Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

News Plame Was Working On The Iran Nuclear Situation

  1. Aug 27, 2006 #1
    I realy didn't give this topic much credit when I first read it on some sources like Talk Left, and the" Raw Story" Then I came across a video of "Hard Ball" on MSNBC in another link.

    Valery Plame was working on an Iran nuclear proliferation project at the CIA at the time she was outed. Scroll down the link just a bit to find the video. The video is about the Plame situation in general, but just a bit past the halfway point the information about Plame and her job is made quite clear.


    I want someone to convince me that this is not true.:mad: If this ever made the mainstream media I certainly must have missed it.
  2. jcsd
  3. Aug 27, 2006 #2


    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    I'm pretty sure it's come up, because I remember seeeing/hearing/reading this as well - it may even be that I happened to watch it on Hardball. But MSNBC is pretty mainstream, isn't it?
  4. Aug 27, 2006 #3
    Yep, but only if you were watching it at the time.:smile:
    I don't remember it being in the papers. Regardless it makes the act of outing Plame even more treasonous, especiously considering all of the Iran and nukes talk that is so prevelant everywhere I look.
  5. Aug 27, 2006 #4
    Interesting find ed, thanks. :smile:
  6. Aug 28, 2006 #5
    Facts are getting confused here. Plame was outed by Ames in the mid-nineties, resulting in her return to the U.S. As a result, as well as a matter of law Fitzgerald did not/could not accuse anyone of outing her and should have closed the case five minutes after it was assigned to him. As for Iran, Plame was not outed by anyone in 2003 while working in the Iran group which has many working on the same things - nothing lost.
  7. Aug 28, 2006 #6
    Got a link for that? I would really like to see it.

    It was the CIA who turned the incident over to the Department of Justice for investigation.
    Last edited: Aug 28, 2006
  8. Aug 28, 2006 #7
    As for Aldrich Ames, he was giving information about CIA operations to the Russians. The end result was that Plame along with many other agents were recalled from foreign covert operations for fear that they had been compromised. She was not "outed" at that point anymore than any of the other CIA agents.

    http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/cold.war/experience/spies/interviews/ames/ [Broken]

    The Topic here is still about what Plame was working on (Iran) when she was outed by the Bush administration.
    Last edited by a moderator: May 2, 2017
  9. Aug 28, 2006 #8
    To be specific, here is where Plame was working:


    I do believe that Iran and nuclear weapons is a hot topic right now.:rolleyes:
  10. Aug 28, 2006 #9
    Can't be outed when there is nothing to out. If outing did occur can you tell us why Fitzgerald did not indict someone for doing so?
  11. Aug 28, 2006 #10
    What does that mean? If more than one was outed then they were all outed. Bottom line, here cover was blown and she was returned to the U.S., i.e., she was outed. Subsequently, she no longer fell into the category where she could be outed. As a result, nobody was indicted for outing her or are we dealing with the conspiracy du jour?
  12. Aug 28, 2006 #11
    So you rely on blogs like rawstory? LOL. Be that as it may, does rawstory tell you when she was a NOC? The fact is that her NOC days were sufficiently long ago that her prior NOC status was no longer covered by laws that prohibit disclosing a secret agent. Of course, if this is not the case then don't you agree that Fitzgerald would have indicted someone? Or is he incompetent or in bed with the Bush crowd? Outta here as only permitted a limited amount of time in wackoland.
  13. Aug 29, 2006 #12
    Good question. It now appears that Dick Armitage may have also leaked the same info at the same approximate time.
  14. Aug 29, 2006 #13
    You are using the term "outed" selectively to apply to an act of treason that occured over 10 years ago. Neither Plame nor any of the other dozens of covert agents were in any way outed to the public by Ames treason. Ames supplied the names of agents working in Russia, to the Russians. They were "outed", if you wish, only to the KGB.

    Just because no one was indicted for the "outing'" of Plame has no bearing on the fact that her name was revealed to the American and global media.
    Last edited: Aug 29, 2006
  15. Aug 29, 2006 #14
    As I mentioned in the OP, I usually would not rely on a source like Raw Story. It turned out that Raw Story was the first source That I found that had a link to the MSNBC. Video located at:

    Not operating with NOC status does not mean that she was not working in country on: an operation tracking distribution and acquisition of weapons of mass destruction technology to and from Iran.

