Hey Bob Novak, Karma is a Bitch
By Larry Johnson
Email: larry_johnson@earthlink.net
Site: http://NoQuarterUSA.net
About: Larry C. Johnson is a former analyst at the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency, who moved subsequently in 1989 to the U.S. Department of State, where he served four years as the deputy director for transportation security, antiterrorism assistance training, and special operations in the State Department's Office of Counterterrorism. He left government service in October 1993 and set up a consulting business. He currently is the co-owner and CEO of BERG Associates, LLC (Business Exposure Reduction Group) and is an expert in the fields of terrorism, aviation security, and crisis and risk management, and money laundering investigations. Johnson is the founder and main author of No Quarter, a weblog that addresses issues of terrorism and intelligence and politics. NoQuarterUSA was nominated as Best Political Blog of 2008.[1] He has worked as a private consultant on issues of international terrorism and security for the U.S. Government and private companies. Johnson has appeared as a consultant and commentator in many major newspapers and news programs.[2]
Contents [hide]
1 Background
2 Views
2.1 1996
2.2 1998
2.3 1999
2.4 2000
2.5 2001
2.6 2003
2.6.1 Plame affair
2.7 2008
3 Notes
4 References
5 External links
[edit]Background
Larry Johnson moved to Washington, D.C. in 1979 to begin work on a Ph.D. at the American University. Although he completed successfully all coursework and comprehensive exams, he did not write a dissertation. In 1978 and in 1983-85 he worked in Latin America on community development projects as a community organizer. Returning to the United States in 1985 he joined the Central Intelligence Agency, thanks in part to a letter of recommendation from Republican Senator Orrin Hatch (R-UT) that helped to "open doors" for him at the Agency.[3] Johnson entered on duty at the CIA in September 1985 and was a classmate of Valerie Plame. Every member of that class was undercover. After a year in the Career Trainee program, which included a stint with the Afghan Task Force, Johnson was assigned as an analyst in the Middle America Caribbean Division in the Latin American Affairs Office of the Directorate of Intelligence. He received two Exceptional Performance awards and was promoted ultimately to Senior Regional Analyst for Central America.
Johnson remained undercover in the CIA until October 1989, when he resigned from the CIA and started a new job in the Office of Counter Terrorism at the Department of State. Johnson played an instrumental role in launching the Terrorism Rewards program international advertising campaign (working with Diplomatic Security officers Brad Smith and Michael Parks). [4] Johnson also was involved in a variety of crisis management response operations, including the release of hostages from Lebanon and liaison with the Pan Am 103 families. He left government service in October 1993 and started his own business as a consultant.
After leaving government service, Johnson became a frequent guest on many major television news shows when a question of terrorism came up. He was first interviewed by CNN following the capture of Carlos the Jackal. Johnson subsequently appeared on CNN, ABC's Nightline, CBS, the BBC, MSNBC, the Jim Lehrer News Hour, NBC, and NPR. In December of 1999, for example, Johnson was hired by NBC to serve as its terrorist expert for the Y2000 and was in Time Square with Tom Brokaw and Katie Couric ("a lot of fun and the best way to see in the New Year"). Johnson also was hired in January 2002 as a Fox News Analyst and remained under contract until February 2003.
Since 1994 a significant focus of Johnson's consulting work has been with the U.S. military special operations forces in scripting and conducting military counter terrorism exercises. He traveled under orders from the U.S. military to Iraq in May 2006 to work on a short term project.
A registered Republican who supported President Bush in 2000, Johnson became a strong critic of the Bush administration in May 2003 for its conduct of the war in Iraq and, a few months later, for its role in the outing of CIA operative Valerie Plame.[5] He was also featured in the 2004 political documentary Outfoxed: Rupert Murdoch's War on Journalism. Since Robert Novak's controversial disclosure of Valerie Plame as a CIA operative in July 2003, Johnson has contributed to public discourse on intelligence matters, often sparking further controversy. He has been interviewed by both the mass media and the alternative media and published commentaries on a variety of issues, including the Plame affair, the controversy concerning Mary McCarthy, and the resignation of Porter Goss as Director of Central Intelligence.
[edit]Views
This article or section may contain an inappropriate mixture of prose and timeline.
Please help convert this timeline into prose or, if necessary, a list.
[edit]1996
In 1996, Johnson noted that terrorism worldwide was on the decline. "Terrorist incidents [both internationally and in the US] have fallen to levels not seen since the 1970s. Whether measured by the number of incidents, the number of fatalities, or the number of groups, raw statistics demonstrate that the level of terrorist violence has declined since the mid-1980s. In fact, the evidence suggests terrorism was more widespread and deadly 10 years ago."[6]
He also wrote an op-ed piece for the New York Times suggesting that the newer and more deadly terrorist threat to the U.S. was embodied by "networks of terrorists, mostly foreign, working within its borders." Exemplifying this threat was Ramzi Yousef, one of the masterminds behind the 1993 attack on the World Trade Center. In the article, Johnson suggests that enhanced cooperation between intelligence agencies, particularly the FBI and CIA, is mandatory to meet the growing threat of terror networks.[7]
[edit]1998
In 1998, Johnson argued that while overall terrorism was declining, the threat from bin Laden and al-Qaeda should be the focus of American counterterrorism policy:
The nature of the threat posed by Bin Ladin is highlighted by my final chart, number 7. Osama Bin Ladin and individuals associated with him have killed and wounded more Americans than any other group. This chart also illustrates that groups such as Hamas and the Tamil Tigers (LTTE) prior to 1998 have killed more foreigners in the anti-US terrorist attacks. If we take into account the bombings of the US Embassies in Kenya and Tanzania, Osama's status as the most lethal terrorist is certain.[8]
In addition, he told USA Today that bin Laden had participated in "virtually every major attack of terrorism against the United States" in the 1990s. Johnson underlined the threat posed by bin Laden, saying that he was possessed by "hatred and craziness." If left unanswered, "he would continue to terrorize Americans around the world. He has no compunction about killing women and children. He's a complete egalitarian in his murderous attitude."[9]
[edit]1999
In an interview with PBS's Frontline for its 1999 program, Hunting bin Laden, Johnson discussed Osama bin Laden.[10] According to Johnson, Americans had "tended to make Osama bin Laden sort of a superman in Muslim garb." "Actually," he continues, "Osama bin Laden, in my view, represents more of a symptom of a problem, and the problem is this: the Saudi Arabian government, not just Osama bin Laden but many people in Saudi Arabia, have been sending money to radical Islamic groups for years." Johnson continued:
