April 24, 2006
Beers For St. Mary of Langley
At last, fired CIA analyst from the Inspector General's office speaks out, denying that she leaked any classified intelligence. Well... actually, not quite.
Instead of speaking herself, she sent out one of her mentors, Rand Beers -- the man who would be Condoleezza (under President John F. Kerry) -- to deny it for her. As her other mentor is Clintonian National Security Advisor Sandy Berger, her choice of senseis leaves a bit something to be desired:
The fired official, Mary O. McCarthy, “categorically denies being the source of the leak,” one of McCarthy’s friends and former colleagues, Rand Beers, said Monday after speaking to McCarthy. Beers said he could not elaborate on this denial and McCarthy herself did not respond to a request for comment left by NEWSWEEK on her home answering machine.
Oh, yes, I can just envision that conversation:
Several things about this "non-denial denial" intrigue me:
- The words were parsed very thinly, as above: is she saying she wasn't any of the sources, or just that she wasn't the only source?
- By not denying that she leaked, she leaves open the possibility that, even if she weren't a source on the secret-prisons story, she may still have been a source on some other hysterical Bush-bashfest.
- She did not even issue the denial herself, in person. Any normal, innocent person accused of leaking classified intel would at a minimum step forth and personally insist that she was innocent of all charges.
The more Mary O. McCarthy tries to deny without really denying that she is guilty, the more convinced I am that she is just exactly that: guilty.
Hatched by Dafydd on this day, April 24, 2006, at the time of 11:53 PM
TrackBack URL for this hissing: http://biglizards.net/mt3.36/earendiltrack.cgi/698
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Beers For St. Mary of Langley:
» ABC News and the equivalency card from Sister Toldjah
When it comes to leaks which undermine our national security, we can always count on our media to come to the defense of those who leaked the information by either a) referring to them as “whistleblowers” or b) utilizing the “everybod... [Read More]
Tracked on April 25, 2006 6:22 AM
» The Silence of the Saint from Big Lizards
The silence of St. Mary of Langley continues; since Mary O. McCarthy was fired on Friday, April 21st, 2006, four days have passed in which she has refused to come forward herself and flatly state that she did not leak... [Read More]
Tracked on April 25, 2006 3:03 PM
The following hissed in response by: cboldt
Katherine Shrader of the AP reports a more definitive denial, still not by Mary McCarthy herself, but by her lawyer.
"She did not leak any classified information, and she did not have access to the information apparently attributed to her by some government officials," Washington lawyer Ty Cobb, who is representing veteran CIA analyst Mary McCarthy, said Monday.
Great name for a lawyer. But in seriousness, this story has promise of being full of intrigue and political linkage.
The following hissed in response by: RBMN
Fired CIA official denies leaks
WASHINGTON, April 25 (UPI) -- Fired Central Intelligence Agency official Mary McCarthy denies she leaked information about secret CIA-run prisons for terror suspects, reports said.
While reports had said the inspector general's office employee was fired last week because of the secret-prisons leak, CIA officials told CNN and The Times McCarthy was fired for a "pattern" of conduct -- not a single leak.
The following hissed in response by: MTF
A couple of interesting points about McCarthy:
1. she keeps her pension, according to yesterday's Post. So far, anyway. If true, what lesson is learned by other leakers? I have to assume this is an interim position.
2. while the CIA certainly can conduct investigations, any criminal investigation intended to result in a prosecution will have to be condusted by the Justice Department, after a referral for that purpose by the CIA. We are told no such referral has occurred, and, again according to the Post, there is no ongoing criminal investigation of her actions (specifically) at present. Only a CIA investigation.
We must be in the very early days of a much larger effort and her problems are all that's visible so far. This could take some time.
The following hissed in response by: markg8
Her crime is being a Democrat. The secret prisons and NSA spying leaks are excuses to purge the intelligence agencies of anyone who may be willing to testify against the administration in the inevitable investigations and possible prosecutions once the Dems take control of one or both houses of congress in November.
The following hissed in response by: Dafydd ab Hugh
Her crime is being a Democrat.
Hm... then isn't it odd that George W. Bush retained George J. Tenet, President Clinton's personal appointee to the position of Director of Central Intelligence, rather than replacing him... despite the fact that most presidents replace the DCI first thing?
Bush retained Tenet before 9/11, after 9/11, before the Afghanistan War, after the war, before the Iraq war, after the war, after it was clear the CIA intelligence was really bad for Iraq, and right up until Tenet himself resigned in 2004. A Democrat!
So he loved George Tenet, even keeping him on when he could have blamed the whole "WMD scandal" on Tenet and fired him as scapegoat. But the CIA hated this woman whom they loved enough to lure out of retirement to work in the powerful Inspector General's office just a couple of years earlier?
Good try, Mark; but like Fagin, I think you need to think it out again. <g>
The above hissed in response by: Dafydd ab Hugh at April 25, 2006 2:20 PM
The following hissed in response by: Dafydd ab Hugh
Tenet = Fall guy
Then why wasn't he used as the fall guy? What, did Bush just forget to blame him?
