Source of NIE leak may have been found

[rhatsaruck]

Originally posted by: Pabster

Originally posted by: Craig234
So, what do you think should be done to the people who are the 'good' whistleblowers when they break the law on classified information - while your fellow right wingers, none of whom answered my question, say they should always go to jail?

Please explain how leaking national security secrets in the middle of a war can be construed as "good" whistleblowing.

The Pentagon Papers. They were classified Top Secret.

 

[rhatsaruck]

Source: FOX News:

This week, on the request of Rep. Ray LaHood (R-IL), Intelligence Chairman Pete Hoekstra (R-MI) suspended a Democratic staffer?s access to classified information. Hoekstra said the suspension would remain in place pending a review to determine if that staffer leaked a classified National Intelligence Estimate to the New York Times.

Today on Fox News, LaHood said, ?I?ll tell you why I did it. The reason I did it was because Jane Harman released the Duke Cunningham ? who sat on our Intelligence committee ? report.? That report, which detailed the misconduct of Cunningham, who is now serving a jail term, was not classified.

A Fox anchor asked, ?So, it?s payback?? LaHood responded, ?There are some of us on the other side who can equally play politics, and I?m not afraid to do it.?

 

[her209]

Originally posted by: Pabster

Originally posted by: Craig234
So, what do you think should be done to the people who are the 'good' whistleblowers when they break the law on classified information - while your fellow right wingers, none of whom answered my question, say they should always go to jail?

Please explain how leaking national security secrets in the middle of a war can be construed as "good" whistleblowing?

Only a liberal would stretch it that far.

Leaks are bad, but where's the logic in declassifying more of the leaked classified document?

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: Pabster

Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Uhh, this forum's only been in existence for a little over 5 years.

And libs were whining long before this forum.

They've yet to reach the historic levels achieved by the Far Right during Clinton's terms when he was doing to them what he was doing to Monica. Hell you little girls are still whining about him.

 

[Tom]

"The thread title is not misleading "


it isn't misleading as long as we pay attention to the source, you, and the bias you bring to every topic.

It is misleading as a summary of the article. The article does not say there is a "most likely" suspect, in fact looking at the info in the article objectively, the staffer is no more likely the source of the leak, than is the Republican congressman himself.

If having access to classified info is all it takes to become the "most leading" suspect, then everyone who had access is guilty.

 

[Tom]

Originally posted by: Pabster

Originally posted by: Craig234
So, what do you think should be done to the people who are the 'good' whistleblowers when they break the law on classified information - while your fellow right wingers, none of whom answered my question, say they should always go to jail?

Please explain how leaking national security secrets in the middle of a war can be construed as "good" whistleblowing?

Only a liberal would stretch it that far.

When "national security" is being used to hide the truth from the American people, we can't function as a democracy.

 

[DAPUNISHER]

Originally posted by: rhatsaruck
Source: FOX News:

This week, on the request of Rep. Ray LaHood (R-IL), Intelligence Chairman Pete Hoekstra (R-MI) suspended a Democratic staffer?s access to classified information. Hoekstra said the suspension would remain in place pending a review to determine if that staffer leaked a classified National Intelligence Estimate to the New York Times.

Today on Fox News, LaHood said, ?I?ll tell you why I did it. The reason I did it was because Jane Harman released the Duke Cunningham ? who sat on our Intelligence committee ? report.? That report, which detailed the misconduct of Cunningham, who is now serving a jail term, was not classified.

A Fox anchor asked, ?So, it?s payback?? LaHood responded, ?There are some of us on the other side who can equally play politics, and I?m not afraid to do it.?

QF:shocked:

 

[KGB]

Originally posted by: rhatsaruck

Originally posted by: Pabster

Originally posted by: Craig234
So, what do you think should be done to the people who are the 'good' whistleblowers when they break the law on classified information - while your fellow right wingers, none of whom answered my question, say they should always go to jail?

Please explain how leaking national security secrets in the middle of a war can be construed as "good" whistleblowing.

The Pentagon Papers. They were classified Top Secret.

For those of you who are too young to remember.

 

[DealMonkey]

Because Bush declassified (at least parts of) the NIE, it should make the Democratic staffer's actions retroactively legal! That's how it works in Washington DC, baby!

 

[miketheidiot]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Looks like they may have found the person who selectively leaked parts of the NIE for partisian gain.

