Pickering Angels
Toronto Escorts

CIA Rat, Traitor, Liar & Turncoat Turfed

May 3, 2004
1,686
0
0
By KATHERINE SHRADER, Associated Press Writer
April 21, 2006

WASHINGTON - In a highly unusual move, the CIA has fired an employee for leaking classified information to the news media, including details about secret CIA prisons in Eastern Europe that resulted in a Pulitzer Prize-winning story, officials said Friday.

The Associated Press has learned the officer was a CIA veteran nearing retirement, Mary McCarthy. Reached Friday evening at home, her husband would not confirm her firing.

In McCarthy's final position at the CIA, she was assigned to its Office of Inspector General, looking into allegations the CIA was involved in torture at Iraqi prisons, according to a former colleague who spoke on condition of anonymity because the case is under investigation.

Without identifying McCarthy by name, CIA Director Porter Goss announced the firing in a short message to agency employees circulated Thursday. Such firings are rare. And it is the first time since Goss took over in September 2004, vowing to clamp down on leaks, that he has dismissed an intelligence officer for speaking with reporters.

Agency spokesman Paul Gimigliano confirmed an officer had been fired for having unauthorized contacts with the media and disclosing classified information to reporters, including details about intelligence operations.

"The officer has acknowledged unauthorized discussions with the media and the unauthorized sharing of classified information," Gimigliano said. "That is a violation of the secrecy agreement that everyone signs as a condition of employment with the CIA."

Citing the Privacy Act, the CIA would not disclose any details about the officer's identity or what she might have told the news media. However, a law enforcement official confirmed there was a criminal leaks investigation under way, but it did not involve the fired CIA officer.

The official said the CIA officer had provided information that contributed to a Washington Post story last year disclosing secret U.S. prisons in Eastern Europe. The law enforcement official spoke only on condition of anonymity, citing the sensitivity of the matter.

The Post's Dana Priest won a Pulitzer Prize this week for her reporting on a covert prison system set up by the CIA after Sept. 11, 2001, that at various times included sites in eight countries. The story caused an international uproar, and government officials have said it did significant damage to relationships between the U.S. and allied intelligence agencies.

Post Executive Editor Leonard Downie Jr. said on the newspaper's Web site, "We don't know the details of why (the CIA employee) was fired, so I can't comment on that. But as a general principle, obviously I am opposed to criminalizing the dissemination of government information to the press."

It was unclear if Priest or any other reporters who spoke to McCarthy would be brought into an investigation. Post spokesman Eric Grant said no reporter at the paper had been subpoenaed or had spoken to investigators about the matter.

Goss has pressed for aggressive probes about leaked information.

"The damage has been very severe to our capabilities to carry out our mission," Goss told Congress in February, adding that a federal grand jury should be impaneled to determine "who is leaking this information."

On Friday, another government official, also speaking on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the information, said the fired officer had failed a lie-detector test.

It was not clear if the person was taking a routine polygraph examination, as is required periodically of employees with access to classified information, or if the lie-detector test was among those ordered by Goss to find leakers inside the agency.

Justice Department officials declined to comment publicly on the firing and whether the matter had been referred to federal prosecutors for possible criminal charges. One law enforcement official said there were dozens of leak investigations under way. Another said there had been no referral from the CIA involving the fired employee, normally a precursor to a criminal investigation.

Both spoke on condition of anonymity because the matter is under investigation.
 
May 3, 2004
1,686
0
0
DonQuixote said:
Listen to me carefully. The CIA is in rebellion.
I repeat. Rebellion protecting their autonomy and
fighting against politicalization by the present
administration.

This is symptomatic and problematic for all of US.

You're Canadian. It's our asses that are on the
line. Get out of my face with your BS. In short,
F**K O**
. I'ts my problem, not yours.
Turfing rats, traitors, liars and turncoats is part of the strategy of reforming the CIA. Gee, lets all get behind divulging classified intel. info that harms national security and that weakens intel. gathering operations. Gee, let's all get behind giving the enemy all of America's intelligence because some CIA employee decides to renege on his/her contract with the CIA because of political policy disagreements.

Let's just invite the Washington Post, the New York Times and every other media organ to peruse every classified program and document.

What's with the invective in your post DQ? My thread was not a personal message to you, so why the personalization of hostility?

Pluralism is a cornerstone of free speech in a democracy.
 

SilentLeviathan

I am better than you.
Oct 30, 2002
909
0
16
I guess it's a question of who do you serve; the CIA and government officals or the Constitution and the people of America. It would seem that this person chose the latter.

How far does one go in protecting themselves? Do you have to become what you claim to dispise? It's just like Friedrich Nietzsche in Beyond Good and Evil "He who fights with monsters might take care lest he thereby become a monster. And if you gaze for long into an abyss, the abyss gazes also into you."
 
May 3, 2004
1,686
0
0
SilentLeviathan said:
I guess it's a question of who do you serve; the CIA and government officals or the Constitution and the people of America. It would seem that this person chose the latter.