When you look at who's killed Americans in the last 10 years, the individuals he's supported and backed--I'm basing that upon the initial information that's been released in the indictments and conversations with others in the intelligence communities--Osama bin Laden has been the one killing Americans. No other terrorist group in the world has been out killing Americans except for Osama bin Laden.... Osama bin Laden remains out there as the one really targeting us. So, we recognize that he's the threat. He's serious about wanting to kill Americans, but as long as he's in Afghanistan, as long as he doesn't have access to a cell phone, as long as he can't just hop on a plane and travel wherever he wants without fear of being arrested, his ability to plan and conduct terrorist operations is extremely limited. We have to recognize [that] he would like to do a lot of damage. He would like to kill Americans, but wanting to is different from being able to, having the full capabilities in place.[11]
In the interview, Johnson doubted the ability of members of bin Laden's organization to plan and put their lives on the line:
There's not another Ali or Mustafa out there at this point and Osama bin Laden in my view has not been a very effective organizer or leader. He talks a great game and puts out terrific threats as far as stirring the passions in the United States and maybe firing up the imaginations of some young Muslims throughout the world. But when push comes to shove, can he get a group of people who are together who will say: we are going to plan an operation, we're going to put our lives on the line, we're going to go out and try and kill people and we don't care what the consequence is? It hasn't happened.[12]
Frontline asked:
[Is it] ... fair to say what you're saying is that the president of the United States, his national security advisor, his deputy national security advisor for counter-terrorism, are basically blowing smoke [about the danger posed by bin Laden] and his followers]?
Johnson responded:
They're grossly exaggerating the problem. They are hyping it. They shouldn't be talking about rising terrorism. Instead of saying "terrorism's rising," it's not. "Terrorism is spreading," it's not. "More people are dying from terrorism," not the case. But what they should be saying is, "There's one individual out there that really doesn't like us, and he's made it his mission in life to kill Americans, and we've gotta deal with him." But we need to have a voice of reason in that process instead of putting ourselves out crying wolf, because this is essentially what's taking place right now. They call it the administration that cries wolf.[12]
[edit]2000
Johnson co-authored an article in 2000 with Milt Bearden which focused on the threat posed by al-Qaeda specifically, rather than terrorism trends in general. Beardon and Johnson note that new information emerging about the bombings at Kenya and Tanzania in 1998 points to the threat posed by Imad Mugniyah and Osama Bin Laden will require "a coordinated policy that will employ a full range of covert, clandestine, diplomatic, and military operations," concluding:
The Clinton Administration has shot its bolt on the terrorist problem with small effect, and no last minute show of force will change the record. A new administration can start afresh with a more sharply defined set of terrorism goals – Mughniyeh and bin Laden and their protectors for starters – and bring the full, coordinated force of American diplomatic, military, and intelligence capabilities to bear on the problem.[13]
[edit]2001
After Johnson's testimony to the special forum at the U.S. Senate, Gary J. Schmitt, executive director and CEO of the Project for the New American Century, refers in the Daily Standard (blog) to an op-ed piece Johnson wrote two months prior to the 9/11 attacks, claiming that Johnson argued that the US had little to fear from terrorism.[14]
In an editorial entitled "The Declining Terrorist Threat," published in the New York Times on 10 July 2001, Johnson says:
Judging from news reports and the portrayal of villains in our popular entertainment, Americans are bedeviled by fantasies about terrorism. They seem to believe that terrorism is the greatest threat to the United States and that it is becoming more widespread and lethal. They are likely to think that the United States is the most popular target of terrorists. And they almost certainly have the impression that extremist Islamic groups cause most terrorism.... None of these beliefs are based in fact.... While terrorism is not vanquished, in a world where thousands of nuclear warheads are still aimed across the continents, terrorism is not the biggest security challenge confronting the United States, and it should not be portrayed that way.[15]
Ten days after the 9/11 attacks, after quoting the above passage, Timothy Noah concludes a post in his "Chatterbox" feature at Slate: "Johnson's analysis, we now see, was bold, persuasive, and 100 percent wrong."[16] Johnson defended himself against such attacks:
The rightwing is resurrecting an op-ed I wrote in July 2001. I stand by the full article. It is still relevant today. I am accused, incorrectly, of ignoring the threat of terrorism. In fact, I correctly noted that the real threat emanated from Bin Laden and Islamic extremism. President Bush, for his part, ignored the CIA warning in August 2001 that Al Qaeda was posed to strike inside the United States.[17]
After September 11, Johnson appeared several times on FOX News to address the question of military action against terrorism. On 14 November, he defended the FBI's proposal to interview 5,000 students in the U.S. suspected of having information relevant to the September 11 investigations:
I think they should talk to everyone that they feel they have a need to talk to. I mean, look, this is war. This is not a legal proceeding. This isn't the O.J. Simpson trial. The folks that attacked us -- they murdered Americans. And we've got to recognize that in wartime, we should do things differently.[18]
[edit]2003
In January 2003, Johnson wrote an analysis of the relationship between the upcoming U.S. invasion of Iraq and the threat of transnational terrorism. According to Johnson, Bremer's response was to tell him that "it didn't matter what Saddam did or didn't do, we were going to war."[19] The paper warned that an invasion would "do little to destroy the infrastructure of radical Islamic terrorism responsible for the 9-11 attacks." Noting that Saddam Hussein's regime has been a longtime supporter of regional terrorist organizations such as the PLO, Johnson examines contacts between Saddam Hussein and transnational terrorist organizations such as al-Qaeda:
There is no doubt that Iraq is a state sponsor of terrorism—i.e., a country that provides financial support, safe haven, training, or weapons and explosives to groups or individuals that carry out terrorist attacks. . . . According to Central Intelligence Agency data, there is no credible evidence implicating Iraq in any mass casualty terrorist attacks since 1991. . . .
