The ACLU people engaged in amking the identities of covert operatives public should be treated as traitors.The left doesn't care about these operatives naturally,but went into histrionics over Valerie Plame,who wasn't a covert operative when she was identified.She was also engaged in questionable behavior insofar as having her husband assigned to the project she was working on.
The ACLU won't be touched by this administration,kindred spirits as they are.

Actually, John Adams' proudest moment, he said, of his legal career was his defense of British forces who fired upon Americans in the Revolutionary War. This is where the name for this group came from. He saw it as his duty as a lawyer to represent the accused, regardless of his personal feelings about any of them. Some, not enveloped in histrionics and an obsession over "treason" might see the similarities.

What part of "represent[ing] the accused" involves gathering information about U.S. intelligence officers and passing it onto a declared enemy of the United States?

Matt-the bottom line is that revealing an agent's identity can get them killed.
I wouldn't call that histrionics-it applies to undercover operations also-not necessarily involving national security,but more prosaic matters such as drugs.In narcotics opearions,the undercovers are often not known to other officers engaged in the same operation unless it is absolutely essential.

The ACLU's position emphasizes the need to answer the question of whether the prisoners at Gitmo are "criminals" or "POW's".

If they are "criminals" then the ACLU has some justification. If they are POW's, then national security is paramount.

I regard them as POW's, this opinion does not seem to be widely shared. Of course, calling them POW's tacitly admits that we are "at war".

If we aren't at war with the terrorists,WTF are we at?
Of course if you recall neither the Korean War nor the Vietnam were TECHNICALLY wars either.If you were there the distinction didn't matter.
Treating these people as criminals makes as much sense as bobbing for French Fries.

"The left doesn't care about these operatives naturally,but went into histrionics over Valerie Plame,who wasn't a covert operative when she was identified"

Great point. So it's acceptable to out some covert operatives but not others.

Now, how do they determine who goes in which category?

Monique-that's easy-whoever the traitorous ACLU deems to be politically correct-the ACLU is providing aid and comfort to an enemy in time of war-what is that?

Sounds like treason, Joe.

In addition to that, it seems a tad ironic, not to say counterproductive to their very existence, for members of an organization founded on civil liberties to work to take away the civil liberties (isn't life a civil liberty?) of those working to protect the civil liberties of the entire country.

One can only hope these very same ACLU people are incinerated in the next terrorist incident.It would be poetic justice.

When the CIA exposes one of its own in order to have him or her eliminated, it is not treason, it is patriotism. This is the way the world works.