You guys are just going to have to deal with the fact that Bush retained Tenet, relied upon Tenet, and defended Tenet through the worst. It was Tenet who decided to resign, and he did so at a time when there was no particular attack on him.
He wasn't blamed even after he resigned, nor did he take the blame himself. He's about the least scapegoated guy in the Bush administration.
(Ooh, I can see the next attack: "Bush is so incompetent, he even screwed up scapegoating George Tenet!)
The above hissed in response by: Dafydd ab Hugh at April 25, 2006 3:12 PM
The following hissed in response by: Dishman
Rand Beers didn't need to talk to McCarthy to know that she wasn't the source.
It's curious, also, that reporters from Newsweek already had her home phone number on file.
The following hissed in response by: KarmiCommunist
OK...someone on the Bloggy is talking about this 'Change'...good!!!
The Washington Post mentions the denial today, and i found the following quite interesting:
"Firing someone who was days away from retirement is the least serious action they could have taken," said a former intelligence official who is friendly with McCarthy but spoke on the condition of anonymity because of speculation on the administration's motive. "That's certainly enough to frighten those who remain in the agency."
That was the second time that i saw something about retirement mentioned. The first was from an article that i now forget, but do recall that it mentioned a focus on "Retiring Agents".
Perhaps the Bush Administration is sending a final message to Leakers and Publishers, that 'Thangs are about to change...so to speak of 'Thangs like leaking National Secrets during a Time of War are about to have some rather serious Consequences for such leaking and publishing.
i mean, how much longer can such anti-Americanism be allowed to continue...when such *AIDING* of the Enemies of America, also gives them hope and Comfort in their War Against America!?!
Forget that MSM claimed that American Troops were "bogged down in Iraq", just 3 days after the Invasion had started...forget that MSM has kept a "Death Count" going since day-one...forget all of the support that MSM has given to the Enemy, up until today:
Osama bin Laden and Abu Musab al-Zarqawi have been getting their arses kicked since 911, but people like St. Mary of Langley, St. Valerie (also of Langley, and a Sister of St. Mary), "Sandy Burglar", Joe Wilson, 90% of the Democrat Party, etc etc etc, and the MSM keep supporting such Enemies/Terrorists. Keep giving them Comfort, aid, and other such support against America...giving...giving, and giving until Abu Musab al-Zarqawi takes what might be his last breath with this:
"Why don't you tell people that your soldiers are committing suicide, taking drugs and hallucination pills to make them sleep?" he asked, directing his words to President Bush. "By God, your dreams will be defeated by our blood and by our bodies. What is coming is even worse," he said.
Sorry...Abu Musab al-Zarqawi and Osama, but y'alls words have a Karmic *RING* of radical Islamic Desperation to them, at best, and y'all are in some serious Dualistic trouble, huh.
The "Right-Wing" Blogs are rolling once again, and i'm talking some *BIG* Time Rolling here. Humble me has been so impressed by this quick Movement...Change...Sudden...Action (???), that i have become Political once again.
Osama...Abu Musab, have either of you ever read my book, ‘Da Ten Percent Dualistic Theory ??? Obviously not, huh. i ask and mention such, since you both seem so focused on America's past (particularly, the Vietnam part), and my book was published in North Vietnam, with the "Blessings" of Ho Chi MINH. It sold quite well in North Vietnam, back between 1963 and 1975, but only one copy was sold here in America (i bought it).
In Chapter 33, on Page 1,021 (first Page in Chapter 33 - Fighting a War Over/For Politics or Religion), humble me brings up the simple fact that Wars should not be fought over or for either, because such a War is not about one's dualistic or non-dualistic "Freedoms", it is about one's opinions on such, and thusly a losing position...a position that even a "200%" support could not overcome, in most cases.
Well, the book has 10,911 pages, and i suggest that you both read it before continuing (attempting to...anyway) this War any further. i would send you free copies, but need an address. Anyway, until i get your addresses, the best way that i can describe the *WAR* mistakes that y'all have made, is to point out the fact that y'all need the full support of at least 10% of the Islamic World's males, and at least 33% support from the Islamic World's females...y'all don't even come close, until "W" is gone, and he still has well over three years left.
Heck, just look at how Iran's Ahmadinejad squirms, and realize that even the whole Muslim, Arab, and Islamic worlds combined couldn't/can't come up with even 1% percent male support...or, even 10% female support!!! You radical Islamists have almost 50% of America (the Mary O. McCarthy's) supporting you, 75% of Europe supporting you, take a guess as to how many Russians and Chinese support you (since it don't matter to me), but y'all are facing at least 10% of America's *MALES* that are willing to die in this War.
Y'all are losing this War, *BIG* Time!!! Ahmadinejad squirms, Osama is back...begging again ("crusader war" this time), and you...Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, will soon join Saddam (another weak male). Surrender dude, and live for a few more months. *SNICKER*
[Last bits clipped off for dualistic legal reasons. -- the Mgt.]
The above hissed in response by: KarmiCommunist at April 25, 2006 5:31 PM
Post a comment
Thanks for hissing in, . Now you can slither in with a comment, o wise. (sign out)(If you haven't hissed a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Hang loose; don't shed your skin!)
© 2005-2009 by Dafydd ab Hugh - All Rights Reserved