A little primer on the handling of Classified information:

[kurtyboy]

Sources, Methods, and NOC status are among the most highly guarded secrets in the whole government. This stuff is Sensitive Compartmented Information (SCI) requiring a Special Background Investigation (SBI) before one can even be considered for access to the Special Access Program (SAP). Access to some of these SAPs may be limited to a few dozen people in the whole country--like knowing NOC identities, for example.

Even then, before one gets their "numbers" (the programs are numbered, often with the numbers themselves being classified), they are evaluated as to the importance of having the information against their ability to do the job.

In short, they cannot gain access with a mere need-to-know basis, they instead require what is called a MUST-KNOW urgency. That is, they cannot perform their duties in any way without the information. Compartments are created to allow only the absolute minimal number of people access to this data which, if improperly disseminated, will cause "Grave damage to the national security of the United States." (The other advantage of compartmentalization is that if a leak occurs, there are only a few people who could have leaked--the evidence trail narrows quickly)

Once such access is granted to an individual, they have a responsibility to:

-NEVER discuss it with anyone without the same program clearance (Even if they have a Top Secret clearance, they must have the program numbers). By the way, this restriction includes spouses. I knew someone who lost a good job opportunity because he blabbed to his spouse.

-NEVER discuss it AT ALL in anything but a secure environment--a space that has been swept for bugs and is unoccupied by uncleared personnel (such as janitorial staff). Generally speaking, these spaces--Secure Classified Information Facilities (SCIF)--prohibit recording or transmission devices of any kind: Cell-phones, floppy disks, camcorders, pagers must be checked at the door--often even including notetaking equipment like a pen and paper.

-NEVER discuss it over an unsecure telephone line. Only encrypted lines, with the particular crypto-key for the SAP, may be used.

-NEVER key the information into a computer that has not been authorized for it. These computers are prohibited from posessing modems, never have any conenction to the WWW, and have removable hard drives that must be stored in a safe when not in use. In the case of very sensitive information (the identity of a NOC, for example), the safes may have not one, but two sophisticated combination locks, so that no individual acting alone can access the information.

Whoever leaked Plame's name knew all of this--the indoctrination for the clearance is pretty thorough--and these people should fry on the nearest suitable barbeque. Too many of our patriots have risked too much to let this stand.

Just saying.

[patrice]

1. Thanks for the info!

[evlbstrd]

2. I had a really low level clearance back in my military days.

And I was given such a thorough briefing, it scared the bejesus out of me. FBI background check, all of the warnings about speaking about my role.
I still won't tell anyone. And it really wouldn't sink a single ship if I did.

[proud2BlibKansan]

4. Are you supposed to get a letter

one day telling you that you can now talk about the secret stuff you knew in the military? Hubby has never gotten his letter. He thought he would when the Soviet Union broke up.

[evlbstrd]

5. I honestly don't remember.

But maybe I'll tell you what I know at the next meetup!

[proud2BlibKansan]

7. Well it does seem to be a fad now

to disclose classified info. :crazy:

Hubby had a friend in high school whose mom had worked in ASA in WWII. She got her letter clearing her to divulge all the secrets she knew back in the 60s. Apparently, Hubby still has some majorly top secret info.

[evlbstrd]

8. I think the Cold War had a lot to do with that.

There's no problem exposing WWII actions. Anything after that is incredibly suspect. And the secrecy just gets stronger. Where/when did Hubby serve? That is, if you can tell me. Need to know, and all that.

[proud2BlibKansan]

10. He was in a comm center

on an air base in Alaska in the early 70s.

[evlbstrd]

11. Well, there ya go.

I worked in an intelligence training center in the 70's.
No way either one of us will get that letter.

[proud2BlibKansan]

12. You guys need to talk

You probably know some of the same secrets.

[evlbstrd]

13. Better yet, swap some we don't.

[FlaGranny]

22. I worked for NORAD back in the 60's.

Had only a secret clearance, though. Worked in war planning and also did some reports for the intelligence office. (Edit: I was only a clerk-typist). All of what I knew then is now obsolete, but I still don't speak if it. In fact, LOL, I've forgotten most of it.

[proud2BlibKansan]

3. Hubby was in Army Security

and had a secret clearance. He explained this to me the other night. He didn't believe all this at first because it was just too improbable to him that anyone with a high level clearance would be stupid enough to out a CIA agent. But he does believe it now.

[evlbstrd]

6. It amazed me, too.

It's unthinkable.
But Rove was never a part of that culture. His is a strictly political ethic, and that ain't good.

[kurtyboy]

9. You're Husband has good instincts

What I am trying to convey is that this kind of information isn't run-of-the-mill Top Secret information.

Lets start by describing the ascending heirarchy of classifications:

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY (FOUO) (aka SENSITIVE) This is information that may not cause any damamge to national security, but is held close and disseminated only to those persons and organizations that will appropriately safeguard it--no particular background investigation is required for access to this information.

CONFIDENTIAL (CONF) Access to this information does require a background investigation, usually a cursory record check for prior criminal activity. Unauthorized disclosure of such information can cause "damage" to the national security of the United States. An example of Confidential data might be the number of FBI agents working in a given field office.

SECRET (SEC) Unathorized disclosure of this level of information will cause "Serious damage" to the national security of the United States. Access will require a more rigorous background investigation--perhaps including personal interviews with the applicant. The bar is raised here, and information requiring this clearance might include tactical troop movements in an active battlfield, for example.

