| Submit your comments on this article |
| Home Front: Politix |
| Yet more on McCarthy |
| 2006-04-22 |
| The Central Intelligence Agency has dismissed a senior career officer for disclosing classified information to reporters, including material for Pulitzer Prize-winning articles in The Washington Post about the agency's secret overseas prisons for terror suspects, intelligence officials said Friday. The C.I.A. would not identify the officer, but several government officials said it was Mary O. McCarthy, a veteran intelligence analyst who until 2001 was senior director for intelligence programs at the National Security Council, where she served under President Bill Clinton and into the Bush administration. At the time of her dismissal, Ms. McCarthy was working in the agency's inspector general's office, after a stint at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, an organization in Washington that examines global security issues. The dismissal of Ms. McCarthy provided fresh evidence of the Bush administration's determined efforts to stanch leaks of classified information. The Justice Department has separately opened preliminary investigations into the disclosure of information to The Post, for its articles about secret prisons, as well as to The New York Times, for articles last fall that disclosed the existence of a program of domestic eavesdropping without warrants supervised by the National Security Agency. Those articles were also recognized this week with a Pulitzer Prize. Several former veteran C.I.A. officials said the dismissal of an agency employee over a leak was rare and perhaps unprecedented. One official recalled the firing of a small number of agency contractors, including retirees, for leaking several years ago. The dismissal was announced Thursday at the C.I.A. in an e-mail message sent by Porter J. Goss, the agency's director, who has made the effort to stop unauthorized disclosure of secrets a priority. News of the dismissal was first reported Friday by MSNBC. Ms. McCarthy's departure followed an internal investigation by the C.I.A.'s Security Center, as part of an intensified effort that began in January to scrutinize employees who had access to particularly classified information. She was given a polygraph examination, confronted about answers given to the polygraph examiner and confessed, the government officials said. On Thursday, she was stripped of her security clearance and escorted out of C.I.A. headquarters. Ms. McCarthy did not reply Friday evening to messages left by e-mail and telephone. "A C.I.A. officer has been fired for unauthorized contact with the media and for the unauthorized disclosure of classified information," said a C.I.A. spokesman, Paul Gimigliano. "This is a violation of the secrecy agreement that is the condition of employment with C.I.A. The officer has acknowledged the contact and the disclosures." Mr. Gimigliano said the Privacy Act prohibited him from identifying the employee. Intelligence officials speaking on the condition of anonymity said that the dismissal resulted from "a pattern of conduct" and not from a single leak, but that the case involved in part information about secret C.I.A. detention centers that was given to The Washington Post. Ms. McCarthy's departure was another unsettling jolt for the C.I.A., battered in recent years over faulty prewar intelligence in Iraq, waves of senior echelon departures after the appointment of Mr. Goss as director and the diminished standing of the agency under the reorganization of the country's intelligence agencies. The C.I.A.'s inquiry focused in part on identifying Ms. McCarthy's role in supplying information for a Nov. 2, 2005, article in The Post by Dana Priest, a national security reporter. The article reported that the intelligence agency was sending terror suspects to clandestine detention centers in several countries, including sites in Eastern Europe. Leonard Downie Jr., The Post's executive editor, said on its Web site that he could not comment on the firing because he did not know the details. "As a general principle," he said, "obviously I am opposed to criminalizing the dissemination of government information to the press." Eric C. Grant, a spokesman for the newspaper, would not address whether any C.I.A. employee was a source for the secret prison articles, but said, "No Post reporter has been subpoenaed or talked to investigators in connection with this matter." The disclosures about the prisons provoked an outcry among European allies and set off protests among Democrats in Congress. The leak prompted the C.I.A. to send a criminal referral to the Justice Department. Lawyers at the Justice Department were notified of Ms. McCarthy's dismissal, but no new referral was issued, law enforcement officials said. They said that they would review the case, but that her termination could mean she would be spared criminal prosecution. In January, current and former government officials said, Mr. Goss ordered polygraphs for intelligence officers who knew about certain "compartmented" programs, including the secret detention centers for terrorist suspects. Polygraphs are routinely given to agency employees at least every five years, but special polygraphs can be ordered when a security breach is