Looks like the CIA of Valerie Plame and her lying husband Joe Wilson are coming home to roost.

Without a tradition of honesty and patriotism at its core, instead you have the relativism of 'liberalism' and the policy of making do rather than core values. So the agency spends its time fighting G.W. along with the Fifth Column elsewhere,

Way to go lefties.

Posted by: dgene at November 20, 2007 9:49 AM

The very fact that her sister was married to an accused terrorist is enough to question her intent. She was open to blackmail and her lying about her citizenship just compounds the problem. She may very well be loyal to this country but her background alone would have disqualified her had it been known who her sister was married to. Unless of course the CIA thought it could use it to their advantage. Regardless, she is a security risk

Posted by: Kevin at November 20, 2007 9:49 AM

You don't have to break the rules to know how they're broken. The CIA just doesn't give a d*mn, that's all.

Posted by: Miss_Anthrope at November 20, 2007 9:57 AM

"As far as I can tell, she was just looking out for her family," another senior official said.

Sure. And a world takeover would be the best security she could give her family. Family is very important in Islam, that's why all those manly Moslem men have 4 wives, in addition to all that fraudulent AFDC dollars.

I saw a Moslem cabbie and 4 grown women getting into a Lexus 400 the other day.

* 9:5 ** 9:5 ** 9:5 ** 9:5 ** 9:5 ** 9:5 ** 9:5 ** 9:5 ** 9:5 ** 9:5 ** 9:5 ** 9:5 ** 9:5 *

This senior official, was he the dude who came up with the FBI's Moslem outreach hiring program?

Posted by: Alarmed Pig Farmer at November 20, 2007 9:58 AM

"James Bamford, who has written several respected books on the intelligence community...
-- from the article above

Errata Sheet:

For "several respected books" read "several books"

Why tell us his books are "respected" when by many they are not?

There is Bamford's claim, for example, that in June 1967 Israeli airplanes -- not by mistake (that it was clearly a mistake is clear from the transcript, finally released, of the tapes of the pilots, and a consideration of every other factor -- see the comprehensive report by Judge Crystal)-- but deliberately, attacked the U.S.S. Liberty because, Bamford claimed without the slightest proof, the Israelis were supposedly executing vast numbers of Egyptian prisoners -- shows, to me at least, that he is clearly suffering from that well-known mental pathology that explains the eagerness to make, without evidence, such a charge, and the refusal either to consider the evidence (i.e., his lack of it) or the need to forthrightly withdraw the claim. ever retract it.

Posted by: Hugh at November 20, 2007 10:13 AM

This is what happens when you let the wolves into the chicken coop.

I knew that they were allowing muslims in for translating documents (gee, do I trust they translated them all as accurately as possible - NO!). And I figured they were using them for spies - but not allowing them access to documents and to tell you the truth they shouldn't even be letting them have access to the bathrooms in any FBI/CIA building! If this one could access the documents that they are admitting to - what else has she been able to access?!

I don't trust the FBI/CIA. They haven't a clue and neither does our government, the Pentagon, our media, etc. Why? Because they let saudi arabia loose in our country to buy organizations to push their wahabbism, to build mosques and to train our youth. (yeah, right now the parents in Lodi are outraged that the muslims are teaching islam under the guise of history - they even teach the pillars of the faith, about mohammed - but not that he is a rapist, enslaver, murderer, etc.) It isn't because they are secretive, because they need to be secretive. They do things that should not be splattered all over the news. They better get a clue that anyone that is a citizen can marry a foreigner and claim they are what they want to be but could be a enemy. They should have assumed that before. How come I know this and they don't? Are these guys from outer space without a clue?!

I guess I am mostly dumbfounded that these organizations are this stupid.

If a person's background check is hazy - then look for someone else to fill the position - unless they are just using them as a spy with absolutely no access to anything.

Posted by: R_not at November 20, 2007 10:16 AM

James Jesus Angleton, please call your office.
Mr Angleton, please call your office...

Posted by: MP at November 20, 2007 10:28 AM

As stated before on JW, the FBI, CIA and other US intel agencies are desperate to recruit Arabs/Muslims. As for the CIA, well, the last war they fought with any success was probably WWII and they should just close up shop. Ya know - a slam dunk. And am not surprised by their careless attitude. And if Prouty was so concerned about her family, maybe she should have been checking the CIA's files for what they were doing overseas. As for the FBI, you'd think they'd be more upset that she successfully passed their background investigation, but guess not. It's all about the image....

