Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
100 words for 100 days: submit your 100 word essay and get published on AlterNet
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement

Fighting Rove's Gang of Bullies

By Larry C. Johnson, AlterNet. Posted July 25, 2005.


A former CIA analyst speaks up in the hopes of freeing his former colleague, Valerie Plame, from the RNC's 'malicious smear campaign.'
Advertisement

Editor's Note: Below is testimony presented by former CIA analyst Larry C. Johnson on July 22, 2005 in hearings held by Senate and House Democrats on the national security implications of the Rove CIA leak.

I submit this statement to the Congress in an effort to correct a malicious and disingenuous smear campaign that has been executed against a friend and former colleague, Valerie (Plame) Wilson.

Neither Valerie, nor her husband, Ambassador Joseph Wilson, has asked me to do anything on their behalf. I am speaking up because I was raised to stop bullies. In the case of Valerie Plame she is facing a gang of bullies that is being directed by the Republican National Committee.

I entered on duty at the CIA in September 1985 as a member of the Career Trainee Program. Senator Orin Hatch had written a letter of recommendation on my behalf, and I believe that helped open the doors to me at the CIA. From the first day, all members of my training class were undercover. In other words, we had to lie to our family and friends about where we worked. We could only tell those who had an absolute need to know where we worked. In my case, I told my wife. Most of us were given official cover, which means that on paper we worked for some other U.S. Government agency. People with official cover enjoy the benefits of an official passport, usually a black passport -- i.e., a diplomatic passport. If we were caught overseas engaged in espionage activity, the black passport was a get-out-of-jail-free card. It accords the bearer the protections of the Geneva Convention.

Valerie Plame was a classmate of mine from the day she started with the CIA. At the time I knew her only as Valerie P. Even though all of us in the training class held Top Secret Clearances, we were asked to limit our knowledge of our other classmates to the first initial of their last name. So, Larry J. knew Val P. rather than Valerie Plame. Her name did not become a part of my consciousness until her cover was betrayed by the government officials who gave columnist Robert Novak her true name.

Although Val started off with official cover, she later joined a select group of intelligence officers a few years later when she became a NOC, i.e. a Non-Official Cover officer. That meant she agreed to operate overseas without the protection of a diplomatic passport. She was using cover, which we now know because of the leak to Robert Novak, of the consulting firm Brewster-Jennings & Associates. When she traveled overseas she did not use or have an official passport. If she had been caught engaged in espionage activities while traveling overseas without the black passport, she could have been executed.

We must put to bed the lie that she was not undercover. For starters, if she had not been undercover, then the CIA would not have referred the matter to the Justice Department. Some reports, such as one in the Washington Times that Valerie Plame's supervisor at the CIA, Fred Rustman, said she told friends and family she worked at the CIA and that her cover was light. These claims are not true. Rustman, who supervised Val in one of her earliest assignments, left the CIA in 1990 and did not stay in social contact with Valerie. His knowledge of Val's cover is dated. He does not know what she has done during the past 15 years.

Val only told those with a need to know about her status in order to safeguard her cover, not compromise it. Val has never been a flamboyant, insecure person who felt the need to tell people what her "real" job was. She was content with being known as an energy consultant married to Joe Wilson and the mother of twins. Despite the repeated claims of representatives for the Republican National Committee, the Wilson's neighbors did not know where Valerie really worked until Novak's op-ed appeared.

I would note that not a single member of our training class has come forward to denounce Valerie or question her bona fides. To the contrary, those we have talked to have endorsed what those of us who have left the CIA are doing to defend her reputation and honor.

As noted in the joint letter submitted to Congressional leaders earlier this week, the RNC is repeating the lie that Valerie was nothing more than a glorified desk jockey and could not possibly have any cover worth protecting. To those such as Victoria Toensing, Representative Peter King, P. J. O'Rourke, and Representative Roy Blunt, I can only say one thing: you are wrong. I am stunned that some political leaders have such ignorance about a matter so basic to the national security structure of this nation.


Digg!

Larry C. Johnson is a former CIA analyst.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »

Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
My Dear Mr. Johnson
Posted by: expat in tokyo on Jul 25, 2005 1:38 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Thank you for speaking the truth instead of the lies we are fed each day. In addition thank you for telling congress about it.

I can only pray that Mr. Fitzgerald can see through all the spin, not be pushed over by the pressure from the WH, and give the indictment that Rove Et. Al. deserve.

P.S.
I really hope your voting district wasnt in FLorida in 2000.. You bought Roves BS... just like over half the country still does.. I mean come on.. did you really expect something different from Shrub.. If you did i think they should take the I. out of CIA...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

My question is: Was this covered in the news anywhere that I missed?
Posted by: Pepper on Jul 25, 2005 5:46 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
You know, this is really getting old. I don't remember this testimony covered anywhere. Did anyone else see this?? If so, please direct me to the link and article.