How far does one go in protecting themselves? Do you have to become what you claim to dispise? It's just like Friedrich Nietzsche in Beyond Good and Evil "He who fights with monsters might take care lest he thereby become a monster. And if you gaze for long into an abyss, the abyss gazes also into you."
1) She signed a contract with the CIA not to divulge information.
2) She signed a contract with the CIA not to divulge classified informartion.
3) She lost her job because she breached her contractual obligations.

4) She is under investigation for criminal offences because she divulged classified information.
5) She and others who engage in divulging sensitive classified intel. info harms national security and thus the American people and the Constitution that protects them. This has been confirmed by the Director of the CIA and other professionals in the intelligence and security profession.

6) Hence, Mary Mary quite contrary the hapless and hopelessly naive traitor has actually harmed the people she once contractually obliged and faithfully chose to serve.
 
May 3, 2004
1,686
0
0
salsamarc said:
just goes to show what the people working for the Bush administration really think about their "job" and the way those high above are handling it
She worked(past tense thank God now for the intelligence community) for the CIA for quite a long time. Probably another one of them failed Clintonite politically cleansed CIA appointee flunkies.

The less of them the better for national security and the constitution that protects them.

Toss her embittered ass in jail.
 

SilentLeviathan

I am better than you.
Oct 30, 2002
909
0
16
rogerstaubach said:
1) She signed a contract with the CIA not to divulge information.
2) She signed a contract with the CIA not to divulge classified informartion.
3) She lost her job because she breached her contractual obligations.

4) She is under investigation for criminal offences because she divulged classified information.
5) She and others who engage in divulging sensitive classified intel. info harms national security and thus the American people and the Constitution that protects them. This has been confirmed by the Director of the CIA and other professionals in the intelligence and security profession.

6) Hence, Mary Mary quite contrary the hapless and hopelessly naive traitor has actually harmed the people she once contractually obliged and faithfully chose to serve.
It's not a case of things being black and white, but rather right or wrong. She believed that the idea of secret prisons to be wrong and spoke out against them. I'm guessing that people within the CIA weren't too keen on her belief so she went outside of the system. Did she do the right thing? Only time will tell, personally I believe she did.
 

UMustang

Member
Jan 16, 2004
267
0
16
rogerstaubach said:
She worked(past tense thank God now for the intelligence community) for the CIA for quite a long time. Probably another one of them failed Clintonite politically cleansed CIA appointee flunkies.

The less of them the better for national security and the constitution that protects them.

Toss her embittered ass in jail.
I believe that the agent in question had worked for the CIA in excess of 20 years. That means that they were hired during Reagan's era, not Clinton.

Regardless, she does deserve to get fired and prosecuted. Anyone who leaks classified information should. There should be no limits as to who gets prosecuted though...and that includes people in the Administration (Bush, Cheney, Rove, Libby, Rice)

Has anyone else been checking up on the allegations that Rice leaked classified info to the Israelies?
 
May 3, 2004
1,686
0
0
UMustang said:
I believe that the agent in question had worked for the CIA in excess of 20 years. That means that they were hired during Reagan's era, not Clinton.

Regardless, she does deserve to get fired and prosecuted. Anyone who leaks classified information should. There should be no limits as to who gets prosecuted though...and that includes people in the Administration (Bush, Cheney, Rove, Libby, Rice)

Has anyone else been checking up on the allegations that Rice leaked classified info to the Israelies?
Good post UMustang.

Patrick Fitzgerald has spent a great deal of time, money and resources regarding investigating the W.H. for CIA leaks. The Libby indictment regarding "lying but not leaking" evidences the Justice Dept's reach in investigation and prosecution.

Intel. agencies by law are mandated to investigate for possible prosecution possible breaches of classified information and programs.
 

UMustang

Member
Jan 16, 2004
267
0
16
SilentLeviathan said:
It's not a case of things being black and white, but rather right or wrong. She believed that the idea of secret prisons to be wrong and spoke out against them. I'm guessing that people within the CIA weren't too keen on her belief so she went outside of the system. Did she do the right thing? Only time will tell, personally I believe she did.
Well, if whistleblower protection does not apply to state secrets or the CIA (honestly, I'm not sure if it does), then it is black and white; she broke the law. What or why is irrelevant. However, does she have a legal obligation to report the government committing an illegal act (I believe the secret prisions violate the Geneva Convention, which the US is legally obliged to uphold)? Morally and legally I think she does, but that doesn't change the fact that she committed a crime to do so.

Alas, she's the one who gets prosecuted, and no one in the administration is held accountable.
 

SilentLeviathan

I am better than you.
Oct 30, 2002
909
0
16
UMustang said:
Well, if whistleblower protection does not apply to state secrets or the CIA (honestly, I'm not sure if it does), then it is black and white; she broke the law. What or why is irrelevant. However, does she have a legal obligation to report the government committing an illegal act (I believe the secret prisions violate the Geneva Convention, which the US is legally obliged to uphold)? Morally and legally I think she does, but that doesn't change the fact that she committed a crime to do so.

Alas, she's the one who gets prosecuted, and no one in the administration is held accountable.
I agree with you. That's why history will have to judge her actions.
 
Ashley Madison
Toronto Escorts