In a message dated 11/15/2003 7:46:17 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> It has become rather vague since then. We _don't > know_ if it was a political appointee, a career civil > servant (someone in the SES could also be referred to > as a high administration official, for example), or > someone else entirely. All we know for sure is that > the CIA doesn't seem to have made any effort to > preserve her identity - because Novak himself has said > that if the CIA had asked him to keep her name > confidential (and he _called them to ask_) he would > have done so. And they didn't. The only reason, so > far as I can tell, that this became an issue at all is > that Joe Wilson is a pathetic publicity hound. Which > matches the pretty much universal impression of him > that I've heard, so it's not exactly a shock. So now Wilson is being slammed? Did he leak this info? Did he ask to go to africa? All he did was tell the truth when his findings were made public. By the way he wasn't a pathetic publicity hound when he was serving us in the mideast. Please avoid terms like "universal impression" unless you can define the universe. I am sure it is universal in the WJS editorial office but not elsewhere. As to the CIA, it is my understanding that agents are outraged about this. (Saw this on Nightline where several agents and former agents were interveiwed - oh wait this is the liberal press so can be discounted as anti-american. I hate those anti-americans who risked their lives for their country and fake outrage when their own government undermines them - almost treasonist if you ask me. _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