Johnson notes that the period immediately leading up to 2003 saw a rise of activity surrounding terrorist Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, suggesting that "Iraq is willing to help a movement that it would otherwise oppose on ideological grounds. Nonetheless," Johnson concludes, "it is important to understand that Iraqi entreaties to Al Qaeda, are most likely intended as a tactic to bolster Iraq’s ability to fight off a U.S. invasion rather than a deep-seated theological and ideological commitment to the terrorist agenda of Bin Laden.[20]
In that analysis Johnson also warns that the U.S.-led invasion was likely to backfire:
In fact there is a serious risk that a U.S. led war against Iraq may crystallize the diffused anger in the Arab and Muslim world — a heretofore unattained goal of bin Laden and his followers — and persuade more Muslim youths to take up the terrorist banner against America and her citizens.... If we decide to invade Iraq we must be prepared for the contingency that our attack will inspire young Muslims to pursue jihad against the West in general and the United States in particular. Just as the 1979 Soviet invasion of Afghanistan rallied many Muslims, especially young adults to the cause of jihad, a U.S. attack may enable Islamic extremists to attract new followers.[20]
Johnson also gave interviews on the topic of what to do with captured al-Qaeda leaders; while he did not condone torture, he suggested that a "sleep deprivation and reward system" might be useful for getting information from Khalid Sheikh Mohammed:
I don't see a constitutional right to have eight hours of sleep. You shouldn't subject someone to freezing but they don't get to wear mink coats, either.[21]
In May 2003, Johnson joined members of Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS) in condemning the manipulation of intelligence for political purposes:
It is a misuse and abuse of intelligence. The president was being misled. He was ill served by the folks who are supposed to protect him on this. Whether this was witting or unwitting, I don't know, but I'll give him the benefit of the doubt.[22]
[edit]Plame affair
After Robert Novak wrote a column identifying the wife of former ambassador Joseph C. Wilson as a CIA officer, the media invited Johnson to comment on the ensuing scandal because he had been a member of the same Career Trainee class with Valerie Plame Wilson. For example, in October 2003, he appeared on Democracy Now to discuss the Plame affair. He told interviewer Amy Goodman that Valerie Wilson's cover should have been respected whether she was an "analyst" or a "cleaning lady": "if she's undercover she's undercover, period. If the media allows themselves to get distracted with those kinds of curve balls, they ignore the issue."[23]
He told a Senate Democratic Policy Committee in October 2003, "My classmates and I have been betrayed. Together, we have kept the secrets of each other's identities a secret for 18 years. Each and every one of us have kept that secret, whether we were in the CIA, in other government service or in the private sector. But this issue is not just about a blown cover. It is about the destruction of the very essence, the core of human intelligence collection activities: plausible deniability, apparently, for partisan domestic political reasons."[24]
Johnson testified at a special joint hearing of Congressional and Senate Democrats on 22 July 2005 about the consequences arising from the Plame affair.[25]
[edit]2008
In 2008, Johnson emerged as a staunch supporter of Hillary Clinton and a strong critic of Barack Obama. Larry Johnson's blog, NoQuarterUSA, became a rally point for Clinton supporters wary of Barack Obama's qualifications to be president. Supporters of Barack Obama insist that a story that first appeared on Johnson's blog--a report that Republican operatives have a tape of Michelle Obama making racially insenstive comments about caucasians--has been "refuted" Barack Obama's Fight the Smears website.[26]. However, Johnson never claimed to have the tape and reported that the Republican operatives controlling it intended to release the tape sometime after the Democratic Convention in August 2008. On October 21, however, he asserted that the operative in possession of the tape had been instructed by the McCain campaign not to release it.[27]
[edit]Notes
^ http://2008.weblogawards.org/polls/best-political-coverage/
^ Larry C. Johnson, "About Me," No Quarter (personal blog).
^ "Former CIA Official Larry Johnson Delivers Democratic Radio Address," transcript posted on official Democratic National Committee's website for The Democratic Party, July 23, 2005], accessed November 21, 2006.
^ Interview with Larry Johnson, confirmed by his supervisor
^ "Ex-CIA official Blasts Bush on Leak of Operative's Name: Democrats' Radio Address Focuses on White House Aides' Role," CNN July 23, 2005, accessed November 21, 2006.
^ Gail Russell Chaddock, "Why Terrorists Pick On the French," Christian Science Monitor (5 December 1996) p. 1.
^ Larry Johnson, "Terrorists Among Us," New York Times (20 August 1996) p. A19.
^ Terrorism Today
^ Lee Michael Katz, "The Hunt for Bin Laden," USA Today (21 August 1998) p. 1A.
^ See Transcript of original interview with Larry C. Johnson, as broadcast on Frontline in 1999. Cf. "Interview: Larry C. Johnson," for Hunting bin Laden, transcript of interview broadcast on Frontline subsequently on 13 April 2001. See also dedicated PBS webpages for media links: Iraq and the War on Terror, Frontline PBS, online featured programs, accessed 19 November 2006.
^ frontline: hunting bin laden: interviews: larry c. johnson | PBS
^ a b [1].
^ As posted in [2].
^ Gary Schmitt, [ 07/25/2005 "Meet Larry Johnson: The CIA official Turned Democratic Spokesman Has a Pre-9/11 Mindset," Daily Standard (blog), July 25, 2005, accessed November 20, 2006.
^ *Larry C. Johnson, "The Declining Terrorist Threat," The New York Times 10 July 2001: A19.
^ Timothy Noah, "(Not Exactly a) Whopper of the Week: Larry C. Johnson," Chatterbox: Gossip, speculation, and scuttlebutt about politics (blog), hosted by Slate September 21, 2001, accessed November 20, 2006. Note the full context of this quotation:
It is, to be sure, a little bit cheap (and slightly at odds with the usual parameters of this feature) to criticize someone for making an erroneous prediction, particularly after a tragedy. Chatterbox is especially reluctant to tag Johnson because Johnson's op-ed was argued forcefully, backed up meticulously with factual data, and bravely at odds with conventional wisdom at the time of its publication. Add in that Johnson now makes his living as a consultant to corporations about terrorism, and therefore had everything to gain by exaggerating the dangers terrorism poses, and the guy practically looks like a hero. Chatterbox, who two decades ago was an editor for the New York Times op-ed page, would have published Johnson's piece had he still been an editor there this past July. In his capacity at Slate, Chatterbox might well have written up Johnson's prediction, and perhaps even endorsed it.