From Michael Barone of US News and World Report Link

Where did that selective leak of the National Intelligence Estimate come from? Well, it's beginning to look like it came from a Democratic staffer on the House Intelligence Committee.

Committee Chairman Pete Hoekstra last week suspended and denied classified information to the unnamed staffer. According to Republican Rep. Ray LaHood, the staffer requested a copy of the April NIE three days before part of its contents appeared in the New York Times. LaHood, by the way, is not necessarily a partisan spear chucker; he is close to Speaker Dennis Hastert, but he is one of those members often chosen to preside over divisive debates on important issues because he is perceived to be fair and impartial. As you'll recall, the NYT story quoted the NIE as saying that our military action in Iraq has stirred up more jihadist activity. It conspicuously failed to quote the NIE as saying, as it did, that our withdrawal from Iraq would stir up even more jihadist activity.

If the staffer leaked the NIE to the Times, he could be criminally charged. And, of course, it's outrageous on every level for a staffer to leak classified material for political purposes. Especially a selective leak like this one.

If this is the person who leaked it then they should lose their job and security clearance FOREVER and should face criminal charges. It is not acceptable to release classified information. If the Democrats in congress felt strongly enough that this information should have been released they could have pressed for it to be released through proper channels.

And to you lefties, there will come a day when there is a Democrat President again, remember your actions now, since how you act in matters like this will certainly effect what happens when you are in office again.

it more like what your "team" did to clinton is finally coming around.

props to the guy that leaked this.

 

[Craig234]

Originally posted by: Pabster

Originally posted by: Craig234
So, what do you think should be done to the people who are the 'good' whistleblowers when they break the law on classified information - while your fellow right wingers, none of whom answered my question, say they should always go to jail?

Please explain how leaking national security secrets in the middle of a war can be construed as "good" whistleblowing?

Only a liberal would stretch it that far.

Don't ask questions that were clearly answered in the post you are responsding to, Pabster.

I laid out the answer both in general and with a hypothetical example -

In general I said such things as when someone is aware of classified documents which show that public officals are betraying the public trust. Exposing those is good.

In my hypothetical, I laid out a specific example of where a politician could be harming the public because he is being blackmailed. Exposing that it good, too.

You may be right that only a liberal would show the concern for the public good over security, but I think you are shortchanging a few right-wingers who also would.

It seems the right doesn't want to answer my question on how to deal with whistleblowing.

 

[Harvey]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Jack, did you or anyone else call the Clinton administration a "cabal" ?

It is a term that has a natural negative connotation, that is why it was used, to cast Bush in a negative light, otherwise it had no real useful meaning in the context of that discussion.

From Merriam-Webster.com

Main Entry: ca·bal
Pronunciation: k&-'bäl, -'bal
Function: noun
Etymology: French cabale cabala, intrigue, cabal, from Medieval Latin cabbala cabala, from Late Hebrew qabbAlAh, literally, received (lore)
1 : the artifices and intrigues of a group of persons secretly united in a plot (as to overturn a government); also : a group engaged in such artifices and intrigues.

If you don't think that's exactly what the Bushwhackos have been doing since day one, you've been far too removed from this planet for far too long. This administration has:

• Plotted in secret to start a war based entirely on lies, one after another, all of which have been disproven. I don't have to post links to all the other threads with that evidence. Just search for posts by ProfJohn or Pabster and the replies to them in any thread. At this point, the burden of proof falls on anyone who still thinks the Bushwhackos have been truthful about anything at any time.
  
• Conspired with various business interests, to the exclusion of opposing voices, to draw legislation beneficial to those business interests. One glaring example is Cheney's closed meetings with execs from large energy companies that excluded any input from environmental interests. Another is the no bid contracts awarded to war profiteers like Halliburton and their subsidiaries.

The list could be extended for pages. The topics range from their total destruction of our Constitution to their illicit, immoral and illegal political and military agendas to political corruption to special financial advantages for themselves and their financial backers, and in each and every case, this administration and their lackies in Congress have worked behind closed doors to legislate in furtherance of their own agenda to silence and exclude any and all input from any and all dissenting voices.

