# Wherein Scylla admonishes the left wing for casting Plame upon Rove **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [August 30, 2006, 1:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wherein-scylla-admonishes-the-left-wing-for-casting-plame-upon-rove/370737 "2006-08-30T01:20:09Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 16
**Author:** ![waterj2](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/858c86/32.png) [@waterj2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/waterj2)\ **Post date:** [September 6, 2006, 2:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wherein-scylla-admonishes-the-left-wing-for-casting-plame-upon-rove/370737/301 "2006-09-06T02:58:10Z")
[QUOTE=Scylla] I swear to God, I seriously thought you were fucking with me and that was a rhetorical question. It really is that stupid. I’m not trying to be insulting, but it really is, and you’re wasting my time. [/QUOTE] So, the wife of the US Ambassador to Gabon would have diplomatic immunity while attending a meeting for her own pivate employer in, say, Iran? I think a cite would be useful, as it doesn’t seem at all clear to me that that would be the case. Not that it matters, as the distinction between NOC and OC is irrelevant to the laws we’re talking about. ---
**Author:** ![Scylla](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a5b964/32.png) [@Scylla](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scylla)\ **Post date:** [September 6, 2006, 3:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wherein-scylla-admonishes-the-left-wing-for-casting-plame-upon-rove/370737/302 "2006-09-06T03:00:14Z")
[QUOTE=waterj2] I was merely discussing your apparent confusion between not being NOC and not being covert. You seemed to have accepted Plame’s statements, reservedly, for the sake of making that point. [/quote] At the time of the Novak article Plame’s status was classified. Prior to her marriage to Wilson she spent time “covert.” Whether or not she was a NOC is still another question. A chicago Tribune article shows that her address in part of the 90s was the American Embassy, Athens. The article quotes a 20 year veteran of the CIA as saying “the key is the [embassy] address. That is completely unacceptable for an NOC. She wasn’t an NOC, period.” Working at the embassy she would have official cover. I guess it was possible that she was a NOC at some other time. The CIA doesn’t tell me how they work either. I’m guessing, and the unnamed veteran in the article seems to be saying that "officers serving in American embassies would have “diplomatic cover”, and their identities would be known to both “friendly and opposition intelligence services alike”. Once they know that, it’s kind of hard to be a NOC (Sorry I can’t link to the article. It requires registration, but I got the quotes from Wikipedia) > [@](#): > > I understand that pointing to any statements made by Plame is not going to convince you of anything in and of itself. I suspect that pointing to any statements that disagree with your contentions is equally fruitless, but nonetheless… I change my mind and concede points pretty often compared to most. Such complaints typically imply that there’s not a very strong argument forthcoming, but we’ll see. > [@](#): > > Well, not so much secret missions as business meetings to keep alive the persona of Valerie Wilson, WMD expert with Brewster Jennings. Maintain ties to people she had worked with before. Presumably, with her marriage to Joe Wilson, and her (I don’t believe proven) outing by Aldrich Ames, it was becoming time to transition to the persona of Valerie Wilson, who retired from Brewster Jennings and got a cushy State Department job through her husband, a former ambassador. These are, you know, the same person. > [@](#): > > and yet you expect us to take Rustman’s assertions at face value. Obviously, you consider there to be a difference between the two’s credibility on the matter. Again, I suspect that it is merely which partisan axe they grind. But, if you can fill us in, let me know, because for the invective you’ve spewed it sounds as if you really expect the left to see the obvious truth of your guy’s unsupported assertions, and dismiss our guy’s unsupported assertions. Yes. Rustman was actually her boss for a time. He served with her. Johnson did not. Johnson left before she got on board if I’m reading the timeline correctly. Johnson has a very clear partisan axe to grind, and really no credible means to have the information he shares. The fact that he has it and shares it is pretty much self-negating as to it’s credibility. For example, he says words to the effect that she went to Niger in 2003 and ran spies. Let’s pretend that this is actually true. He claims to bring this up to show that the outing of Plame jeopardizes Plame’s operations **and** at the same time he goes on to get specific about the operations she was running. Very very specific. This is much more damaging than simply revealing that she was a covert agent. He’s saying where, when, and what she was doing with such specifity it’s ridiculous. I can just see them in Niger “Oh, she was running spies, and conducting operations in 2003? We better check that out, so we can go round those guys up and kill them.” Johnson doesn’t seem to realize the almost comical self-refuting nature of such statements to his credibility. Rustman on the other hand seems to have like Plame, respected her and as far as I can see he is grinding no political axe while Johnson appears to be a blogging pundit who is conveniently self-condemning his own arguments. So yeah, Rustman is a **way** better source than Johnson. > [@](#): > > Yes. The CIA is pretty tight-lipped about the details, for some reason. They haven’t even told me how they usually do this covert agent stuff so I can judge which assertions are more plausible, much less confirm any details. Me neither. Fortunately Johnson outs himself as unreliable. ---
**Author:** ![Scylla](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a5b964/32.png) [@Scylla](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scylla)\ **Post date:** [September 6, 2006, 3:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wherein-scylla-admonishes-the-left-wing-for-casting-plame-upon-rove/370737/303 "2006-09-06T03:13:10Z")
[QUOTE=elucidator] Darned if I know. I have trouble keeping up with John LeCarre stories. But an overt cover that gives her entirely plausible reasons to be in places she needs to be for, ah, _classified_ reason seems entirely sensible to me. [/quote] But if you were doing that “overtly” as you say, than you coudn’t have **classified** reasons without leaking them. If the overt cover was “official” say as being the Ambassador’s wife, it couldn’t really be “nonofficial” too. And, if she was there say as a private employee of some firm she would still be married to an ambassador and have “offical” cover > [@](#): > > That word “apparently”. Seems a bit “soft”, like this is your personal impression, your feminine intuition, so to speak. Have any proof for that than for your last improv? If I did, I would not have said “apparently.” I would have said “definitely.” I say “apparently” because it merely seems apparent based on the fact that Corn’s claims while uncredited seem to “apparently” directly derive from Johnson’s (which are also uncredited) which preceed them yet are nearly identical. It is not sourced, but the source seems to be “apparent.” Stop being a pain in the ass. ---
**Author:** ![Scylla](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a5b964/32.png) [@Scylla](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scylla)\ **Post date:** [September 6, 2006, 3:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wherein-scylla-admonishes-the-left-wing-for-casting-plame-upon-rove/370737/304 "2006-09-06T03:27:32Z")
[QUOTE=waterj2] So, the wife of the US Ambassador to Gabon would have diplomatic immunity while attending a meeting for her own pivate employer in, say, Iran? I think a cite would be useful, as it doesn’t seem at all clear to me that that would be the case. [/quote] She would still be the wife of the ambassador to Gabon, wouldn’t she? > [@](#): > > Not that it matters, as the distinction between NOC and OC is irrelevant to the laws we’re talking about. True, but the claim that Plame was a NOC would make her seem more heroic and her outing more egregious if it were true, just as it would be more egregious if she were covert rathen than merely classified. The higher the status of Plame the more serious the incident. ---
**Author:** ![Scylla](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a5b964/32.png) [@Scylla](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scylla)\ **Post date:** [September 6, 2006, 3:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wherein-scylla-admonishes-the-left-wing-for-casting-plame-upon-rove/370737/305 "2006-09-06T03:35:25Z")
Interestingly enough George Stephanopolous seems to agree with me: > **[So Now We Know](https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/story?id=2375968)** Though within the context of the story the last sentence doesn’t make any sense. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [September 6, 2006, 3:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wherein-scylla-admonishes-the-left-wing-for-casting-plame-upon-rove/370737/306 "2006-09-06T03:49:16Z")
[QUOTE=Scylla] …If I did, I would not have said “apparently.” I would have said “definitely.” I say “apparently” because it merely seems apparent based on the fact that Corn’s claims while uncredited seem to “apparently” directly derive from Johnson’s (which are also uncredited) which preceed them yet are nearly identical. It is not sourced, but the source seems to be “apparent.”… [/quote] Just wanted to clear that up. You are rejecting Mr. Corn’s statements out of hand, having nothing more but your own biases to operate from. Of course, his statements are pretty strong, suggesting, as they do, a considerable degree of importance to Ms. Plame. If he’s lying, as you “apparently” suggest, I have little doubt he’ll be busted for it, that’s some very specific stuff there. Let me know, won’t you, when that happens? > [@](#): > > …Stop being a pain in the ass. Yeah, does seem kind of ungrateful, after you’ve been so nice to me, and all. ---
**Author:** ![waterj2](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/858c86/32.png) [@waterj2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/waterj2)\ **Post date:** [September 6, 2006, 4:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wherein-scylla-admonishes-the-left-wing-for-casting-plame-upon-rove/370737/307 "2006-09-06T04:29:04Z")
[QUOTE=Scylla] She would still be the wife of the ambassador to Gabon, wouldn’t she? [/QUOTE] Yes, but I really don’t know if that’s the sort of thing that would enable the US to tell Iran that we’d like our diplomat back and require them to give her back, or if wives of ambassadors are at the mercy of the laws that the rest of us are bound to when they wander around the world on their own business. As I said, I don’t really care so much, as it’s irrelevant to the legal case, but you do seem to be making the claim that it ought to be apparent, when I don’t think it is. > [@](#): > > I change my mind and concede points pretty often compared to most. Such complaints typically imply that there’s not a very strong argument forthcoming, but we’ll see. I’m sure that you do. The tenor of this thread leads me to suspect that this is not one of those cases. There’s certainly not going to be a strong argument coming from me. I saw a few blatant gaps in your argument and took you to task. You’ve filled in those gaps with some clarifications and futher information, rather than invective, and I suspect I’ll be satisfied with the answers I’ve gotten soon, and quietly bow back out. We’ll continue to disagree, of course. But I think I’ll mostly leave this to the others. I mean, I’m not sure how far out on a limb I want to go basing my arguments around the credibility of a [guy](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Larry_C._Johnson#2006) that said: “Karl is a shameless bastard. This could explain why his mother killed herself. Once she discovered what a despicable soul she had spawned she apparently saw no other way out.” Sure, I still think he’s right, but sheesh. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [September 6, 2006, 4:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wherein-scylla-admonishes-the-left-wing-for-casting-plame-upon-rove/370737/308 "2006-09-06T04:39:38Z")
Anyone ever seen Rove with his head shaved? Just askin… ---
**Author:** ![kaylasdad99](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kaylasdad99/32/3398_2.png) [@kaylasdad99](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kaylasdad99)\ **Post date:** [September 6, 2006, 5:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wherein-scylla-admonishes-the-left-wing-for-casting-plame-upon-rove/370737/309 "2006-09-06T05:42:27Z")
[QUOTE=Scylla] > [@](#): > > If you intend to characterize them as seperate line items, then I commend you for not engaging in a quixotic effort to demonstrate that discrediting Joe Wilson as a reliable reporter was not among the White House’s motivations; and sticking to the “destroying-Joe-Wilson’s-reputation-and-seeing-to-it-that-the-remainder-of-his-days-were-spent-in-bitter-isolation-from-all-men-of-good-report-type revenge” line. 