Why do I think Al Aqeda and others don't quite operate like these agencies...

Posted by: HOV Dummy at November 20, 2007 10:41 AM

Thousands of highly educated, intelligent and loyal Middle Eastern Christians applied after 911 to work as translators, agents, etc. Somehow, despite the much lower Muslim turnout, Muslims were overwhelmingly selected for important National Security positions. Many Christians who were hired to work were given the worst and most dangerous assignments working in grueling conditions supporting the front line troupes while nearly illiterate Muslims were given cushy and safe jobs with the intelligence folks.

FYI
Christian Lebanese girls are arguably some of the most attractive women on the planet. You would be shocked to discover how intelligent, educated and articulate they are. There are many Lebanese Christian girls with PhDs, MDs, JDs that can easily be models. If I was in charge of recruitment in any of the intel outfits, I would do my earnest to recruit those gals.

Posted by: have_mercy at November 20, 2007 11:17 AM

Where are those pictures of hijabbed and bearded Muslims in kaftans, CIA employed staff in the pentagon praying during Ramadan? Did anybody save them? That was just last month. I thought that was an outrage.

If it continues like this we are doomed...

Posted by: sheik yer'mami at November 20, 2007 11:28 AM

This entire episode smells suspicious and alot is unexplained.

I have not done exhaustive research. Maybe I should. But some things just jump out at me for the way this is being reported incompletely.

When was she arrested and what was she charged with initially as opposed to what she pled guilty to? It seems as if the only thing she is charged with is violation of immigration laws (slap on the wrist compared to to other crimes she may have committed).

When was this first reported in the media- after she was arrested or after she pled guilty?

The first time I heard a thing about this was AFTER she pled guilty. Why the delay in reporting? Wouldn't her arrest be just as newsworthy? You don't get arrested on day 1 and pled guilty on day 2 unless the prosecution has a special reason. For example, keeping the case away from public scrutiny out of embarrassment? Then again, deals are made for lesser charges in exchange for getting to operatives higher up the food chain. How higher up could they go in addition to having a mole inside the CIA? Are there others more importantly placed than her that will be charged?

The fact that she was charged with only a certain number of crimes is suspicious also because it would seem that crimes she was likely to commit by accessing this data are much more serious (sedition, treason, espionage) yet we only know she was charged with and pled guilty to immigration law violations. BFD!

Why was a deal made before the plea? Will she lead them to other traitors? Why didn't they insist she give up her brother in hiding? Perhaps a sting operation to lure him back into the U.S. or at least disclose his location for rendition.

What office was the plea arrangement made? Was it one where FBI muslim "outreach" programs are so popular? The Detroit U.S. Attorneys Office wouldn't recognize a jihadists if one fell out of a tree and landed on him (see Debbie Schlussel's blog on her reports of that office).

Looks like to me the FBI is rushing this thru, sweeping it under the rug as quickly as they can. Perhaps there are too many outreach programs to attend and would rather push this out of the public consciousness ASAP.

Posted by: USorThem at November 20, 2007 11:52 AM

This entire episode smells suspicious and alot is unexplained.

I have not done exhaustive research. Maybe I should. But some things just jump out at me for the way this is being reported incompletely.

When was she arrested and what was she charged with initially as opposed to what she pled guilty to? It seems as if the only thing she is charged with is violation of immigration laws (slap on the wrist compared to to other crimes she may have committed).

When was this first reported in the media- after she was arrested or after she pled guilty?

The first time I heard a thing about this was AFTER she pled guilty. Why the delay in reporting? Wouldn't her arrest be just as newsworthy? You don't get arrested on day 1 and pled guilty on day 2 unless the prosecution has a special reason. For example, keeping the case away from public scrutiny out of embarrassment? Then again, deals are made for lesser charges in exchange for getting to operatives higher up the food chain. How higher up could they go in addition to having a mole inside the CIA? Are there others more importantly placed than her that will be charged?

The fact that she was charged with only a certain number of crimes is suspicious also because it would seem that crimes she was likely to commit by accessing this data are much more serious (sedition, treason, espionage) yet we only know she was charged with and pled guilty to immigration law violations. BFD!

Why was a deal made before the plea? Will she lead them to other traitors? Why didn't they insist she give up her brother in hiding? Perhaps a sting operation to lure him back into the U.S. or at least disclose his location for rendition.