I consider that a cabal. I had no intention of any negative connotation or implication. I'll say it straight out. It's as declaritively negative as hell! :thumbsdown: :| :thumbsdown:

You're welcome to call me a "leftie" or a "liberal." I'm proud to own those lables, especially, and even more so, because that's what you're NOT. :thumbsup: :thumbsup:

I see men who are trying to squeeze us,
And taking whatever they can,
While they buy those who try to appease us with scraps from their table.

It gets harder each day to break even.
This wasn't a part of my plan.
Time is right to be fighting or leaving this tower of Babel.

And who's watching over who's watching over you?
Tell me who's telling you what to do what to do?

P.S. -- Pabster --TS if you don't like my song. You're in the minority. :laugh:

 

[Craig234]

Harvey, when you say your song, do you mean you posted the link, or you wrote the song, or you are the singer? I've listened to it a couple times now.

 

[nageov3t]

I'm a bit conflicted... which is worse? leaking information for political gain or refusing to make information public for political gain?

 

[Harvey]

Originally posted by: Craig234
Harvey, when you say your song, do you mean you posted the link, or you wrote the song, or you are the singer? I've listened to it a couple times now.

You forgot to mention playing the song, and the answer is all of the above. :music:

What scares me is how precisely relevant and accurate the lyrics continue to be with each breaking news story.

If you like it, PLEE-e-e-eze share the link. There are three links on the page:

WhosWatching.mp3 -- The song.

WhosWatching.htm -- The lyrics.

Contact.htm An e-mail address I set up specifically for communicating about the song.

It's copyrighted material, but the only time I require any license or payment is for projects intended for profit. For example, if you want to perform it in public, go for it or us it for a local or national political ad, go for it. If you want to include it on your band's album for sale, please respect my intellectual property rights and pay for the use as you would with any copyrighted song.

 

[Pabster]

Originally posted by: Craig234
Don't ask questions that were clearly answered in the post you are responsding to, Pabster.

You've yet to clearly answer.

In general I said such things as when someone is aware of classified documents which show that public officals are betraying the public trust. Exposing those is good.

In my hypothetical, I laid out a specific example of where a politician could be harming the public because he is being blackmailed. Exposing that it good, too.

Let me ask one final time. What is a valid excuse for leaking classified national security secrets in the middle of a war? Not one of the libs here has presented a valid argument for that.

It seems the right doesn't want to answer my question on how to deal with whistleblowing.

How to deal with it? Easy. Lock the SOB's up. AFAIAC, you are aiding the enemy, and deserve far worse.

 

[nageov3t]

Let me ask one final time. What is a valid excuse for leaking classified national security secrets in the middle of a war? Not one of the libs here has presented a valid argument for that.

to a certain extent, I feel like the American people really deserve to know the effects of the Iraq War, especially as they're about to decide whether or not to vote for the people who authorized the war and have been beating the "stay the course" drum, and especially if the report itself was kept classified for political reasons.

 

[Pabster]

Originally posted by: loki8481
to a certain extent, I feel like the American people really deserve to know the effects of the Iraq War, especially as they're about to decide whether or not to vote for the people who authorized the war and have been beating the "stay the course" drum, and especially if the report itself was kept classified for political reasons.

Oh, the people who 'authorized' the war ... you must be speaking of John Kerry and the like?

 

[Balt]

Let me ask one final time. What is a valid excuse for leaking classified national security secrets in the middle of a war? Not one of the libs here has presented a valid argument for that.

How about this: Bush was intentionally misleading the public. In his 9/11 speech and elsewhere he claimed he had made Americans "safer but not yet safe". He was clearly trying to make people believe that his war on terror was decreasing terrorist threats to Americans. If the NIE doesn't directly contradict that claim, it surely puts it into doubt. He made claims based on his 'beliefs' rather than actual information. Thing is, I and many others don't care what he believes, especially if he only states it for political ends. I would rather hear facts.

Whether pointing out his dishonesty is a 'valid excuse' for the leak depends on your opinion. When a politician makes unsunbstantiated claims to boost their numbers in the polls, they are increasing the likelihood that some lone wolf is going to take it upon themselves to bring down the house of cards.

 

[JEDIYoda]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Looks like they may have found the person who selectively leaked parts of the NIE for partisian gain.

From Michael Barone of US News and World Report Link

Where did that selective leak of the National Intelligence Estimate come from? Well, it's beginning to look like it came from a Democratic staffer on the House Intelligence Committee.