But boy, is he glad he didn't! Johnson's analysis, we now see, was bold, persuasive, and 100 percent wrong. Sadly, a mistake this embarrassing cannot be ignored. As a fellow skeptic, Chatterbox in all sincerity wishes Johnson better luck next time.
^ Larry C. Johnson, "Johnson vs. President Bush," re-posted and updated by SusanHu at DailyKos (blog) July 25, 2005.
^ FOX News Interview with John Garrett (14 November 2001) Transcript #111405cb.260.
^ [3].
^ a b Larry C. Johnson, "Setting the Record Straight on Iraqi Terrorism," posted in Booman Tribune: A Progressive Community (personal blog) 27 January 2003. accessed 19 November 2006.
^ Qtd. in Toby Harnden, "CIA 'pressure' on al-Qa'eda chief," The London Telegraph 5 March 2003: 16.
^ Qtd. in Nicolas D. Kristof, "Save Our Spooks," The New York Times 30 May 2003:A6.
^ Democracy Now (3 October 2003)[4]
^ U.S. Senate, Democratic Policy Committee Meeting on the CIA Operative Leak, (24 October 2003).
^ Letter to the Senate.[Needs full source citation; see "References" section.]
^ Tumulty, Karen (2008-06-12). "Will Obama's Anti-Rumor Plan Work?", Time Magazine. Retrieved on 20 June 2008.:"a story that apparently first made a big splash on the Internet in late May in a post by pro-Hillary Clinton blogger Larry Johnson"
^ Whitey Tape, API, Phil Berg, and Andy MartinSee Authors Posts (1090) on December 4, 2008 at 8:21 PM in Current Affairs
There was a time that Bob Novak was a responsible, muckraking journalist. But those days are long gone. The turn to the dark side started when Novak willingly exposed the classified identity of Valerie Plame Wilson. Novak knew better. He had been around Washington long enough to know the vital importance of protecting the identities of intelligence officers but in a fit of partisan rage or pandering he played along with the White House and circulated the bullshit story that Valerie sent her unqualified husband on an African boondoggle.
So here is Novak today, proving that he is making little progress in his battle against brain cancer. He was asked if he would out Valerie if he had it to do all over again. Novak said:
I’d go full speed ahead because of the hateful and beastly way in which my left-wing critics in the press and Congress tried to make a political affair out of it and tried to ruin me. My response now is this: The hell with you. They didn’t ruin me. I have my faith, my family, and a good life. A lot of people love me — or like me. So they failed. I would do the same thing over again because I don’t think I hurt Valerie Plame whatsoever.
So Bob, with respect to your brain tumor. I have a phrase for you. Karma is a bitch. Those of us who know Valerie, who worked with her, and were undercover with her know that she was not a political partisan. She was a professional intelligence officer dedicated to serving the President, regardless of party.
If you had simply taken the time to interview the National Intelligence Officer for Africa at the time, Ambassador Robert Houdek, you would have learned that the Niger uranium story was considered bogus. Joe Wilson’s findings were consistent with what the true intelligence professionals believed–the Iraq had not tried to buy new quantities of uranium because they already had 500 tons they could not process. But no, you ignored the repeated warnings of the CIA spokesman, Bill Harlow, and exposed Valerie.
So, you would do the same thing over again? I have to assume that the tumor eating your brain accounts for your stupid, shallow comments. You didn’t hurt Valerie? You ignorant fool. You hurt more than Valerie. You exposed intelligence assets. Human sources. You put the lives of people who worked for Valerie as intelligence assets in the search for weapons of mass destruction at risk.
What will you say if an intelligence officer provides information that is viewed as not supportive of a policy of Barack Obama? Is it okay to out that person? My answer does not depend on the political affiliation of the intelligence officer. An undercover officer is part of our nation’s security and must be protected. It is not up to political hacks and weak minded journalists to expose intelligence officers because of a political snit.
Bob, I do not wish you a happy holiday. I simply wish that you could recover that portion of your brain that once made you a respected journalist. Unfortunately, you are dying and disgracing what legacy you had in the process. Protecting officers like Valerie Plame Wilson is not about left versus right. It is about right versus wrong.
(small, medium and large sizes; for both dogs and cats)
+ 
[nodding in agreement]
Excellent post, Larry. I especially like your closing paragraph!
Robert Novak’s brain tumor must have been affecting his thinking for years. That’s about as charitable as I can muster for that schmuck.
So by this we are supposed to smirk with satisfaction at the suggestion that Novak deserves brain cancer?
I find this title “Hey Bob Novak, Karma is a Bitch” disgusting and in very poor taste.
It is the equivalent to saying Ted Kennedy deserves brain cancer for drowning a woman (which he did do) and that his liberalism was caused by a brain tumor. Now that is so not even funny.
“Hey Ted Karma is a bitch” and all those dead Kennedy’s like JFK juniors mishap was payback I suppose. I would never say such a thing. I only did to make a point. You can be provocative without sounding like spiteful insensitive loon.
Here is another example: Hey how about some trig Palin Jokes? I heard the kid is a real tard. Yuk Yuk. A real knee slapper. NOT.
Shame on you, Winston.
Although you claim not to usually say those things, you do promote them by lustily repeating them. Why else would you think to post the disgusting “joke”, without any relevance to the topic??
Larry, on the other hand, is making a clear point about Bob Novak’s unacceptable behaviour, who has caused severe damage to a friend of his and the entire Intelligence community, many of whom put their lifes on the line for our security even without being exposed by people like Novak, Scooter Libby and probably Cheney and/or Rove. Whether Novak’s behaviour is caused by brain tumor, I do not know.