What office was the plea arrangement made? Was it one where FBI muslim "outreach" programs are so popular? The Detroit U.S. Attorneys Office wouldn't recognize a jihadists if one fell out of a tree and landed on him (see Debbie Schlussel's blog on her reports of that office).

Looks like to me the FBI is rushing this thru, sweeping it under the rug as quickly as they can. Perhaps there are too many outreach programs to attend and would rather push this out of the public consciousness ASAP.

Posted by: USorThem at November 20, 2007 11:52 AM

This episode made me wonder how much the muslims are infiltrating American govt agencies under the guise of political correctness. Is the CIA ignorant, or just foolish?

Despite all the dhimmitude and political correctness we have here in India we don't have muslims infilterating armed forces or intelligence agencies (atleast not yet) , they are at least smart enough. Given that most Indians know a thing or two about the real nature of Islam, they are not likely to hire suspicious muslims because of 'Islamophobia' etc. no matter what govt. or politicians keep putting out.

Posted by: zaphodbrx at November 20, 2007 12:12 PM

Funny how hard it is for a white, Christian, regular person to even get an interview with the FBI or CIA.
You can't have ever experimented with even one marijuana joint...try finding that person anymore. But moslems? Bring 'em on.
As others have said before, what is the problem with Jewish Arabic speakers? They would be just a tad bit more trustworthy than the crowd we are at war with.
FBI, CIA, here's the cluebat!

Posted by: interestinconundrum at November 20, 2007 12:20 PM

"Is the CIA ignorant, or just foolish?"

Neither...they're infested with political correctness it's FUBAR, it needs total replacement.

case-in-point:
accepting: "exercised poor judgement"?
LMAO...that is by far the lamest, most outregously bogus, most politically correct excuse in existence.
Her (& her infestive infiltrators') antics are not the work of "poor judgement", but cold, calculated and unmistakably deliberate effort.
Only a jerry springer fan would be so stupid as to believe that BS.

Posted by: jcom972 at November 20, 2007 12:21 PM

The comments by the CIA agents confirm some serious 'situation ethics', and demonstrates the lack of knowledge that as an agent that you lie to other countries not our own.

If 'situation ethics' is status-quo at the CIA why hire any and every criminal willing to lie to them....sorry they already do. And those they can't put on their payroll, the U.S. State Department pays directly or grants U.S. Aid funds.

And if 'all she did was looking out for her family' then they would have no problem hiring any criminal that fits this scenario.

I am patriotic, it is too bad I can't get a job at the CIA.

Posted by: alaskan1000 at November 20, 2007 12:36 PM

The CIA is a agency that has long outlived its usefulness. It couldn't even warn us about OBL let alone protect us. Hell not even one CIA drone got punished for that debacle.

Its the same agency that said a Iraq had WMD's and was proven not wrong but dead wrong. Again not one drone got punished for it.

Its the same agency that promoted a raving drunk and incompetent - Hansen to one of the most sensitive posts in the agency and didn't even notice when he started living in a mansion and driving a Jaguar to work.

These people are the quite the bunch of losers and incompetents.

Posted by: waltc at November 20, 2007 12:43 PM

Its the same agency that said a Iraq had WMD's and was proven not wrong but dead wrong.

I may be totally alone here, but I still say the WMDs went to Syria. They were there, but damn, he had months of warning that we were going to invade.
We have pictures of trucks moving things to Syria.
We know he had them.

Posted by: interestinconundrum at November 20, 2007 12:49 PM

Remember this?
http://www.snopes.com/photos/military/sandplanes.asp
If they had time to bury whole aircraft, they had time to hide chemical and nuclear evidence.

Posted by: interestinconundrum at November 20, 2007 12:54 PM

Ummm, walt...3rd time now.
Hansen was FBI...not CIA.
Right track, wrong example...Aldrich Ames is more accurate.

'conundrum,
no, you're not alone, not by a longshot-they had help...and they didn't remove all of it, either...but that's another thread.

Posted by: jcom972 at November 20, 2007 2:56 PM

interestinconundrum-

You're not alone. Saddam was a clever and brutal fellow (had to be to rise to the top of the blood Baath power structure). There's no way he would have put his life and that of his regime on the line for a mere bluff given his history.

Posted by: ISLAMSFORLOSERS at November 20, 2007 3:04 PM

"Several other CIA officers also shrugged off her pleading guilty to rifling FBI files for information on family members and a Hezbollah counterterror case in Detroit.

