Fork You Rove!

Here is the text... Read it all... There is no exception for disclosing classified info even if you only confirm a previous source. It is illegal. And they are "trained" to know this before they to get any security clearance.

They are so detailed in this training that even confirming classified info to a news source is a part of that training, and it is definately a no-no.

REP. HENRY A. WAXMAN
RANKING MINORITY MEMBER
COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT REFORM
U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
JULY 15, 2005


Fact Sheet
Karl Rove’s Nondisclosure Agreement


Today, news reports revealed that Karl Rove, the White House Deputy Chief of Staff and the President’s top political advisor, confirmed the identity of covert CIA official Valerie Plame Wilson with Robert Novak on July 8, 2003, six days before Mr. Novak published the information in a nationally syndicated column. These new disclosures have obvious relevance to the criminal investigation of Patrick Fitzgerald, the Special Counsel who is investigating whether Mr. Rove violated a criminal statute by revealing Ms. Wilson’s identity as a covert CIA official.


Independent of the relevance these new disclosures have to Mr. Fitzgerald’s investigation, they also have significant implications for: (1) whether Mr. Rove violated his obligations under his "Classified Information Nondisclosure Agreement" and (2) whether the White House violated its obligations under Executive Order 12958. Under the nondisclosure agreement and the executive order, Mr. Rove would be subject to the loss of his security clearance or dismissal even for "negligently" disclosing Ms. Wilson’s identity.


KARL ROVE’S NONDISCLOSURE AGREEMENT


Executive Order 12958 governs how federal employees are awarded security clearances in order to obtain access to classified information. It was last updated by President George W. Bush on March 25, 2003, although it has existed in some form since the Truman era. The executive order applies to any entity within the executive branch that comes into possession of classified information, including the White House. It requires employees to undergo a criminal background check, obtain training on how to protect classified information, and sign a "Classified Information Nondisclosure Agreement," also known as a SF-312, promising not to reveal classified information.1


The nondisclosure agreement signed by White House officials such as Mr. Rove states: "I will never divulge classified information to anyone" who is not authorized to receive it.2


THE PROHIBITION AGAINST "CONFIRMING" CLASSIFIED INFORMATION


Mr. Rove, through his attorney, has raised the implication that there is a distinction between classified information to someone not authorized to receive it and confirming classified information from someone not authorized to have it. In fact, there is no such distinction under the nondisclosure agreement Mr. Rove signed.

One of the most basic rules of safeguarding classified information is that an official who has signed a nondisclosure agreement cannot confirm classified information obtained by a reporter.


In fact, this obligation is highlighted in the "briefing booklet" that new security clearance recipients receive when they sign their nondisclosure agreements: Before … confirming the accuracy of what appears in the public source, the signer of the SF 312 must confirm through an authorized official that the information has, in fact, been declassified. If it has not, … confirmation of its accuracy is also an unauthorized disclosure.3


THE INDEPENDENT DUTY TO VERIFY THE CLASSIFIED STATUS OF INFORMATION


Mr. Rove’s attorney has implied that if Mr. Rove learned Ms. Wilson’s identity and occupation from a reporter, this somehow makes a difference in what he can say about the information. This is inaccurate.


The executive order states: "Classified information shall not be declassified automatically as a result of any unauthorized disclosure of identical or similar information."4


Mr. Rove was not at liberty to repeat classified information he may have learned from a reporter Instead, he had an affirmative obligation to determine whether the information had been declassified before repeating it. The briefing booklet is explicit on this point: "before disseminating the information elsewhere … the signer of the SF 312 must confirm through an authorized official that the information has, in fact, been declassified."5


"NEGLIGENT" DISCLOSURE OF CLASSIFIED INFORMATION


Mr. Rove’s attorney has also implied that Mr. Rove’s conduct should be at issue only if he intentionally or knowingly disclosed Ms. Wilson’s covert status. In fact, the nondisclosure agreement and the executive order require sanctions against security clearance holders who "knowingly, willfully, or negligently" disclose classified information.6 The sanctions for such a breach include "reprimand, suspension without pay, removal, termination of classification authority, loss or denial of access to classified information, or other sanctions."7


