NY Times and intelligence leaks

[Alex]

Originally Posted by €uroMeinke

I guess I have to wonder just how secret somethin is, if it is uncovered by a reporter. If they can uncover it, I would presume any "enemy" we miht have would just start sending it's folks to journalism school to do whatever required intelligence work was needed. Seems in the end they're doin the admin a favor by pointing out breeches in the system. Obviously there are people with clearance talking to people they shouldn't - that's what really should be getting attention.

I guess I'm not clear on why only one side of the equation should get attention. It strikes me as like saying that you should thank me for exposing how unsmart it is to hide your spare key under the doormat by stealing your television.

While I'm sure the reason it isn't being widely discussed it political expediency I have no doubt that they are trying to find out who leaked the information and if found the person will be at least fired. Unless, of course, it was the same person who coordinates the bin Laden tapes in which case it might be a resource too valuable to lose.

Similarly, I wonder why people who thought it was so important to find the leaker in the Valerie Plame case and to see the reporter punished (so long as it was Bob Novak and even though it was generally known that she worked for the CIA and was the wife of the guy whose name I forget) now think that leaking classified information is really not that big of a deal, especially since it was information you could have assumed.

Both sides should feel the heat unless there is a very compelling case for revealing the information (a true whistle blower situation of which this is not a good example). The leaker should lose their job and possibly face criminal charges. The publisher should be criticized though I think the situations where any kind of criminal charge is warranted are very, very narrow.

[Name]

Originally Posted by Alex Stroup

...

Similarly, I wonder why people who thought it was so important to find the leaker in the Valerie Plame case and to see the reporter punished (so long as it was Bob Novak and even though it was generally known that she worked for the CIA and was the wife of the guy whose name I forget) now think that leaking classified information is really not that big of a deal, especially since it was information you could have assumed..

and vice versa.... why were those that are up in arms about this so non-chalant about the Plame leak.... or at least that is how it is perceived.

[€uroMeinke]

Originally Posted by Alex Stroup

I guess I'm not clear on why only one side of the equation should get attention. It strikes me as like saying that you should thank me for exposing how unsmart it is to hide your spare key under the doormat by stealing your television.

Yeah but the reporter isn't stealin a TV, he's just saying it's stupid to hide your key where everyone knows to look, which I think is far better than lettin people presume their TV is totally secure cause no one knows where the keys are.

[wendybeth]

The Plame case, on top of Guantanamo and soooo many others, are what is causing this 'meh' response. They have dulled our sense of right and wrong- stilled our sense of outrage. The bastards have (for now) simply worn us down. I'm just not interested in arguing semantics or trading hate-radio barbs anymore. This administration is going to do wtf they want to, and worry about the consequences later.

[Alex]

Except I haven't seen a reporter say "my role is exposing the weaknesses in the government's efforts to keep secrets."

Ok, rather than stealing the TV, the lack of security is shown by taking the sex video you recorded from the box in your closet, posting it on the internet, and saying "hey, you should thank me."

Name. That is exactly my point when above I mentioned the "synchronized dance of hypocrisy." Both sides just switch sides depending on whichever bit of feigned outrage suits their preconceived notions. Take the exact same situation, change the name Bush to Clinton and 98% (approximately) of the people who have stated an opinion would instead state the opposite.


This isn't too say that every similar situation requires the same response. But for the most part people are expressing knee-jerk reactions based on minimal information and never try to get any more information except from the sources they know will reinforce what they already think. I was upset by the Plame leak until I learned more of the details. I'm somewhat upset by this New York Times publication and so far the details have, in my opinion, supported that. The wiretapping one initially didn't bother me that much but as more details became known I have come to think the New York Times had a more than appropriate justification for publishing the story.

[€uroMeinke]

Originally Posted by Alex Stroup

Except I haven't seen a reporter say "my role is exposing the weaknesses in the government's efforts to keep secrets."

Ok, rather than stealing the TV, the lack of security is shown by taking the sex video you recorded from the box in your closet, posting it on the internet, and saying "hey, you should thank me."

Perhaps, but I think it's closer to saying - hey, if you're going to be making sex videos, do something to secure them, becasue copies are already circulating in downtown Kaubul - maybe you need a more discreet set of porn stars?