'Cos, I agree with you, they’ll never be able to pin that one on Messrs. Cheney, Rove, and Libby. That is one bitch of a sentence, double negatives and all. Hmmm. I’m not really sure what you’re asking here. Is discrediting Joe Wilson proper? I think it is. We know that he conveniently left out that there was an attempt to purchase yellowcake in 1999 out of his Op-ed, and I view that piece as a pretty clear attempt to smear the Bush administration and help Kerry. \ \*\*\*I hope that answers your question. If I failed to do so, I apologize, but either it’s very late or my brain is fried or your sentence structure got a bit too complex and obfuscatory for me to parse. [/QUOTE] Yes I suppose it was. Sorry, I’ll try to break it down. I posited that there were possibly two separate acts of malfeasance that the “ilk” were accusing Cheney, Rove, and Libby of (in your thesis). The first is that, in pursuit of retribution against Joe Wilson, for publishing an Op-Ed piece that might be construed as giving the lie to a significant assertion that the Administration was using to make the case for the war, they conspired to reveal his wife’s CIA connections. The second is that Cheney, Rove and Libby conspired to reveal Valerie Plame’s CIA connections in order to impeach the substance of Joe Wilson’s Op-Ed piece, and in so doing, rescue their significant assertion’s usefulness, on the grounds that Wilson’s mission, to which he referred in the piece, was tainted by nepotism; therefore his conclusions were less trustworthy than the assertion which they purported to cast doubt upon. I noted that you have done a creditable job of establishing that the first accusation can fairly be called “baseless”. I also said that anyone who was making that accusation, and that accusation alone, should be ashamed of [him]self (at least, that’s what I hoped to be understood as saying). I was also attempting to point out that you did not seem to have expended much energy in attempting to prove baseless the accusation that they had acted to rescue their significant assertion. Because I personally believe that to have been the motivation for their actions, I think you would have had a much harder task in proving that accusation baseless. So I congratulated you for being smart enough not to attempt it. The entirety of the preceding, of course, rests upon the assumption that you in fact view those as two separate accusations, and that you were only remonstrating “ilks” for the first. As to your belief that discrediting Joe Wilson is proper, well, I’m not prepared to argue in absolute terms that discrediting your opponent (or your opponent’s “star witness,” as it were) is never legitimate; the courtroom-seasoned lawyers around here would eat me alive ;). But I do feel that decency demands that one impose _some_ limits upon one’s own tactics and behavior when doing this ( **Hentor the Barbarian** might disagree with me on that point :dubious: ). You probably agree with me on the point that some means of discrediting are not legitimate (else why this thread?), but I suspect you draw the line at a different point than I do. ---
**Author:** ![kaylasdad99](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kaylasdad99/32/3398_2.png) [@kaylasdad99](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kaylasdad99)\ **Post date:** [September 6, 2006, 5:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wherein-scylla-admonishes-the-left-wing-for-casting-plame-upon-rove/370737/310 "2006-09-06T05:59:45Z")
[QUOTE=Scylla] Interestingly enough George Stephanopolous seems to agree with me: > **[So Now We Know](https://abcnews.com/Politics/story?id=2375968)** Though within the context of the story the last sentence doesn’t make any sense. [/QUOTE] Perhaps not, to you. You’ve already established pretty adamantly your view that Armitage’s loose lips sank Plame’s cover so completely and irrevocably that anything Libby said, even before Novak’s column saw the light of day, was so close to common knowledge as to not constitute the slightest impropriety.\* Stephanopolous apparently doesn’t agree with you 100%. Be pretty alarming if he did, of course, your respective histories being what they are. 😉 \*This is what I understand the gist of your position to be. Please enlighten me if I’m misreading you. ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [September 6, 2006, 10:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wherein-scylla-admonishes-the-left-wing-for-casting-plame-upon-rove/370737/311 "2006-09-06T10:06:40Z")
[QUOTE=Scylla] > [@RTFirefly](#): > > “Rustman, whose formal association with Plame consisted of when he’d been her boss for a year or so back in the 1980s…” While she was at Penn State majoring in advertising? :rolleyes: She didn’t finish schooling till 1995. Nice. [/QUOTE] > [@](#): > > Valerie Plame was recruited into the CIA in 19 **8** 5, straight out of Pennsylvania State University. [At least get the basic timeline right.](http://www.thenation.com/doc/20060918/corn) ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [September 6, 2006, 10:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wherein-scylla-admonishes-the-left-wing-for-casting-plame-upon-rove/370737/312 "2006-09-06T10:18:49Z")
And shorter **Scylla** on another issue: ‘Rustman is authoritative, because I agree with him.’ Seems that in **Scylla** ’s mind, any evidence, any source, that contradicts Rustman, is automatically wrong, because Rustman worked for the CIA and was briefly Plame’s boss in the very early stages of her career. This despite the obvious weakness of Rustman’s assertions that Plame’s friends and neighbors all knew she was CIA: the friends and neighbors we know of who’ve been interviewed didn’t know, and AFAWK no neighbors who claim they _did_ know have ever been produced. Even former CIA agents are human, and can say things that reflect their personal animus rather than their professional expertise. What we know is that Rustman has made an allegation about Plame that is at odds with the other facts we have. We don’t have any evidence of Rustman’s track record as an honest and reliable witness other than this. Accordingly, Rustman must be considered a questionable source. ---
**Author:** ![Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/8edcca/32.png) [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hentor_the_Barbarian)\ **Post date:** [September 6, 2006, 11:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wherein-scylla-admonishes-the-left-wing-for-casting-plame-upon-rove/370737/313 "2006-09-06T11:47:12Z")
[QUOTE=kaylasdad99] But I do feel that decency demands that one impose _some_ limits upon one’s own tactics and behavior when doing this ( **Hentor the Barbarian** might disagree with me on that point :dubious: ). [/QUOTE] For one who chose to take me to task for the, perhaps graceless, manner in which I tried to respond to **Hamlet’s** charge while I simultaneously apologized for the sidetrack, it is unclear why you would now wish to poke sticks at me. In any event, your post suggests that anyone may act prickishly in any given situation, intended practices notwithstanding. ---
**Author:** ![Waverly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/57b2e6/32.png) [@Waverly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Waverly)\ **Post date:** [September 6, 2006, 3:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wherein-scylla-admonishes-the-left-wing-for-casting-plame-upon-rove/370737/314 "2006-09-06T15:28:27Z")
[QUOTE=Scylla] No. It’s pretty specific. [/quote] I was being kind. Calling it ambiguous seemed more polite than saying, “you are deliberately taking liberties with the definition.” > [@](#): > > The CIA must also be providing her an active cover identity. Didn’t we go over this? The first condition that must be met is that her status must be classified, which Fitzpatrick establishes. The 2nd condition is that she must have served overseas within the past 5 years. You are going to doubt sources that state that condition #2 has been met… but why the fuck are you adding in this “providing active cover” non-sequitur? You sense that Plame might well meet the definition of covert, perhaps even NOC, so you throw in your own qualifiers like a petulant child. Grow up and stick with the facts, or come right out and admit that you intend to waste my time. > [@](#): > > Only according to Larry Johnson who is non-credible in his claims. Yes, condition #2 depends upon Johnson’s claims being substantiated. The claim itself is plausible, but I’d like to see a second source, and presumably time will tell. I certainly think this is a more reasonable approach than holding up Rustman as inherently more credible because, well, because he says things you like to believe are true. > [@](#): > > Marrying an ambassador, having twins, working as an analyst, again, according to her former boss Rustman who is much mor credible than Johnson Rustman was fairly far removed from her during the period of time in question. Any idea why her current boss isn’t speaking? Maybe he believes that ‘classified’ means classified. Think about it… what does silence from the CIA, other than their request to have the matter investigated, seem to indicate? If they had some wannabe poseur on their hands, they’d have debunked the notion themselves early on. As for the rest of this non-sense… what do you think an operative is? Maxwell smart with a shoe-phone? Getting married and having children does not prevent Plame from posing as an energy analyst when her real purpose was quite different. You don’t need to skulk around in disguise with a number rather than a name to act as a spy. ---
**Author:** ![Waverly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/57b2e6/32.png) [@Waverly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Waverly)\ **Post date:** [September 6, 2006, 3:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wherein-scylla-admonishes-the-left-wing-for-casting-plame-upon-rove/370737/315 "2006-09-06T15:35:25Z")
Eh, sorry, I’ve made the mistake of calling Patrick Fitzgerald, “Fitzpatrick”. I’m apparently not the only one, since the mistake is common in blogs and newswires. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [September 6, 2006, 3:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wherein-scylla-admonishes-the-left-wing-for-casting-plame-upon-rove/370737/316 "2006-09-06T15:37:36Z")
Oh, no you don’t! It’s perfectly clear that you hope to confuse Fitzpatrick with John _Fitzgerald_\* Kennedy. Your nefarious purpose in this is obscure, but obvious! ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [September 6, 2006, 3:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wherein-scylla-admonishes-the-left-wing-for-casting-plame-upon-rove/370737/317 "2006-09-06T15:39:03Z")
What’s this button “Preview”? Looks dangerous. Best leave it alone… ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [September 6, 2006, 3:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wherein-scylla-admonishes-the-left-wing-for-casting-plame-upon-rove/370737/318 "2006-09-06T15:52:33Z")
From _Daily Kos_: Roger Cressey, former Chief of Staff to the President’s Critical Infrastructure Protection Board at the White House from November 2001 to September 2002, told Scarborough: > [@](#): > > SCARBOROUGH: Roger, let me begin with you. There are points of this docudrama that are more drama than fact. But talk about Bill Clinton and the central premise by ABC that he should have done more to get Bin Laden. > > CRESSY: Joe, it’s amazing, based on what I’ve seen so far is how much they’ve gotten wrong. They got the small stuff wrong such as Khalid Sheikh Mohammed instructing Ahmed Rassam to carry out the millenium attacks. Then they got the big stuff wrong, this fantasy about how we had a CIA officer and the Northern Alliance leader Ahmed Massoud looking at Bin Laden and they breathlessly call the White House to say we need to take him out and the White House said no. I mean it’s sheer fantasy. So, if they want to critique the Clinton administration and the Bush administration, based on fact, I think that’s fine. **But what ABC has done here is something straight out of Disney and fantasyland. It’s factually wrong. And that’s shameful.** > > SCARBOROUGH: But at the same time, doesn’t history show that Bill Clinton had several opportunities to go after bin Laden, but the President and his cabinet were afraid to do so because they may offend some people in the Arab world? > > CRESSY: Actually, Joe, that had nothing to do with it. If you read the 9/11 Commission report, it makes it very clear. In most of those cases, George Tenet, the Director of the CIA, said because there was single source intelligence it was his recommendation to the President not to take the shot. **There was never a case where we had a clear shot at Bin Laden and the decision to take it wasn’t made**. Emphasis added. Offered without comment. ---
**Author:** ![Hamlet](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hamlet/32/2818_2.png) [@Hamlet](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hamlet)\ **Post date:** [September 6, 2006, 3:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wherein-scylla-admonishes-the-left-wing-for-casting-plame-upon-rove/370737/319 "2006-09-06T15:57:22Z")
[QUOTE=elucidator] Emphasis added. Offered without comment. [/QUOTE] Good thing there is no comment, because I fear it is in the wrong thread. Instead of here, it should have been in the 9/11 movie thread. ---
**Author:** ![kaylasdad99](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kaylasdad99/32/3398_2.png) [@kaylasdad99](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kaylasdad99)\ **Post date:** [September 6, 2006, 4:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wherein-scylla-admonishes-the-left-wing-for-casting-plame-upon-rove/370737/320 "2006-09-06T16:57:56Z")
[QUOTE=Hentor the Barbarian] For one who chose to take me to task for the, perhaps graceless, manner in which I tried to respond to **Hamlet’s** charge while I simultaneously apologized for the sidetrack, it is unclear why you would now wish to poke sticks at me. In any event, your post suggests that anyone may act prickishly in any given situation, intended practices notwithstanding. [/QUOTE] Indeed. Lighten up. 😛 [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wherein-scylla-admonishes-the-left-wing-for-casting-plame-upon-rove/370737.md?page=15) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wherein-scylla-admonishes-the-left-wing-for-casting-plame-upon-rove/370737.md?page=17)