Thanks for giving us the news and I will do what I always do daily, I will forward this to all 6 editors of the NY Times. LOL

Hey, I have a picture of the terrorists that was taken off of the subway station entrance that is put out by the cops in London. Check it out if it comes up for you. These guys were superimposed over the picture. See the one in the white hat. His left arm is behind a railing that is way behind him. Its bizarre! Its either stupidity by those who did it or a hero trying to tell us the whole thing was bogus.

http://news.yahoo.com/photo/050724/photos_pl_afp
/050724214150_vesdc65b_photo1

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Truth Shall Not Be Boring Posted by: smithjohn
Better late than never
Posted by: outandabout on Jul 25, 2005 5:53 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I am relieved to read the defense of his fellow CIA operative by Larry C. Johnson. The fact that the outting was participated in, if not initiated, by two operatives closer than virtually any others, at least in the political sphere, to the President and Vice President is clearly indicative of the President's and Vice President's involvement, and would certainly seem to have been on the behalf if not the initiative of those two. Again their political goals outvalue human lives.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

You Must Be Kidding!
Posted by: Iana_g on Jul 25, 2005 6:36 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Plame and Wilson have brought these problems on themselves. This isn't about Rove, This is about Porter Goss. All these dissatisfied misfits are of the anti-man culture that has gripped washington since the 1970s.
The identity of Plame was not an issue until Wilson joined Kerry's staff with a big check in his hand. there is a timeline and a sequence of events that have been largely ignored.
Frankly, they should be embarrassed and Plame should find another job.
If she worked for YOUR company, would you still be on her side? I'm embarrassed to see so many people worked up over such a non-issue.
I want the old America back!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: You Must Be Kidding! Posted by: Jamboree
» RE: You Must Be Kidding! Posted by: mvbungalo
» RE: You Must Be Kidding! Posted by: steve333
» RE: You Must Be Kidding! Posted by: gwb666
I think it's time to follow the Texas 3-step to battling back the rightwing nazi bullies
Posted by: maxpayne on Jul 25, 2005 8:21 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
BATTLING BACK: THE TEXAS THREE-STEP

A 3-Step Method For Cutting Through The Argument Games of the Right

By Benjamin F. Stinson


P.S.: Plame and her husband have never been partisan unlike what Bush, Rove, Delay, and other rightwing nazis would like to have you believe. Both have given campaign contributions to both Republicans and Democrats in the past although Plame and Wilson ultimately backed Kerry because Bush's people knowingly commited the crime with the rightwing media swooping in to defend them at all costs.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Be Careful What You Wish For!
Posted by: thirdmg on Jul 25, 2005 8:45 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
>I voted for George Bush in November of 2000.... I was promised a President who would bring a new tone and new ethical standards to Washington.<

And, that's exactly what we got - unfortunately.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

And the Divide Grows Larger
Posted by: nakis on Jul 25, 2005 9:49 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This president and his right wing fanaticals really are people of action. They have done what no Democrat or left winger could do. Divide this nation.
And each and every action they do widens the gap (beside the gap between the poor and the wealthy).

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

walldodger1969
Posted by: walldodger1969 on Jul 25, 2005 12:24 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
So when is the impeachment process gonna start? Think this is a wee bit more important than Lying about a blowjob.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: walldodger1969 Posted by: Dale
» RE: walldodger1969 Posted by: Edward George
» RE: walldodger1969 Posted by: windy
» RE: walldodger1969 Posted by: Jersey Devil
» RE: walldodger1969 Posted by: MausMasher
» RE: walldodger1969 Posted by: thebuoy
Why Is Robert Novak Walking Free?
Posted by: mrsmagoo on Jul 25, 2005 12:47 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Throughout this news story, Robert Novak has not spent one day in jail. This is a "journalist" who is out walking free for endangering many lives. As far as I'm concerned throw him in jail with Rove, Libby, Cheney and Bush. Throw away the key.

Thank you Mr. Johnson for your comments. We MUST keep this in the forefront and NOT let this administration play mirror games with the public. We deserve to know the TRUTH.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

paulinus7c
Posted by: paulinus7c on Aug 1, 2005 9:05 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It is clear that there is a complete lack of principle in the administration and ethics is a forgotten concept in the WH."Conservatism" is a mislabeling of their "doctrine" What are Bush and associates "conserving"? George Lakoff has put it well: don't let them frame the issues and fasten on us a new totalitarianism!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]