Posted by zeugma on December 10, 2005, at 5:59:01
In reply to Umm, You know.... » zeugma, posted by Gabbix2 on December 9, 2005, at 19:22:14
ok, i can see why continuing a thread with your name appended to that reverberating monosyllable is not the most conducive to the deep notions examined herein.
i think, to return to an original misogyny element in the thread, that if Valerie Plame had been a man, and a stereotypical 'spy' like some James Bond-like character (duh!)the reaction to the outing of an undercover CIA agent would have been one of alarm and outrage that the national security was compromised rather than one of near-indifference since "she wasn't really undercover anyway"?
What? Just because the CIA isn't divulging the details of her role and she had an excellent cover identity 'hiding in plain sight' as they say, married to an aboveground CIA affiliate and and ambassador, doesn't mean that she wasn't undercover or say anything about her potential role in the intelligence field. A good spy is one who seems least likely to be one, after all. Duh.
-z
poster:zeugma
thread:586858
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/poli/20051121/msgs/587717.html