I seem to recall something Bush said about "dead or alive" back in late 2001.

The Blackstone Group, the big buyout firm, has devised a way for its partners to effectively avoid paying taxes on $3.7 billion, the bulk of what it raised last month from selling shares to the public. Although they will initially pay $553 million in taxes, the partners will get that back, and about $200 million more, from the government over the long term.

Compassionate conservatism. How refreshing to know only the little people will pay for our government.

News Story Here

Sigh.

F*** all organized religions. F*** them all.

The primary purpose of the legislation was to protect the lives of those intelligence officers and agents residing overseas. Here is the relevant excerpt from Victoria Toensing's written testimony before congress :

Covert Agent

Under the term “covert agent,” two types of individuals are covered: an officer and an agent. A person working for the CIA is an “officer.” A person who is an informant or source for the CIA is an “agent.” The media often err in this distinction. To make the legislation simpler, the term “covert agent” was used by the drafters to refer to both officers and agents. The Senate Report, when relevant, distinguishes how the law applies to each.

Although a “‘covert agent’ is specifically limited to an individual whose identity as an intelligence agency employee ‘is classified information,’” criminality does not turn on whether the information disclosed is classified. Id. at 15. There should only be prosecution “when the defendant has knowingly disclosed information that, in terms of its specificity, its sensitivity, and the effort expended to maintain its secrecy, is virtually the equivalent of classified information.” Id. In other words, the definition of a covert agent is more than classified and less than classified. It clearly is not synonymous with classified. As the Committee stated, “The mere fact that an intelligence relationship appears in a document which is classified does not constitute evidence that the United States is taking affirmative measures to conceal the relationship.” Id. at 19.

Significantly, the Senate Report makes clear Congressional desire to limit application of the criminal law to disclosure of selected intelligence officers:

[T]he Committee has carefully considered the definition of “covert agent” and has included only those identities which it has determined to be absolutely necessary to 4 protect for reasons of imminent danger to life or significant interference with vital intelligence activities. Undercover officers and employees overseas may be in special danger when their identities are revealed…. (Emphasis added). Id. at 15.

Notably, the legislation limited coverage of U.S. citizen informants or sources (agents) also to situations where they “reside and act outside the United States.” Id. at 16.

This foreign assignment requirement developed from the impetus for the legislation: attacks on CIA personnel serving abroad. Renegade former CIA officer, Philip Agee, exposed over 1000 CIA officers, which was followed by the December 1975 assassination of CIA Athens Station Chief, Richard S. Welch. In 1980, Louis Wolf, coeditor of the Covert Action Information Bulletin, publicly claimed 15 U.S. officials in Jamaica were CIA. He provided addresses and telephone numbers, information not considered “classified.” Within a week two of those named were attacked. Id. at 8.

Early drafts of the legislation covered only those individuals stationed abroad. During my participation in the negotiations, the CIA brought up the issue that it was not unusual for CIA officers to be rotated back to the United States. Such period of time was for about two to three years. So we agreed to extend coverage for three years after a covert person left a foreign assignment. Then the issue arose that the protection of the Act was not intended just for the CIA officers, but also for their sources. “How long,” we asked, “would be a reasonable time to protect sources?” The CIA replied that five years would be sufficient. As a result of that round of negotiation, the criterion of the foreign assignment requirement for an employee to be a “covert agent” was drafted as follows:

[A] present or retired officer or employee of an intelligence agency…who is serving outside the United States or has within the last five years outside the United States. 5 § 426 (4)(A).

In other words, the compromise language of “within five years” is intended to prohibit disclosure of the intelligence officer for five years for the purpose of protecting former sources, not protecting the person assigned back to this country.

So, what makes Victoria Toensing an authority on this particular topic?

INTELLIGENCE IDENTITIES PROTECTION ACT

In late 1981, when I became Chairman Barry Goldwater’s chief counsel for the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, my first assignment was to get the Intelligence Identities Protection Act passed. Chr. Goldwater was the ultimate manager, meaning that I was to come to him if there was a problem only he could resolve. Other than that situation, I was to negotiate whatever issues arose. Thus, I had hands-on everyday involvement with those for and against the bill.

In light of Chertoffs latest comments, etc. and as a little boost for Bush.

Stage Attacks Possible

Rep. Ron Paul, said the country is in "great danger" of the U.S. government staging a terrorist attack or a Gulf of Tonkin style provocation, as the war in Iraq continues to deteriorate. [....]"The attack on our civil liberties here at home, the foreign policy that's in shambles and our obligations overseas and commitment which endangers our troops and our national defense." [....]Paul said the government was conducting "an orchestrated effort to blame the Iranians for everything that has gone wrong in Iraq."

Is he being realistic or just off the wall?