    Now you are just rudely rambling. If you consider this forum to be wackoland I would suggest that you not come back.
    Last edited: Aug 29, 2006
  16. Aug 29, 2006 #15
    culion, perhaps you don't understand how the U.S. justice system works. Prosecutors don't file charges just because they think a person is guilty: they have to be able to prove it. If they recklessly file charges without much proof, the judge may dismiss the case with prejudice, and they'll never be able to file charges again if future evidence comes to light. In the case of Valerie Plame, the Bush administration officials were playing the "I don't remember" card, which makes for a very weak case.
  17. Aug 30, 2006 #16
    I understand perfectly that without a case that can stand up in court one is simply dealing with a belief system which in today's political climate tends to produce conspiracy theories. More importantly, in my view, is the fact that from early on Fitzgerald knew that as a matter of law the required covert conditions did not exist and should have shut the investigation down at that point. Now that the Armitage story is on the front pages and "proven" can we look forward to an indictment? Don't hold your breath. Fitzgerald will not even have to issue a report and attempt to explain his actions. The process is broken.
  18. Aug 30, 2006 #17
    Libby was never charged with anything related to the outing of a covert CIA agent only because Fitzgerald doubted that he could prove that Libbly was aware of Plames status at the CIA. Yet for some reason Libby felt the need to lie.

    This will be the same situation with Armitage. Armitage and Libby revealed Plames name to different people but Armitage has not lied before a grand Jury.

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11179719/site/newsweek/ [Broken]

    The system still works. Plame was working on sensitive information regarding IRAN and nuclear weapons. This project was interrupted by Plames outing. Those involved should be held accountable.
    Last edited by a moderator: May 2, 2017
  19. Aug 30, 2006 #18

    Plame was working on sensitive information along with a "zillion" other bureaucrats at the CIA. To believe that a major section of the CIA would be disrupted by the loss of one bureaucrat is naive at best and indicates a lack of understanding about staffing and management. The bottom line is that within several months of being appointed, Fitzgerald knew that the IIPA had not been violated in terms of either intent of fact because Plame was simply a bureaucrat at Langley and not a "covert" agent at that point. And now we know that even the leaker did not violate the IIPA. Geez, the whole conspiracy theory is coming apart! :surprised The special counsel approach is fatally flawed.
  20. Aug 30, 2006 #19
    She wasn't exactly sitting around counting paper clips. Nor were there a zillion people working on the IRAN nuclear situation.

    You are the one suggesting a conspiracy. The investigation was done at the request of the CIA!!

    That was what I tought when Ken Star was chasing around after the Clintons. All he ever came up with after spending $40 million was a spot on a blue dress.:rolleyes:

    Even if Plame had not been working on sensitive information. Her outing was not patriotic at the very least and was also a betrayal of the public trust. It was a very good example of the deviousness of the Bush administration. That is why Libby lied.
    Last edited: Aug 30, 2006
  21. Aug 30, 2006 #20
    Right you are. As I said she was working on sensitive material. And right again not a zillion. I miscounted. It was only a "bunch." Good show. Batting 500.

    You definitely have your facts right this time. Not surprisingly, however, you forgot to mention that the CIA's referral was completely dishonest. There is no doubt that they knew that Plame was not as a matter of law a covert agent. In addition, as required by the law for "spook" types, the CIA did not take actions to protect her identity. Quite an outfit. A strategy that lead to media-led wild-eyed conspiracy theories which will probably never die during my lifetime. Based on the moaning on the blogs, Armitage has created much pain.

    Agree in large part in re Starr (did I actually say that?).

    Of course, she was working on sensitive material but not as a covert agent. Just a grunt at Langley the knowledge of which by non-CIA people does not constitute outing. Because one works on classified material and others know that is the case does not have the slightest to do with patriotism (that has the ring of Move-On). You have not been exposed to situations where people work on classified material. That fact is not a state secret, although the material is. In fact, I heard a rumor the other day that Bush was working on sensitive material. Damn, now I have to call the press and get a special counsel appointed.

    Well, Ed, it has been great fun. We have both stated our positions, convinced nobody, as is typical of such web-based exchanges, but now it is time to get a life and Move-On.
  22. Aug 30, 2006 #21
    Actually yes I have, all the way up to top secret. But that was many years ago.
    Regards Ed.
  23. Oct 30, 2007 #22


    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor

  24. Oct 30, 2007 #23


    User Avatar

    Saw this in the link Astronuc provided -

    It also mentions her last overseas intelligence mission was in 2002 which dispels the nonsense spouted of her being a filing clerk outed years ago.
    Last edited by a moderator: Oct 30, 2007
  25. Oct 30, 2007 #24


    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    She was a NOC. One of the most highly-prized and least-protected assets of the CIA, and Bush/Cheney outed her in retribution for her husband's exposing their flimsy lies about Saddam's nuclear ambitions - a story that was widely discredited overseas while it was being touted and pimped in the US. Bush, Cheney, and everyone else involved in this sordid smear should be facing treason charges. In the last couple of decades it seems that Republicans can commit treason (remember the sale of ground-to-air missiles to the Iranians and the transfer of that money to the mercenaries in Nicagrua?) with impunity. Are we racing toward another facist government?
  26. Oct 30, 2007 #25
    She also had young twins at home at the time of the leak.

    Last edited by a moderator: Sep 25, 2014
Share this great discussion with others via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook