what I was responded to. I have a thick skin, so your rant doesn't bother me too much, especially considering that it is obvious you didn't read what I was responding to before you judged my response.


Take another breath, and try again please. I wasn't even talking about Plame. Please read it again. Yeah, I'm also keeping up with the thread, since I am the one that started it, and I like to keep up with them moreso.



posted on Jul, 19 2006 @ 10:10 PM
link   

by niteboy: Please read the post again.


REPLY: I did, and boy is my face red. My apologies. I was actually speaking of another poster. My bad. First time, and the last, that THAT will happen. Long day. Sorry.



posted on Jul, 19 2006 @ 10:13 PM
link   

posted by Mr_Peel:
Only the brainwashed can excuse "outing" a CIA officer working on critical national security issues.

Not only did Novak out Plame, but also her cover company, Brewster Jennings. How many other CIA operatives used Brewster Jennings as cover? How many informants used doing business with Brewster Jennings as cover for their espionage efforts? Maybe none. Maybe many.



REPLY: Geez..... catch up!!! Mr. Fitz didn't/couldn't charge anyone with the "outing" because she wasn't covert, hence no outing was possible.

Excuse me to all those who actually read the entire thread:

One of the judges who WROTE the law said: "The law wasn't broken."

She outed herself while voting for Algore (the Brewster-Jennings issue);

The Russians outed her in the late 90's, which is why she got the desk job;

And on, and on, and on............

[edit on 20-7-2006 by zappafan1]



posted on Jul, 19 2006 @ 10:25 PM
link   

Wait, so are you saying that you feel it is ok to out a out a CIA agent?


I'd not only advertise the "identity" ( unless a real spook said I shouldn't) of a rich snob like Plame. I'd give her address but I wouldn't have to. She and her husband did that along time ago. Her type think it's cool to have the CIA monicker. It's status.


No CIA agent should be outed, even if this wouldn't have happened, and another agent was just outed from nowhere.


None was. What other spook was outed? Real spook? None. She's just another rich woman using her money for status and politics. She's a shame on all real moles. One might be being beheaded right now because our gov't is full of rich socialites like Plame. So yea, I'd out her in a heart beat. She's scum.

mod edit, non-ATSNN word choices

[edit on 21-7-2006 by DontTreadOnMe]

Further Mod Edit: Tweakage...

[edit on 22/7/2006 by Mirthful Me]



posted on Jul, 19 2006 @ 10:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by notbuynit
I'd not only advertise the "identity" ( unless a real spook said I shouldn't) of a rich snob like Plame. I'd give her address but I wouldn't have to. She and her husband did that along time ago. Her type think it's cool to have the CIA monicker. It's status.

None was. What other spook was outed? Real spook? None. She's just another rich woman using her money for status and politics. She's a shame on all real moles. One might be being beheaded right now because our gov't is full of rich socialites like Plame. So yea, I'd out her in a heart beat. She's scum.


Wow. I asked you, if you thought that all CIA agents should be outed, since after all, you said:



Oh geeze, some rich socialite gets outed on their status ties with the CIA. Whoop de doo!


Sorry, however you feel about her, she was an agent. I'm not even going to get in the debate with you of whether or not she was still secret, as I have a feeling that would be about as fruitful as this has been so far. Not very.


She was an agent as I said, I don't even see anyone else arguing whether or not she was an agent. Are you this rough on everyone that has ties to other rich socialites? If so, I don't know exactly who all you would be defending now by choosing to only batter this woman's character into mush. That is not the way to debate, the way to debate is with facts, opinions are worthless without anything to back up what you're saying. I'll bow out of this thread until things cool down a little bit, I suppose, I would hate to cause anyone to start using facts instead of spewing nasty things about someone.



Oh! Zappafan1, it happens to us all at times. No harm done here at all. We don't agree on this particular issue, but I value your debates anyhow. Now I will wait for the response that will be, "what is there to debate?!?"


[edit on 21-7-2006 by DontTreadOnMe]



posted on Jul, 20 2006 @ 02:04 AM
link   

by Nightboy:

We don't agree on this particular issue, but I value your debates anyhow. Now I will wait for the response that will be, "what is there to debate?!?"


REPLY: I believe it would be the judge I mentioned who would say that to you. I cannot help but believe she, as one of the judges who wrote the damn law, knows more about the subject than you or I.

Again, the facts don't matter. So sad.



posted on Jul, 21 2006 @ 09:39 PM
link   

I'm not even going to get in the debate with you of whether or not she was still secret, as I have a feeling that would be about as fruitful as this has been so far. Not very.

Good decision on your part seeing how even her parking space had her name on it.


She was an agent as I said, I don't even see anyone else arguing whether or not she was an agent. Are you this rough on everyone that has ties to other rich socialites?


I'm a rebel and yes, they're rich. What? They can't afford a defence? They can handle it. Where's the problem?


If so, I don't know exactly who all you would be defending now by choosing to only batter this woman's character into mush.


Everyone needs a hobby. Oh and I'm sure I've destroyed the poor woman. Me versus the media. Who would win? They gave up because even they knew this was a loser.


That is not the way to debate, the way to debate is with facts, opinions are worthless without anything to back up what you're saying.


I presented facts. Hence your running scared. You chose not to contest them. If you failed to read the whole thread, then go back and read the thread again and contend me on facts.


I'll bow out of this thread until things cool down a little bit


Sucks when facts don't support your emotions doesn't it?

Don't present me as someone who hates the rich, I just hate it when some rich abuse their money. It happens with Republicans and Democrats. Right now, the dem. controlled media isn't challenging her/them. So now I must. Crazy BILL OF RIGHTS.



posted on Jul, 21 2006 @ 09:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by notbuynit

Good decision on your part seeing how even her parking space had her name on it.

I'm a rebel and yes, they're rich. What? They can't afford a defence? They can handle it. Where's the problem?

Everyone needs a hobby. Oh and I'm sure I've destroyed the poor woman. Me versus the media. Who would win? They gave up because even they knew this was a loser.

I presented facts. Hence your running scared. You chose not to contest them. If you failed to read the whole thread, then go back and read the thread again and contend me on facts.

Sucks when facts don't support your emotions doesn't it?

Don't present me as someone who hates the rich, I just hate it when some rich abuse their money. It happens with Republicans and Democrats. Right now, the dem. controlled media isn't challenging her/them. So now I must. Crazy BILL OF RIGHTS.


I suppose I should be flattered that you took so much time to respond in so much detail while vaguely attempting some sort of attack. However I'm not. Running scared, I think not. I was bowing out because it seemed like tempers were beginning to flare. That is the reason I chose not to "contest" anything. Civility got me far in life, I like it.


You're response drips of sarcasm and ill will, so I hope you feel better.


[edit on 7/21/06 by niteboy82]



posted on Jul, 21 2006 @ 10:13 PM
link   

I suppose I should be flattered that you took so much time to respond in so much detail while vaguely attempting some sort of attack. However I'm not. Running scared, I think not. I was bowing out because it seemed like tempers were beginning to flare. That is the reason I chose not to "contest" anything. Civility got me far in life, I like it.


You're response drips of sarcasm and ill will, so I hope you feel better.


[edit on 7/21/06 by niteboy82]


Yea, I got right on it, 2 or 3 days later. That's how much time I spent.

No attack, just, "wake up and smell the coffee". Tough competition ya know. I also feel better when I win and apparently, I so very rarely win, so give me my do. This poor old horse is dead, even the media has given in.



posted on Jul, 24 2006 @ 12:32 AM
link   
What is so sad is the time and money spent on the entire "non-issue."

Novak said in an interview the other day he originally learned about Plame in the "Who's Who" list in the area, not from Rove. He contacted a friend in the CIA and it was confirmed that indeed she worked there, and also that she was no longer covert.

He wasn't allowed to make this public by orders of Mr. Fitz, who knew all of this from the get go. So why the whole ordeal??? To discredit the administration.



posted on Jul, 24 2006 @ 05:48 AM
link   
But, But, What....


According to a confidential source at the CIA, Mrs. Wilson was an analyst, not a spy, not a covert operative and not in charge of undercover operators
en.wikipedia.org...


And, and... What?

Walter Pincus, a Washington Post columnist, has written that he was told in confidence by an (unnamed) Bush administration official on 12 July 2003, two days before Novak's column appeared, that "the White House had not paid attention to former Ambassador Joseph Wilson’s CIA-sponsored February 2002 trip to Niger because it was set up as a boondoggle by his wife, an analyst with the agency working on weapons of mass destruction."[94] Because he did not believe it to be true, Pincus did not report the story.
en.wikipedia.org...


Lawsuit....


And some woman sued McDonalds for HOT coffee too.
And OJ was found culpable in a lawsuit.

Semper




top topics



 
1
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in

join