suspected. The results of such exams are regarded as important indicators of deception among some intelligence officials. But they are not admissible as evidence in court — and the C.I.A.'s reliance on the polygraph in Ms. McCarthy's case could make it more difficult for the government to prosecute her. "This was a very aggressive internal investigation," said one former C.I.A. officer with more than 20 years' experience. "Goss was determined to find the source of the secret-jails story." With the encouragement of the White House and some Republicans in Congress, Mr. Goss has repeatedly spoken out against leaks, saying foreign intelligence officials had asked him whether his agency was incapable of keeping secrets. In February, Mr. Goss told the Senate Intelligence Committee that "the damage has been very severe to our capabilities to carry out our mission." He said it was his hope "that we will witness a grand jury investigation with reporters present being asked to reveal who is leaking this information." "I believe the safety of this nation and the people of this country deserves nothing less," he said. Ms. McCarthy has been a well-known figure in intelligence circles. She began her career at the agency as an analyst and then was a manager in the intelligence directorate, working at the African and Latin America desks, according to a biography by the strategic studies center. With an advanced degree from the University of Minnesota, she has taught, written a book on the Gold Coast and was director of the social science data archive at Yale University. Public records show that Ms. McCarthy contributed $2,000 in 2004 to the presidential campaign of John Kerry, the Democratic nominee. Republican lawmakers praised the C.I.A. effort. Senator Pat Roberts of Kansas, the Republican chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, said, "I am pleased that the Central Intelligence Agency has identified the source of certain unauthorized disclosures, and I hope that the agency, and the community as a whole, will continue to vigorously investigate other outstanding leak cases." Several former intelligence officials — who were granted anonymity after requesting it for what they said were obvious reasons under the circumstances — were divided over the likely effect of the dismissal on morale. One veteran said the firing would not be well-received coming so soon after the disclosure of grand jury testimony by Vice President Dick Cheney's former chief of staff that President Bush in 2003 approved the leak of portions of a secret national intelligence estimate on Iraqi weapons. "It's a terrible situation when the president approves the leak of a highly classified N.I.E., and people at the agency see management as so disastrous that they feel compelled to talk to the press," said one former C.I.A. officer with extensive overseas experience. But another official, whose experience was at headquarters, said most employees would approve Mr. Goss's action. "I think for the vast majority of people this will be good for morale," the official said. "People didn't like some of their colleagues deciding for themselves what secrets should be in The Washington Post or The New York Times." Paul R. Pillar, who was the agency's senior analyst for the Middle East until he retired late last year, said: "Classified information is classified information. It's not to be leaked. It's not to be divulged." He has recently criticized the Bush administration's handling of prewar intelligence about Saddam Hussein's unconventional weapons programs. |
| Posted by:Dan Darling |
| #16 caught that too, OS and I'm only on the outside. A reporter who covers this would have to be willfully ignorant to say the quote, but I repeat myself |
| Posted by: Frank G 2006-04-22 22:53 |
| #15 "the president approves the leak of a highly classified N.I.E." FYI - I doubt thats a CIA person speaking. That really raises this old dog's hackles. Because they KNOW that the President, as CinC, and as Cheif Executive does not LEAK - he DECLASSIFIES. Its inherent in his authority under the Constitution. These reporters making shit up or are they talking to people pretending to be CIA or are they talking to political hacks inside the company? Thats the only choices there, given the remarks at the top of my post and the bottom of that article. This really burns me up. The Amreican peoplr are getting screwed by inaccurate, politically biased bullshit being passed off as news. We had to put up with Reagan playing possibly decrypted intercepts for public consumption to expose the Soviets lies about KAL-007 -- the declassification of which may have exposed the hell out of sources and methods! (I cannot really comment any further). Where was the furor then formthe press? Its up to the President to judge whether those risks outweight the ones involved in leaving the public uninformed and allowing lies about the Government to stand. We are supposed to present the issues, the risks, and the consequences as best we can. But the person sitting int he Oval Office is the one that makes the call. You know the President, the one who is empowered to do just those sorts of things? To the "CIA employee" who said that to a reporter: Try reading the Constitution numb-nuts - and if you cant find a copy ask around in the Ops shop instead of the IG's office or some other dickless deskbound asshole analysis center. Looka at the articles in the front. The CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES -- You know, thet document you swore to uphold and defend - the one you are violating every time you undermine the statutory and legal authority of the President! Makre me as steaming hot about this. |