TOP SECRET (T/S) At this level, unathorized disclosure of information will cause "Grave Damage" to the national security of the United States. There is no higher level of clearance than this--the information within this classification is dear and weighty. Examples of the type of information in this calss include readiness levels of armed fighting units, strategic war planning information, and so on. The background investigation for applicants may include extensive interviews with neighbors, employers, and onsite inspection of local police records, creditors, and so on.

But even though T/S is the highest clearance, there are those further restrictions mentioned in my original post. SPECIAL ACCESS PROGRAMS (SAPs) may include information classified at the any of the levels listed above, but in general terms, they mainly relate to T/S programs where a limited amount of access is required to protect security. Access to Sensitive Compartmented Information (SCI) usually requires more than the background checks described above--it may also require polygraph testing. And there is more than one type of polygraph--for the most stringent SAPs, a "lifestyle" polygraph may be employed.

A Lifestyle Poly is an aggressive test to find if the applicant has any weakness of character that might make them subject to blackmail. The scope of questioning is wide, and makes everyone I ever knew that took one extremely uncomfortable.

I don't know it for a fact, but I'd guess that for all but the most highly placed political operatives, this test is administered to anyone with working knowledge of the names of CIA NOCs. If a leak happened in the Plame case, I doubt it came from anyone but one of those highly placed individuals.

Just saying.

[evlbstrd]

15. Believe me, I get what you're saying.

The clearance levels you are talking about are the tightest in the government. Anybody that violates that secrecy is either ignorant of the security needs of the SAP programs, or is a craven pol. Or both.

[kurtyboy]

16. I know you understand, and thanks for responding

I am just trying to bring a little light into the shady world of government secrecy, without compromising any secrets. It is my hope that a few DUers will read this in the morning and begin to spead the knowledge to their neighbors--how impossibly silly it seems that a reporter could have come up with Plame's name, and how implausible it is that whoever leaked it has not yet been identified.

[evlbstrd]

17. It is a very shady world.

There is no way that Rove got Plame's name from a "reporter." But that same secrecy mentality is ingrained in this administration. It's good for them, not for others, and the CIA will not forget.

[Jose Diablo]

14. This is one reason why I think it must have been Cheney

that 'outed' Plame originally.

I doubt even Cheney would have been in a position to "must know" Plames status as a NOC working on WMD proliferation, except he may have met her during one of his 'unprecedented' visits to Langley. Remember he went there to more or less beat the analysts in line over the decision already made that Iraq possessed WMD.

They, the administration, wanted war with Iraq and they wanted the reason for that war to be Iraq having WMD. That is what would sell the program to Americans in post 9-11.

The way I picture it is he met her in one of the meetings over there and probably also recognized her from social gatherings in which she was with her husband, Ambassador Wilson. Thus, it was his knowing her in her other life and then meeting her in the context of being briefed at Langley that Cheney himself put both her lives together and realized she was 'undercover'.

For politicos to venture to Langley would be discouraged, I would think, for just this reason. They may recognize someone they have no business knowing who and what they do.

Then it would be a simple matter to tell Rove and Bu$h a way to smear Wilson as retribution when Wilson went public with the 'yellowcake' forgeries.

Or if you will, with the hat on, to set-up Plame herself by asking her to recruit her husband to verify the 'yellowcake' story, so Cheney could then use Rove to kill her investigative 'sting' involving Halliburton and Pakistan trading nuke material when Cheney was CEO of Halliburton.

Edit: Thinking it all the way through, maybe Cheney wants George's job. Motives can be a slippery thing to pin-down.

Further Edit: If Cheney is the original source, and his motive was to kill the 'sting', then his lust for power rendered ineffective a very important part of our country's defense against a terrorist obtaining nukes. Our importing of goods from overseas is very porous. Either container shipping or even smuggling across the SW border could allow nukes to enter into our country.

We have heard that within 90 days of the London bombing, we will have another, much larger '9-11' here. And Cheney, Rove and the rest of these traitors are enabling that to happen. Either through incompetence of lust for money/power, whatever the motive, these guys are very bad for our security.

And who would be blamed? It would be Iran, plus the 'soft' on terrorism liberals. Then Martial Law and night of the long knives would also follow. And the take-over of America would be a done deal. Bu$h would be the dictator for life or maybe Cheney if the terrorist target was DC.

Seen Cheney lately? Are Bu$h and Cheney together much?

[BamaBecky]

18. 90 days of the London bombing, we will have , much larger '9-11' here

Lord help us! I was thinking as I read this thread, just how interesting this thread was, till I reached this sentence. That stopped me cold. Here is hoping that Fitzgerald strikes first. Since this is such a volatile situation, I have worried about a break in to Fitzgerald's office......or something worse.....use your imagination here........these are indeed perilous times.

This thread really helps us understand all the speculation that the target of the investigation might be Cheney.

What date rhymes with 7/7 and 9/11...within the next 90 days? Well it just so happens that 9/11 will fall within the next 9/11! Any other ideas?

Whew! :hide:

Bama

[Freedomfried]

19. Rove was obligated to inform the FBI as soon as he realized...

That a newspaper reporter was actively pursuing information of a classified secret nature.

There is no if's and's or butt's.

He was obligated to tell the reporter to cease immediately, and to call the FBI to report the incident.

[bunny planet]

20. Thank you, this clears things up considerably.

And yes, get the barbee ready.

I personally think, when Cheney wants to discuss 'sensitive' information, he just takes someone duck hunting with him.

[FlaGranny]

21. They even go to the point of having

this kind of information destroyed ONLY by someone with the clearance to know the information in the first place. At least that's the way it used to work back when I had (only) a secret clearance. Even the trash in those places is secured.