THE WHITE HOUSE OBLIGATIONS UNDER EXECUTIVE ORDER 12958


Under the executive order, the White House has an affirmative obligation to investigate and take remedial action separate and apart from any ongoing criminal investigation. The executive order specifically provides that when a breach occurs, each agency must "take appropriate and prompt corrective action."8


This includes a determination of whether individual employees improperly disseminated or obtained access to classified information The executive order further provides that sanctions for violations are not optional.


The executive order expressly provides: "Officers and employees of the United States Government … shall be subject to appropriate sanctions if they knowingly, willfully, or negligently … disclose to unauthorized persons information properly classified."9


There is no evidence that the White House complied with these requirements.


ENDNOTES

1 Executive Order No. 12958, Classified National Security Information (as amended), sec. 4.1(a) (Mar.28, 2003) (online at Web reference).


2 Classified Information Nondisclosure Agreement, Standard Form 312 (Prescribed by NARA/ISOO) (32 C.F.R. 2003, E.O. 12958) (online at Web reference).

3 Information Security Oversight Office, National Archives and Records Administration, Briefing

Booklet: Classified Information Nondisclosure Agreement (Standard Form 312), at 73 (emphasis added)(online at Web reference ).

4 Executive Order No. 12958, sec. 1.1(b).

5 Briefing Booklet, supra note 3, at 73.

6 Executive Order No. 12958, sec. 5.5(b) (emphasis added).

7 Id. at 5.5(c).

8 Id. at 5.5(e)(1).

9 Id. at 5.5(b).

Stick a fork in rove...
YEP...
He is done.

Now what we need to know from cheney and bush?

What did you know AND when did you know it?

And while I am at it...
How friendly were you with Jeff Gannon?
Wink wink
(Hey, Gannon had to be screwing some guy in the White House?)

Iraq and Iran Hug Eachother...

And push the US aside...
All is fair in lovae and War, huh?

Well? I'll be interested in seeing how the right wingnut spinmonster tries get this mountain-sized boulder moving... Here you have the country they claim as a "New Democracy" that will be "American friendly" (You know, the Iraq that neocon wet dreams are made of) announcing they will be signing a military training deal and forming an alliance with Iran.

Yes...The same Iran that the bush pseudocons supporters would love to bomb the hell out of.

Aljazeera.Net - Iran and Iraq to sign military deal:
Thursday 07 July 2005, 13:10 Makka Time, 10:10 GMT

Former foes Iran and Iraq have said they will sign a military cooperation agreement that will include Iranian help in training Iraq's armed forces.

The agreement marks a considerable advance in relations between the two countries that fought a bitter 1980-1988 war and comes despite repeated US accusations that Iran has undermined security in Iraq since the fall of Saddam Hussein in 2003.

'It's a new chapter in our relations with Iraq. We will start wide defence cooperation,' Iranian Defence Minister Admiral Ali Shamkhani told a joint news conference with visiting Iraqi counterpart Sadoun al-Dulaimi.

'We're going to form some committees which will be involved in mine clearance, identifying those missing from the war and also ... to help train, rebuild and modernise the Iraqi army,' Shamkhani added.

Iran last year offered to train Iraqi border guards, but Baghdad declined the offer.

Meddling accusation

US and Iraqi officials have often accused Iran of stirring up instability in Iraq. Tehran denies meddling in Iraq or helping, arming or letting foreign fighters cross its borders.

'Nobody can dictate to Iraq its relations with other countries'

Sadoun al-Dulaimi,
Iraqi defence minister
Asked about possible US opposition to Iran-Iraq military cooperation, Shamkhani said: 'No one can prevent us from reaching an agreement.'