Committee Chairman Pete Hoekstra last week suspended and denied classified information to the unnamed staffer. According to Republican Rep. Ray LaHood, the staffer requested a copy of the April NIE three days before part of its contents appeared in the New York Times. LaHood, by the way, is not necessarily a partisan spear chucker; he is close to Speaker Dennis Hastert, but he is one of those members often chosen to preside over divisive debates on important issues because he is perceived to be fair and impartial. As you'll recall, the NYT story quoted the NIE as saying that our military action in Iraq has stirred up more jihadist activity. It conspicuously failed to quote the NIE as saying, as it did, that our withdrawal from Iraq would stir up even more jihadist activity.

If the staffer leaked the NIE to the Times, he could be criminally charged. And, of course, it's outrageous on every level for a staffer to leak classified material for political purposes. Especially a selective leak like this one.

If this is the person who leaked it then they should lose their job and security clearance FOREVER and should face criminal charges. It is not acceptable to release classified information. If the Democrats in congress felt strongly enough that this information should have been released they could have pressed for it to be released through proper channels.

And to you lefties, there will come a day when there is a Democrat President again, remember your actions now, since how you act in matters like this will certainly effect what happens when you are in office again.

I totally agree prof!!!

 

[Pabster]

Originally posted by: Balt
Whether pointing out his dishonesty is a 'valid excuse' for the leak depends on your opinion. When a politician makes unsunbstantiated claims to boost their numbers in the polls, they are increasing the likelihood that some lone wolf is going to take it upon themselves to bring down the house of cards.

ROFL. There was a PORTION of the report leaked for political purposes by a DNC operative. (Or so it is alleged.)

Quite clearly THAT was misleading as the report wasn't nearly as damning as the lefties were trying to portray.

I still maintain there is NO valid excuse for leaking classified national security secrets. PERIOD. The fact that you don't like the President or approve of his Administration is not an excuse, and neither is trying to influence an election.

 

[theeedude]

Turns out the GOP has no evidence that this guy leaked anything. They just wanted to suspend him for a political stunt, as usual.

 

[nageov3t]

Originally posted by: Pabster

Originally posted by: loki8481
to a certain extent, I feel like the American people really deserve to know the effects of the Iraq War, especially as they're about to decide whether or not to vote for the people who authorized the war and have been beating the "stay the course" drum, and especially if the report itself was kept classified for political reasons.

Oh, the people who 'authorized' the war ... you must be speaking of John Kerry and the like?

I am

 

[Balt]

Originally posted by: Pabster

Originally posted by: Balt
Whether pointing out his dishonesty is a 'valid excuse' for the leak depends on your opinion. When a politician makes unsunbstantiated claims to boost their numbers in the polls, they are increasing the likelihood that some lone wolf is going to take it upon themselves to bring down the house of cards.

ROFL. There was a PORTION of the report leaked for political purposes by a DNC operative. (Or so it is alleged.)

Quite clearly THAT was misleading as the report wasn't nearly as damning as the lefties were trying to portray.

I still maintain there is NO valid excuse for leaking classified national security secrets. PERIOD. The fact that you don't like the President or approve of his Administration is not an excuse, and neither is trying to influence an election.

Uh, what? How do you figure that "the report wasn't nearly as damning as the lefties were trying to portray"? Bush released more of the report and it still didn't do ANYTHING to support his claim that he has made Americans safer. The report isn't a political talking point, and it painted our war in Iraq as a recruiting device for radical Islam. It has increased the number of terrorists worldwide and decreased the international opinion of our country.

The only thing Bush could salvage from the report was the theory that leaving Iraq would leave a haven for terrorism. That still doesn't justify going there in the first place.

The NIE was a disaster for Bush's administration, and he knows it. He was going to continue claiming he has made Americans safer all the way to November 7th and beyond, and the leak of the report denied him that option.

 

[Harvey]

Originally posted by: Pabster
I still maintain there is NO valid excuse for leaking classified national security secrets. PERIOD. The fact that you don't like the President or approve of his Administration is not an excuse, and neither is trying to influence an election.

When the criminals have the power to classify anything to cover up their own crimes, whistle blowing becomes the only way to out the criminals. That's why there is a Federal Whistleblower Protection Act. :thumbsup: