A Spy 'Outing' Game For Real

So, where are all the libs who were rallying around Valerie Plame a few years ago? They were all screaming about how horrible it was that Plame got "outed" as a CIA agent.

For some reason, all those same libs are now silent (I would say shamefully silent) about John Adams Project defense lawyers for the terrorists who will truly "out" current CIA operatives and expose their families as well. Whereas Valerie Plame showed how much her privacy had been violated by posing for the cover of Vanity Fair, a nationally circulated magazine, the current outings will put agents and their families in danger of reprisals from the terrorists themselves.

(I wonder if Barack Obama realizes this and if so, does he even care? He seems to care more about the terrorists than he does about American lives.)

Writing for the Washington Times, John Armor has the following:

First, the Plame Affair. According to the mainstream media, that was about the "outing" of a CIA "covert operative" in violation of federal law. But that law applies only to people who had been a covert operative "within five years." The only person who identified her as a CIA covert operative within five years of her service was her husband, who let the cat out of the bag in a Who's Who entry. Mrs. Plame was not outed by anyone, per the law.

That's right. Even Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald admitted that there was no violation of Federal law in the Plame case. But, he overstepped his bounds when he went after Scooter Libby on what were obviously trumped-up charges.

Read on:

However, the fraud of the Plame blame game does not detract from the real purpose of the CIA-protective law. It's designed to protect covert CIA agents from being killed by enemies who would do so in a heartbeat if they knew who these agents are. That brings us to the current situation. The defense counsel for certain Guantanamo Bay detainees is receiving help from the John Adams Project, a combined effort of the American Civil Liberties Union and the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers. According to numerous accounts, these defense lawyers have John Adams Project researchers taking photos of CIA covert operatives. And these lawyers have already shown these photos to their clients in Guantanamo Bay and are now seeking the legal right to release the photos to the public.

If the Plame affair were so infuriating to the libs, then they should be surrounding the Justice Department right now demanding that these photos never get released. Because, unlike the Plame situation in which Valerie was never in any danger, the agents that will be outed by this investigation will most certainly be in danger as will their families.

Clearly, The ACLU couldn't care less about the safety of these people! If anyone from the ACLU wishes to refute this, please feel free to leave a response.

Armor goes on to say:

More likely these photos were taken in the home communities of these agents, placing not only them, but their families and neighbors in the cross hairs of murderers. And that is precisely why the law that never actually applied in the Plame Affair, does apply today. It may be that just showing the photos of the CIA agents to their clients turns the assistants who photographed them and the lawyers who passed them on, into criminals themselves. Beyond that, there is the matter of what happens if these photos are offered as evidence in a trial.

The choice here is clear. If you support protecting innocent Americans, you will be against letting the ACLU out these agents. If you support the terrorists, you will agree with putting these agents and their families at risk by releasing these photos.

I will always go with protecting Americans. It's clear that the ACLU and other libs want the opposite.

You can access the complete column on-line here:

A Spy 'Outing' Game For Real
John Armor
Washington Times
August 26, 2009

Plame Lawsuit Dismissed And The Fairness Doctrine Could Be Used To Control Web Content Too

Would someone please head over to the home of Joe Wilson and Valerie Plame so as to inform them that their fifteen minutes of fame ended back in 2004? These two are such shameless attention hounds that they will do anything to keep themsleves in the news, including launching a frivolous lawsuit against Vice President Cheney and other members of the Bush Administration.

Fortunately, a rationally thinking judge finally ended this whole non-scandal affair by throwing out the lawsuit. From NewsBusters:

Valerie Plame was dealt another setback Tuesday when a U.S. court of appeals upheld a federal judge's decision to dismiss her lawsuit against members of the Bush administration. Given the media's fascination with this former CIA operative who has claimed for years she was illegally outed by the White House for political reasons, it will be interesting to see just how much attention this ruling gets in the next 48 hours.

And according to Reuters:

A U.S. appeals court on Tuesday dismissed former CIA analyst Valerie Plame's lawsuit against Vice President Dick Cheney and several former Bush administration officials for disclosing her identity to the public. [...] Plame and [husband Joe] Wilson sought money damages from Cheney, Libby, former White House aide Karl Rove and former State Department official Richard Armitage for violating their constitutional free speech, due process and privacy rights. But a three-judge panel of the appeals court upheld a federal judge's ruling that dismissed the couple's lawsuit. The court ruled Cheney and the others were acting within their official capacity when they revealed Plame's identity to reporters.

Memo to Joe Wilson and Valerie Plame: Valerie was not covert at the time of her non-outing.

You can access the complete article on-line here:

Plame Lawsuit Against Cheney Et Al Dismissed, Will Media Care?
Noel Sheppard
NewsBusters.org
August 12, 2008

---

And the possible effect on Talk Radio is not the only reason we should all be opposed to the mis-nomered "Fairness Doctrine." The fact that you are reading this on the Internet means you too can be affected by it. According to the Business & Media Institute:

There’s a huge concern among conservative talk radio hosts that reinstatement of the Fairness Doctrine would all-but destroy the industry due to equal time constraints. But speech limits might not stop at radio. They could even be extended to include the Internet and “government dictating content policy.” FCC Commissioner Robert McDowell raised that as a possibility after talking with bloggers at the Heritage Foundation in Washington, D.C. McDowell spoke about a recent FCC vote to bar Comcast from engaging in certain Internet practices – expanding the federal agency’s oversight of Internet networks. The commissioner, a 2006 President Bush appointee, told the Business & Media Institute the Fairness Doctrine could be intertwined with the net neutrality battle. The result might end with the government regulating content on the Web, he warned. McDowell, who was against reprimanding Comcast, said the net neutrality effort could win the support of “a few isolated conservatives” who may not fully realize the long-term effects of government regulation.

This isn't China with it's massive human rights violations. This is the United States where we have Free Speech and Free Press.

Controlling web content is something that Google helps the Chinese Communists do.

You can access the complete article on-line here:

FCC Commissioner: Return Of Fairness Doctrine Could Control Web Content
Jeff Poor
Business & Media Institute
August 12, 2008