Iraq's al-Dulaimi echoed Shamkhani's comments.

'Nobody can dictate to Iraq its relations with other countries,' he said."

Normally I would just sit back and laugh as the right wing spinmonster choked on the fumes of reality, BUT I think it really is a good time to say something in support of our troops:

PULL THE FUCKING TROOPS OUT NOW YOU MORON OF A PRESIDENT!

Pigs On the Wing

While Juan Cole sets the record staright on the real issue of what is at the heart of the terror unleashed on London last week there is one very minor point he may have missed.

Salon.com News | "The time of revenge has come":

Blowback from Bush and Blair's incompetently pursued war on terror has hit London. When will the U.S. figure out how to fight smart?

By Juan Cole

July 8, 2005 | Credit for the horrific bombings of the London Underground and a double-decker bus on Thursday morning was immediately taken on a radical Muslim Web site by a 'secret group' of Qaida al-Jihad in Europe. By Thursday afternoon, as the casualty toll rose above 40 dead and 700 wounded, British Foreign Minister Jack Straw was saying, 'It has the hallmarks of an al-Qaida-related attack.' Although U.S. President George W. Bush maintains that al-Qaida strikes out at the industrialized democracies because of hatred for Western values, the statement said nothing of the sort. The attack, the terrorists proclaimed, was an act of sacred revenge for British 'massacres' in 'Afghanistan and Iraq,' and a punishment of the United Kingdom for its 'Zionism' (i.e., support of Israel). If they really are responsible, who is this group and what do they want?"

Don't you ever wonder where all of these web sites are coming from?

UK-based dissident denies link to website that carried al-Qaida claim

David Pallister - The Guardian
Saturday July 9, 2005

The claim of responsibility for the London attacks was first posted on one of the dozens of Islamic websites that are routinely monitored by western intelligence services.
The statement, under the name of the Secret Organisation of the al-Qaida Jihad in Europe, said: "The heroic mujahideen have carried out a blessed raid in London. Britain is now burning with fear, terror and panic in its northern, southern, eastern and western quarters."

...snip...

...two Israeli groups devoted to exposing the network of jihadist sites claim that it is connected to the London-based Saudi dissident Saad al-Faqih. Mr Faqih, who is based in Willesden, north-west London, and runs the Movement for Islamic Reform in Arabia (Mira), was designated by the US treasury last December as a supporter of al-Qaida. The UK Treasury followed suit by freezing Mr Faqih's assets.

Speaking in December 2004 before the assets were frozen, Mr Faqih ridiculed any idea that "millions of dollars" would be frozen. "I have no assets in the US and all I have in the UK is a current account with a few hundred pounds."

Well? At least someone out there is doing something about all of this by trying to freeze the assets of people that are involved...

But could we do more? Maybe...

It was posted on an Arabic website, al-qal3ah.com, which is registered by Qalaah Qalaah in Abu Dhabi and hosted by a server in Houston, Texas.

One would hope that they will deal with this Houston companies involvement in promoting terror? Maybe freezing all of their assets too...

Maybe?

When pigs can fly!

The server in Houston has intriguing connections. Everyone's Internet was founded by brothers Robert and Roy Marsh in 1998 and by 2002 had an income of more than $30m (now about £17m).

...snip...
Roy Marsh counts among his friends President George Bush's former sister-in-law, Sharon Bush, and the president's navy secretary.

Everyone's Internet, which also hosts a number of pornographic sites, states: "We support the uncensored flow of information and ideas over the internet and do not actively monitor subscriber activity under normal circumstances."

I am sure that investigators will clear Roy of any wrongdoing AFTER they have completely gone through all of the porn on those houston servers owned by another bush family porn pal.

If you didn't care what happened to me,
And I didn't care for you
We would zig zag our way
Through the boredom and pain
Occasionally glancing up through the rain
Wondering which of the buggers to blame
And watching for pigs on the wing

Pink Floyd, Animals