Seems like Larry is making a career out of wishing ill health on those he disagrees with politically. Wasn’t it just last week that he was wishing a stroke on Attorney General Michael Mukasey? And now, he is absolutely gleeful over Robert Novak’s cancer? Why? Because Novak reported on Plame? I wonder if Larry has the same problem with the clown at the New York Times that has had no problem releasing the name of a truely covert agent who had been in Iraq, along with that agent’s address and the type of car he drove.
I guess Larry is just upset because Val and Joe lost their civil case. Or maybe because Larry, being so close to Val, knew that it was that oh, so honorable man, Richard Armitage, that actually gave Novak Plame’s name. Perhaps Valerie should have been smart enough not to list her “shadow” company when she donated to John Kerry’s campaign. How’s that whole VIP thing about trying to get active CIA members to leak sensitive material to create problems for George Bush going?
And now, for a trip to the way back machine where Larry showed us his Plame Game expertise:
The first part of his article:
“Judging from news reports and the portrayla of villains in our popular entertainment, Americans are bedeviled by fantasies about terrorism. They seem to think that terrorism is the greatest threat to the United States and that it is becoming more widespread and lethal. They are likely to think that the United States is the most popular target of terrorists. And they almost certainly have the impression that extremist Islamic groups cause most terrorism.
None of these beliefs are based in fact.”
Now for the last paragraph of Larry’s most insightful article:
“I hope for a world where facts, not fiction, determine our policy. While terrorism is not vanquished, in a world where thousands of nuclar warheads are still aimed across the continents, terrorism is not the biggest security challange confronting the United States, and it should not be portrayed that way.
Written by Larry Johnson on July 10, 2001, two months and one day before those Islamic terrorist flew planes, not nuclear war heads, into the World Trade Center killing almost 3,000 Americans.
So Larry, you were wrong then, you are wrong now in being joyful over another American’s bout with cancer. Not that I ever expect you to admit it.
Yeah well karma’s a bitch for Ted too. I don’t like him anymore than I like Novak. The hypocrite.
I also think it would be karma if Teddy’s last lucid moment is spent seeing Mary Jo standing in front of him waiting to kick his ass downstairs. The killer.
Damn, that’s cold.
He Wilson, here’s a suggestion: if you are so appalled by the commentary of the site’s owner, why don’t you go elsewhere to protect your delicate nature? Novak didn’t seem to be too concerned with Valeria Plame’s health, so you’ll have to forgive Larry if he doesn’t feel all warm and fuzzy about the man who STILL refuses to accept any responsibility for jeopardizing his friend and colleague’s life.
Oh, No! are you going to blame that poor tumor?
Um, how many years exactly do we need to go back to find the Bob Novak who was not a sold-out highly partisan hack just passing on GOP talking points?
I have to agree. He has been doing that for years, although the Plame outing still shocks me. For all he knows people may have died because of his revelation. The CIA won’t say.
the concept of right versus wrong seems lost in the United States. Soon we will be subject to Islam and Sharia law, just like the UK.
Do you really think the UK is subject to Sharia law? It is not.
THe UK has passed laws to allow some Sharia. I am pleased that the UK is so dumb about all of this. They will end up being the example for the wake up call in the rest of the western world.
What I never really understood was how Novak could maintian his access to the power base of Washington.
I guess, he had to be considered a megaphone for trial ballon leaks and it got out of hand with Valarie.
Some how he had to understand that he was being played like a fiddle and he did it for the money.
When I was younger I really thought Washington was a neat place, took my kids to the Capitol, the mall and the White House.
Some how the luster has diminshed and now I think of it as a Den of Ill Repute. I would not think of taking my grandchildren there with the same enthusiam.
People like Novak contributed to the demise if the image.
Every time I think about Valerie Wilson, I can’t escape the truly despicable nature of what the chimp and his boys did. All during the build up to the IRAQ war people were asking McFlightsuit to show us some of the intel that showed Saddam having WMD. Without so much as a hint of hesitation, Chimpy would retort with I can’t because I have to protect sources and methods. It became a montra to him. he tuely enjoyed saying it.
Valerie Wilson was a source and a method. The chimp felt he needed to protect her when he needed to protect his sorry ass. Revealing sources and methods would have revealed the truth about Bush administration intel mining and would have left the nation suffering from a collective yawn rather then a desperate need to take saddam out now.
Bush outed her for the same reason, to protect his sorry ass. Suddenly they had someone credible (Joe Wilson) out on the tube saying that the chimp wasn’t being honest. So the sources and methods the chimp was protecting to save his sorry had to be destroyed to, you guessed it, save his sorry ass. George Bush compromised our national security to save his sorry ass. There is no denying it.
So what do you make of this?
‘Yellowcake’ found in Iraq
http://www.onenewsnow.com/Security/Default.aspx?id=203686
Here’s what I make of it, copied from Larry’s article above.
You think we should have just left it there?
Unbelievable how petty these journos can be. I was thinking today how seldom we hear anything about “the president” anymore. He’s buying a house, that’s the big scoop on him.
So much for his pretending to be a rancher! Bush only bought his Crawford place when he decided to run for president but our media neglects to point that out, giving the public the impression that he is really a man of the people. Heck, he can’t even ride a horse.
LOL Macho George is afraid of horses.
they a scare him.
In a time when up is down, down is up, and 2+2=5, Bob Novak is a pustulant example of just how far astray the fourth estate has roamed. To not see in hindsight, let alone at the time, that exposing Valerie Plame Wilson put our national security and intelligence assets at risk, was motivated solely by partisanship, and was lacking in anything remotely resembling journalistic integrity…I’m rendered virtually speechless…except to say that the cancer is not only metastasized in Novak’s brain, it has rotted American journalism to its core.
This is compounded by the fact that it was the White House that leaked the information to Novak. Since America has elected Bush III, whom we know will dispose of anyone who no longer serves his purpose, or whom he sees as a liability, I think it’s safe to assume that we can expect our next President to also be willing to compromise our national security if it is to his benefit. If I were approached by the Office of the President-Select to head CIA, I’d run as far and as fast as possible in the other direction.
A number of other journalists also knew and didn’t print it.
Bob Novak knows his dishonorable action will forever taint his memory. He will die unmourned, and that knowledge is tormenting his last days.
Wow, what a hateful post, especially the line about his cancer eating his brain. Makes you like a, well, blogger.