'As far as I can tell, she was just looking out for her family', another senior official said."
------------------------------------

So according to this guy's reasoning, if Eva Braun's sister worked in the department back in 1944 and just happened to pass along info about D-Day, it would fall under the heading of "Oh, pshaw, no big deal, she was just looking out for her family" ????

Posted by: A_Nonny_Mouse at November 20, 2007 3:35 PM

I called the FBI locally for something a few months ago. Can't remember what it was, something related to the war.

The point is the guy took my information but when I also mentioned who the enemy was he did not have a clue. All of this is a reflection from the top. They (were the buck stops) have not a clue much less the other branches. As long as the enemy is not defined properly we will hear reports along these lines.

My question is when you have a discussion on this subject. When I say the word 'Islam' I am instantly branded as a coock or worse. What can be said before or after during the discussion that will shock, open or negate the illogic that comes up when the truth is told.

That is what I would like to have a thread on.

Posted by: Im.mad.as.HELL! at November 20, 2007 6:42 PM

from the article:

Prouty, 37, admitted in court that she became a U.S. citizen by hiring an American to marry her. She then joined the FBI in 1999.

"That's not uncommon - people do it all the time," said a dismissive CIA source. The source strongly praised her undercover work in Iraq fighting insurgents, and said at worst she used bad judgment before joining the CIA.

Dismissive?

Exactly what gives this or any CIA 'source' the right to be dismissive about such things? Notice that this particular individual is only identified by the vague term 'source'. Guess his/her identity is something he/she prefers we all remain dismissive about, while he/she expects his/her strong praise be taken seriously.

Silly me, I prefer our government not accept strong praise of suspected traitors from those who take national security issues dismissively. . . unless of course, as in this particular instance, the powers that be identify this 'dismissive' individual and dismiss him/her.

Posted by: justamomof4 at November 20, 2007 7:00 PM

Re: FBI appalled at CIA veteran's defense of agent Nada Nadim Prouty's lies

There is sex someplace in this. This lady is good-real good. And let no one give me this "sexism" crap. It's part of life. A lot of things are overlooked when these things are involved. I'll bet I'm right in my judgement re this.

Posted by: Frank at November 20, 2007 8:08 PM

"While FBI agents are indoctrinated to be morally pure because they often testify in criminal trials, "the CIA is the opposite," he said. "The CIA was founded on subverting laws, going over walls and under fences."

That's one way of putting it.

Posted by: Frank at November 20, 2007 8:13 PM

dgene said:

Without a tradition of honesty and patriotism at its core, instead you have the relativism of 'liberalism' and the policy of making do rather than core values. So the agency spends its time fighting G.W. along with the Fifth Column elsewhere,

Unfortunately, occupationalism and careerism has are rampant throughout all sectors of government, positions that were conceived in a spirit of service. The sentiment within the beltway includes "so what if you lie, cheat and steal - as long as you get the job up the next rung."

Frighteningly, this pollution extends into the military services.

Posted by: defender at November 20, 2007 10:08 PM

I've linked to you here: http://consul-at-arms.blogspot.com/2007/11/re-fbi-appalled-at-cia-veteranss.html

Posted by: Consul-At-Arms at November 21, 2007 2:21 AM

Didn't this happen when George Tenat was the DCI? Remember the weapons-of-mass-destructions? 9/11? Medal of honor George Tenat? Who later resigned at the above fiascos?
Well waddyano? Here is another fiasco for George. Where is the pin?

Posted by: Alert at November 21, 2007 5:19 AM

Guess his/her identity is something he/she prefers we all remain dismissive about,

Posted by: justamomof4 at November 20, 2007 7:00 PM

The "source" seems to be another terrorist-supporter. Then again, with white house in wahhabbi pockets, nothing surpries me.

Posted by: Alert at November 21, 2007 5:57 AM

Dismantle the CIA. Just scrap the damn thing. Haven't they caused enough damage to this country? Transfer its functions, infrastructure, tecnology and funding to the FBI. Because the FBI are primarily federal cops, they have still preserved some of their gumshue integrity.
Get the July 10 & 17, 2006 issue of the New Yorker: 9/11 was fully preventable, and the FBI led by hero John O'Neil was close on bin Laden's track. But the Criminal Imbecile Agency who created bin Laden in the first place had sabotaged the FBI's every effort!

Ruslan Tokhchukov, EnragedSince1999.

Posted by: Enragedsince1999 at November 21, 2007 8:21 PM