| Posted by: Oldspook 2006-04-22 22:46 |
| #14 IMHO if there is any justice,they will have her charged damn fast - and start rolliing all the other leakers too. If she did this for political reasons, then she should be charged with treason. Classified information is classified for a reason. And if you leak it, you have broken your oath that you took when you wre cleared. More importantly, you have broken the oath to uphold and defend the Constitution. You've screwed every citizen in this nation by reducing its ability to secure and defend itself against enemies who would destroy it. IMHO, hanging is too good for her if she's guilty. |
| Posted by: Oldspook 2006-04-22 22:34 |
| #13 Nope. You blow a poly, they pull your ticket to EVERYTHING in a hurry. Been there, know people who have done that (blown poly). Can't say much more, other than its a serious item and you're looking at loss of clearance+access, loss of employment and criminal charges depending on what you did to blow that poly. |
| Posted by: Oldspook 2006-04-22 22:19 |
| #12 Leavenworth if there's any justice |
| Posted by: Frank G 2006-04-22 20:00 |
| #11 Top Secret security clearance with access to Sensitive Compartmented Information. |
| Posted by: Besoeker 2006-04-22 19:47 |
| #10 TW, that's the code for special compartmentalized top secret info. It indicates the information in question is the most sensitive we have. People are granted SCI access on a highly restricted need to know and only a small number of people have SCI clearance for more than one area of info. |
| Posted by: lotp 2006-04-22 19:43 |
| #9 Several former veteran C.I.A. officials said the dismissal of an agency employee over a leak was rare and perhaps unprecedented. And these anonymous former officials don't see this as a problem? Besoeker, what is a TS/SCI? |
| Posted by: trailing wife 2006-04-22 19:32 |
| #8 I'd be willing to bet a pint of Guinness she's still holding an TS/SCI. |
| Posted by: Besoeker 2006-04-22 19:01 |
| #7 Get 'em Goss. Worth loosing a seat. |
| Posted by: 6 2006-04-22 18:20 |
| #6 Mary O. McCarthy testifies to 911 commission - GlobalSecurity.org bio there: Dr. Mary O. McCarthy, a CIA officer, is currently a Visiting Fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, researching and writing on intelligence matters. Previously (from 1996-2001) she had served) as a Special Assistant to the President (Clinton and Bush) and Senior Director for Intelligence Programs on the National Security Council Staff. Prior to moving to the White House, Dr. McCarthy served on the National Intelligence Council as National Intelligence Officer for Warning, and Deputy NIO for Warning. She began her career at CIA in the Directorate of Intelligence in analytic and managerial positions in the areas of Africa and Latin America. Prior to beginning her government service, Dr. McCarthy spent time in the private sector as a Director, then Vice President of BERI, S.A., a Swiss-based company conducting risk assessments for international businesses and banks; and in academics, teaching at the University of Minnesota and serving as Director, Social Science Data Archive, at Yale University. Dr. McCarthy has lectured and written on the relationship between policy and intelligence, on the problem of intelligence warning, and on numerous topics involving the risks associated with international business. She has also published a book on the social history of Ghana. Her Ph.D. in history is from the University of Minnesota. |
| Posted by: 3dc 2006-04-22 14:51 |
| #5 Flopping Ace's has backgrounder with photos |
| Posted by: 3dc 2006-04-22 13:54 |
| #4 From Belmont Club... 1998: Washington — National Security Advisor Samuel R. Berger announced June 16 the appointment of Mary O’Neil McCarthy as Special Assistant to the President and Senior Director for Intelligence Programs. 2001: McCarthy joins the CSIS think tank. Three of her fellow experts are Zbigniew Brzezinski, General Wesley Clark, General Anthony Zinni 2001: McCarthy and Richard Clarke work on a plan to counter the Taliban in Afghanistan. |
| Posted by: 3dc 2006-04-22 13:52 |
| #3 She should be in a cell next to Jonathan Polland and John Walker--and that's only because we'd never get a death penalty conviction. Traitor. |
| Posted by: mac 2006-04-22 11:29 |
| #2 how lucky for her that her name is Mary McCarthy - seeing as how easy it will be for the Kos Kiddies to impose her into the female victim of Joe McCarthy. The Evil Karl Rove with back-from-the-never-dead spirits of Nixon and Joe McCarthy intend to crucify this poor patriotic American, who alone had the guts to stand up against the evil CIA and let the truth be known. It's a canned, made for Hollywood plot. |
| Posted by: 2b 2006-04-22 11:04 |
| #1 It's just a temp job. What I really want to do is to write the Great American Novel. |
| Posted by: gromgoru 2006-04-22 09:45 |