Hateful post?
Please spare me the faux moral outrage there Ace. The fact of the matter is that Bob Novak is a narcissistic ass. Even sick with cancer, old Bob is not reflecting on his life, including owning up to mistakes. Instead, he is having a little pity party for himself. Sorry, but I did not mourn Tim Russert’s passing and I will not be mourning Bob Novak’s. In this town Bob Novak took pride in his name “the dark prince”. This is the same guy who not more that 5 months ago ran over a guy in a crosswalk in D.C., and only stopped some 2 blocks down when a bicyclist who saw the accident blocked his path of escape. This guy has made a very tidy some for himself stirring up crap!
Ask yourself there Ace how many men and women in foreign countries, who were aiding Valerie and other covert operatives, are now dead because Bob not only blew Valerie’s cover but the CIA front company of Brewster Jennings? How many folks are still walking around with a bullseye on their backs thanks to Bob Novak?!!
Ace? Your tag is Ace? I think Dunce is more like it!!
Never mind it was one of very few IF any Ops involving Iranian WMD, Novak phst!
All those who had a part in this need life behind bars, in my humble opinion.
Eurogirl70, you seem to have some perspective on this. We don’t really know how much damage Bob Novak did, do we? The reports on the actual damage would also be classified, right? If others connected with Brewster Jennings were imprisoned or killed because of his leak, we would not know about it, right? We can only surmise, correct? I shudder to think what the actual damage might have been.
If Valerie Wilson felt like she had been “kicked in the gut”, it was only because she was well aware of the damage it caused.
These were treasonous acts committed by seditious people with blood on their hands.
That’s just sad, I mean, that is just sad.
The whole crew just seemed upside down in reality, didn’t they?
From Cheney, to Novak, to Scooter, to Powell, to Bush, to Rumsfeld, and so on.
Their collective anxiety upon leaving Washington must be unbearable — who will protect them, now?
who will protect them, now?
BO will.
I don’t know.
They might not end up in court, (or, again, they might) but the daggers are out, the heat is on.
BO seems somewhat contemptible toward Cheney, and Bush.
I think the lil engine that couldn’t, the neocons, can’t get out of their anxiety driven heads.
Bob Novak is lucky he could pull strings so that he’s not dealing with his brain tumor from a cell, where the treasonous SOB belongs.
You want to talk unfeeling? This is unfeeling.
Translation: the person I hit was a useless homeless person not of significance like an important person like me is. That’s why I managed to get myself a $50 Right Of Way ticket instead of being charge with a Hit and Run.
So he still will not admit that he was wrong — and it seems like he will keep denying any wrong doing.
I have a friend who early in her career as a police officer (in the Caribbean) took an undercover assignment on other island. The dope business is smaller than was anticipated by her superior officers and someone from her home island came to the place where she was working undercover. She was recognized and called by her real name — she looked at the person puzzled (who you taking to buddy — look on her face). She walked out (escaped) and called for removal. That was a very tense situation and she could have been eliminated.
My friend said that whole being outted and escaping replayed over and over again when she heard about Valerie Plame being outted by Novak. Hearing her tell this story — gave me a deeper understanding of Novak’s crime.
The fact that Novak brings up his outing Plame tells me that this sin will eat away at his brain cells and keep moving until it is his last memory. The brain must use up a whole lot of space to keep track of lies (that’s my theory, anyway).
Is it wrong to think that this nasty, self centered, little man will not be missed?
Okay, I am kinda clueless about this espionage stuff, but I did try to follow the Valerie Plame story, and the Wilsons are among my few heroes. My question is this: Robert Novak outed Valerie Plame, and in so doing also revealed the name of “Brewster-Jennings,” the front company for which she “worked.” Was this the main damage? I assume that other CIA operatives “worked” for Brewster-Jennings, and that they were all compromised simultaneously. Is this what happened? There is an article about this in Wikipedia, so it can’t be very “sensitive” anymore. If this is the case, then Novak’s culpability is far beyond that of compromising just Valerie Plame.
WOW!!!! I hope I never piss larry off. But his venom is aimed in exactly the right direction. Shame on you NOVAK.
Bob really needs to take responsibility for the Plame outing. It’s bad to die without making amends and asking forgiveness.
Agreed.
DUST TO DUST, THE END.
The Robert Novak story is just a sad awful tale. Outing Valerie Plame was such a mistake, such a horrible and traitorous act that one could only hope it was the brain cancer affecting his thinking at that time instead of the hate and sucking up to power that it appears to have been.
He should have served a prison term at the least.
He’s a sad case. Karma indeed.
GOES TO SHOW YA. You don’t get away with anything.
He sounds like he’s an incorrigible drunk. He is dying and cannot admit the harm he has caused others. Pathetic. Who will be at the gates of hell waiting for him? His conscience is hurting him sooo bad it’s eating his brain via cancer. He sold his soul to the devil for money and status. He won’t repent and come clean. He needs to apologize or be damned.
So much fraud and lack of morals or ethics in people these days. It will come back to them.
Novak’s brain cancer says it all.
And (probably) if there is to be justice down the road, they’ll have a new roadblock because Novak won’t be there to testify. Not that he’d tell the truth if he did.
“Protecting officers like Valerie Plame Wilson is not about left versus right. It is about right versus wrong.”
Exactly!
The CIA pleaded with Novack not to release the info. Novack has been a Washington DC insider for years. People do leak classified info. Novack knows this. He also knows what should be revealed and what should not.
Novack is too experienced to plead ignorance.
His lack of repentance is based on being angry at those evil leftists that attacked him. Notice he does not care that an entire network (that might have stopped the attack in India) was destroyed.
He also does not care that it affected our national security.
So Novack doesn’t like the left or the Wilsons. Fine. But doesn’t he care about the safety of his fellow Americans or our allies? Evidently he doesn’t even with death staring him in the face.
Larry, I agree that Novak is unpatriotic and obviously sold whatever dignity he had to play politics to please Cheney, but I bringing out the brain tumor was not necessary. Those who know the story understand that life has a way of balancing one’s actions.
It’s treason.
Does betraying your country have any stigma attached to it, at all?
A treasonous government, or a government that tolerates treason, cannot survive.
