Thomas Seay wrote:
>
> The one question that I have about this article is
> about the CIA agent. I wonder how Le Figaro knew that
> the guy who visited Bin Laden was indeed a CIA agent.
The same way you and I know that Bush is the president of the United States. You are confusing "agent" with "secret agent." The agent would have been the the open CIA representative in that region. From a post on L-I:
**** The conservative and _respectable_ French newspaper Le Figaro dated October, 31, says that the "CIA would have met bin Laden past July (....)
at the premises of the American Hospital in the Dubai" emirate. He stayed there during 15 days to be treated of a "serious renal insufficience" by an US doctor, dr. Terry Callaway, a renowned specialist.
It seems to have been a gentlemen's meeting, since the main CIA agent in place "would have even been informed about possible strikes" (Cet agent aurait même été informé sur d'éventuels [*] attentats.). It rather seems a joke: the CIA representative is not an undercover agent because he is widely known overthere (que beaucoup de gens connaissent à Dubaï).
[*] Note that in the Latin languages _eventuel_ means uncertain but possible, although in English it means "taking place at un unspecified later time" (Webster). *****
I believe most CIA station chiefs are known and public rather than undercover.
Carrol