Especially when it comes from the executive.
Sounds like Novak is spiteful in his I don’t care anymore attitude. His reputation shall so be burnished.
Did anyone EVER think she was NOT an agent? I mean, come on! Wife of the ambassador, owner of many fabulous pairs of sunglasses and trench coats, ducking in and out, asking questions that go well beyond food prep and domestic help…Seriously, aren’t 90% of the people in the embassies agents? Or at the very minimum, assumed to be agents?
With all due respect, I never bought it when this case first came up–it’s all some kind of distraction for the public. What Iraqi in their right mind would NOT have assumed she was a spy?
She wasn’t (at the time of her outing) attached to an embassy. She also ran with various alternate IDs which would have had nothing to do with her husband Joe Wilson. She worked for a company that got outed when she did (and therefore many people attached to it) and our capacity to track WMDs in the hands of bad guys suffered with it.
Hey, thanks for the info. I did not realize the embassy connection came later.
I still do wonder how any agent completely escapes suspicion, even when they are ‘covered’ by companies and job titles. Don’t the bad guys suspect just about everybody?
And when someone is outed, does that mean everyone ever associated with them is automatically assumed to be in on the game? I thought agents could have a cover even with their colleagues and daily contacts.
Actually, I think her embassy work came earlier.
It’s likely that a paranoid regime like Saddam’s would suspect any foreigner, but that’s what helps to maintain cover: everyone is suspect and it’s difficult to watch them all all of the time.
The damage report was never made public, so we can only assume from common sense and other cases that it made life difficult for people who may not have even known who or what she did.
It’s the issue of her face being plastered in the media. Once that happened, foreign intelligence services would try to figure out what covers she used in their countries and track down anyone who ever had contact with her. And you can bet some of those people (even the innocent ones) were imprisoned and tortured.
Anyone who used to do stuff like gouge out the eyes of children in front of their parents while sitting on hundreds of tons of yellow cake should very well have been paranoid.
Still, I’m sorry Novak was so selfish as to risk injury to others by outing her. It all comes down to fame, ratings, and that almighty dollar, principles be damned.
As a matter of fact, many women from my generation do remember Ted Kennedy as simply a man who left a woman to die at the bottom of a river. Not to say that everytime bad luck befalls someone that it is because they deserved it. However, I do believe that when someone deliberately does harm to another there will be a price to pay. Karma.
Beautiful, smart Mary Jo Kopechne, was inpregnated by Ted Kennedy, so he staged an accident and left her in the water to drown. Ted’s Mafiosa dad, Joe, bought off the judge. Mary Jo’s Life cut down before she begun to live. A debutante wasted by an over-privileged dude who roams the halls of congress for years now. I just see him as a murderer who didn’t pay for his crime.
Which judge was paid off (there were a couple of different judges involved at various times from the initial charges until the final investigation), and how do you know this for a FACT? Joe Kennedy died in Nov 1969 and had suffered a disabling stroke in the early 1960s. Kopechne’s family opposed an exhumation request made in October 1969, and the formal inquest into Kopechne’s death didn’t take place until January 1970–2 MONTHS AFTER Joe Kennedy’s death.
Joe’s date of death is a FACT. The date of the inquest is a FACT. Unless Joe Kennedy became a member of the living dead, it’s pretty damned impossible for him to have affected the inquest (much less “paid off the judge”).
Hoirse hockey. If Kennedy impregnated the help he would have done a Dubya and footed the bill for her abortion in Mexico.
Ahem, I guess we need to get a leetle more specific and creative with our noms de blog, as you are not me and I am not you. Thoughts?
“…He was asked if he would out Valerie if he had it to do all over again. Novak said:
I’d go full speed ahead because of the hateful and beastly way in which my left-wing critics in the press and Congress tried to make a political affair out of it and tried to ruin me….”
So…..is he saying he would out Valerie Plame all over again out of spite against the people who criticized him for doing so? NOT because he thinks it’s the right thing to do, blah, blah, blah. But because he despises the critics. Uh, ok. Great moral character there, buddy.
Hey Anne, you go first in resolving the name conflict. I’ve been here for a year and you might not appreciate what I have said in your name.
Did his “outing” of Plame constitute a crime? Just asking cause it seems as if it should have. Wonder why no charges were ever brought against him.
Only if we were living in a just world.
Great post LJ.
Years ago, I refused to let an acquaintance spend the night at my apartment. He left me with this platitude: ‘What goes around comes around.’ I had no idea what he meant.
Months later, he broke into the basement and entered the apartment through an unsecured trap door in the floor of a storage closet, and waited. I got home, dropped my things, and settled in to read the newspaper. He jumped out of nowhere and attacked me with a knife. Luckily, I escaped; detectives later told me, a previous victim had not.
Whenever I hear someone ascribe cosmic payback to personal tragedy, I think, what gives you the right to judge what burdens someone deserves to bear?
Go bitterly into that good night, Bob, and take Libby with you.
my salve during that time: attempted song plagery but I admit nothing…
Cheney and Libby
(adapting the “Pancho and Lefty” framework)
Living with this rap my friend
Is gonna keep you free and clean
Now you wear your *’role* like chains
Your words bought as your freedom’s been
Weren’t this Admin’s only boy
But least favorite one it seems
VEEP began to cry, though you swore your lies
Might sink unitary dreams
Cheney was a bandit VEEP
His stealth was quick; words never real
Wore his gun outside his vest
For all his hunting friends to feel
Cheney meets his match someday
In the courtrooms in The Hague
Nobody hears his pleading words
That’s the way it goes…
With ex-politicos
All the congressales say
They could have had him any day
They only let him hang around
Out of dumbness I suppose
Libby he can’t jerk “The News”
All night long like he used to
The dust Cheney blew up Fitz’s south
Ended up in Libby’s mouth
The day they let ol’ Cheney go
Libby split for Ri-i-o
Where he got the bread to go
Only the RNC, FoC ‘n’ FoB know
All the congressales say
We’d should not let him get away
His coup might be forgotten someday
‘Cause that’s how history goes
The pundits tell how Cheney fell
Libby’s livin’ in a swank hotel
The homeland’s quiet and all is well
So the story ends to tell
That Cheney needs your prayers it’s true,
But save a few for Libby too
He just did what he was told to do
Now he lives in hell
A few brave congressales say
They could have had him any day
They only let him go so wrong
Out of spinelessness I suppose
Moral of that story: secure your doors and windows..and trap doors
From the earlier Anne -
Recall how graciously Lee Atwater died and how he reflected and recanted as he neared his own death? Not so apparently with Bob Novak. True Prince of Darkness.
Bob was a big booster of Sarah and her ascent to lead the true Americans.
OFF TOPIC:
We’ve stumbled on something that may be used for Obama’s defense should the US Supreme Court take on the Denofrio case.
I have it here:
Link
There are several examples one can find that reveal dual allegiance issues within the Bush administration and show cause for concern regarding Sarah’s article that we need to loosen Article II as she suggests: these include recommendations made by John Woo, Alberto Gonzales and Zalmay Khalilzad that are against our Constitution.
The issue is with the President’s dual allegiances, but I submit that the past president had persons high in his administration that had dual allegiences and it affected his policy, IMHO. To have the president with these same issues will be horrific to our Constitution and standing with other countries from a practical standpoint. Just review the impact that the previous mentioned citizens with dual loyalties have had upon our judicial system, our torture policy and our Iraq policy.
We must protect our Constitution and our sovereignty, don’t you think, regardless of party affiliation?
This needs to be it’s own thread.
Is America about to be screwed and belittled by the SCOTUS over Obama?
YUCK!
after 2000 when all the “strict constructionist” judges decided to shit can the processes strictly constructed in the US constitution, it’s highly probable.
No offense but I wouldn’t listen to that rant. I know everyone has opinions on what is going on but I don’t think the one posted at PUMA Pac has anything to do with reality. The bottom line is this…one way or another FRAUDbama is going to have to show his documentation. The patriots of this country, who love America and the Constitution, will just continue to file lawsuits in every state in this country and present them to SCOTUS until once and for all it is dealt with. My big dear is that the justices are on the Soros payroll. Even thinking that makes me shudder. That’s the end of this country for good. But it they ignore this issue they should be removed from the bench.
Obama SHOULD not be let off. There are excellent reasons for forbidding dual allegencies as stated by the founding fathers.
If you go to Atlas Shrugs and search for “Kenya Killing Field” starting in January this year, you will find horrific atrocities (war crimes) committed by Obama’s cousin Raila Odinga.
However, Pelosi, Reid, Biden helped Obama “bribe” Kofi Annon to help install Cousin Raila as Krnya’s “Excutive Prime Minister”. Kofi did all this good work for $48 Billion dollars of American Taxpayer money - in the Orwellian named “Global Poverty” Bill all which went to Aftican countries.
If Obama had single allegencience to the US, “We the People” would not have to pay billions to put a criminal thug inpower, abd instead would have transported him to the Hague where he should have gone IMHO.
Holy Cow, Anne! What an original name we each carry. How’s about from now on I shall call myself Reno Annie?
Cool, and I shall rename myself Texan Anne.
Or how about TexANNE (ba-dum-CHING!)?
that’ll work too. Adopted.
SHORT CHRISTMAS POEM FOR NOVAK
May that c*******er rot in Hell.
Noel, Noel, Noel, Noel!
I shouldn’t laugh at that, Baba. But I just did!
From a post on TD’s blog that related the issues with an Obama presidency to this,I have to share.
http://news.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=665847
OMG I’m crying I’m laughing so hard
Larry Johnson kicking a man while he’s down, turning the knife in his back and combating evil with evil. A true Democrat.
yeah he should have hit him with his car and took off. /snark
He’s learning! Next we’ll get him a picture of Harry Truman and teach him the Democratic Ritual post-Electoral Apologia dating back to Adlai Stevenson: “We Wuz ROBBED!!!”
Novak always was an evil bastard and he’s getting what he deserved.
buh-bye bobby
Novak essentially outed Valerie Plame Wilson before disclosing her actual capacity. He mentioned “others close” to different people in the conversation about yellowcake, “wives or husbands,” etc.
People who really watched up and ran search engines off what was said suddenly found reason to consider Valerie without her having been named. He basically filled in all of her background.
Seriously, I’ve never known Novak to be anything but a ruthless partisan piece of crap.
If Larry really believes he was once a journalist. I challenge him to give us a link!
Novak’s lawyer worked with Alexander Strategy Group.
Enron money, war profiteers, Marianna Junkets, laundering money from Russia, representing major contracting firms who dealt in torture to help lie the war forward. They also did work for Freddie Mac….
He was also counsel to Foster, and a former Watergate assistant chief counsel for Senate.
He’s one of the premiere lawyers in the country.
The more I see, the more I think the accruement of power has absolutely NOTHING to do with intellect, simply a willingness to break the law before the others.
They grab power, but after their 15 minutes, they fade away, they fail, unable to sustain because they’re simply not smart enough.
The whole Nixon-Cheney thing, and those connected with them, are laughable pests, in the greater scheme of things.
“If God did not want them shorn, He would not have made them sheep!” - Eli Wallach, The Magnificent Seven
I also hope I never piss Larry off. . .
Novak deserves this rant and so does the damned Bush administration for politicizing every possible aspect of the government. Cheney, Rove, Gonzales, etc. etc.
Disagree for several reasons. For one: it is Karl Rove that Joseph Wilson wanted to see frog marched out of the White House. Instead, writers on this website are posting stories praising Karl Rove these days for his pundit work on tv!
I think he’s a despicable cretin, a war criminal, and really not too bright.
Look at the consequences of his decisions, same as Cheney…
Another self-important A Hole who had his cell phone on his ear 24/7 and got his brains zapped by perpetual low-level microwaves. It’s not like science isn’t warning people that overuse is suspected brain tumor material. The studies are still on, and there are no better guinea pigs than guys like this. Contratulations, Bob, you gave it up for science!
Eventually all of these A Holes will die from their own Importance. Now THAT’s karma.
LOL, yes, you’re right…
Let me ask a question of the group - Why does Richard Armitage get a free pass? Larry? Anyone? Bueller?