No doubt the Dopers have been keeping up with the news story concerning the US government’s secret prisons in Eastern Europe, where terrorist suspects and other persons of interests are allegedly being interrogated. But now CNN.com tells us that
I can’t say I am too keen on this leaker getting the axe, whereas I must confess I am delighted that Scooter might take a fall for the Plame affair. But that’s because I think the first leaker leaked in service of a noble cause (namely, shining light on the government’s illegal and immoral interrogation practices), whereas Scooter…well…not so much. But that can’t make a difference to the law (although it might make a difference as to whether a Presidential pardon was later merited). So what think the Dopers? If there was a leak, was it as seriously wrong as the Plame leak? Should the leaker be sent to prison?
Leaking classified info isn’t necessarily illegal (which doesn’t mean you won’t, or shouldn’t, get in trouble for it). Revealing the name of a covert operative is illegal.
So at least from a legal prosepective, leaking Plame’s name was worse.
They both should be vigorously investigated and prosecuted.
I get very angry when high-level officials leak classified information to the press, whether they think it is for a noble cause or not. That isn’t their decision to make, and they are legally and morally bound to safeguard any classified information that they have access to.
When I was in the military, the protection of classified information was taken very seriously. Security violations could result in being reassigned to a mortar platoon in Alaska, or for more serious incidents, a lengthy prison term at Fort Leavenworth. A civilian worker could expect, at a minimum, to lose their clearance and job. Why should the big shots be treated more leniently than the average soldier or civilian? They are supposed to be setting an example for their subordinates, not ignoring the law to advance their agenda.
mks57: I agree that big shot leakers shouldn’t get a free pass, but what if the information that is leaked is about how the big shots are in violation of the law? Isn’t that the point of the OP?
So far, it seems to be allegations that laws may have been violated. Even if true, that doesn’t justify leaking that information to the press. There are legal avenues for reporting and addressing official misconduct and criminal activities that don’t involve unauthorized disclosure of classified information.
While I don’t think this one is anywhere near as serious as the Plame leak (I can’t for the life of me figure out how national security, or even any particular covert operatives, is/are hazarded by the disclosure of the secret prison network), I say investigate away.
Might as well nail Cheney as many times as we can - and this one’s on the GOP’s dime!
What official avenues are there that weren’t corrupt? This is similar to the old Nixon regime- going through channels only works when the channels aren’t full of criminals.
Civilized societies don’t have secret prisons. If the Americans want to be the shining house on the hill, then they can’t have secret prisons. Leaking information that exposes this is not a crime, it’s an act of patriotism. The Plame leak was far worse because the motivation was retribution, not an underlying noble cause.
Legally, as has been pointed out, there may be a difference in the nature of the leaks. They should both be investigated for the possibility of illegal actions—I don’t have a problem with that.
Morally, of course, there’s a big difference between leaking the existence of secret CIA torture centers/prisons and leaking the identity of a CIA undercover agent. We are all morally opposed to illegal and abusive covert interrogation and detention practices (I’m ready to listen to counter-arguments that these secret centers were really perfectly fine and legal and proper, but they better be pretty good arguments).
We are not morally opposed to the mere fact that undercover CIA agents exist and keep their CIA connections secret. (Perhaps there are some hardcore leftists who believe that the very existence of a secret spy agency is in itself immoral and should be undermined in any way possible, but I think most people don’t subscribe to such an extreme viewpoint.)
Therefore, the former leak would be much more morally justifiable than the latter.
I think a more significant moral distinction is whether and to what extent lives are endangered by the given leak.
In the case of Valerie Plame Wilson, there’s a slew of people who may well be in danger on account of her identity being leaked. People with whom she associated with overseas are now known to have associated, knowingly or not, with a CIA agent. It’s a dangerous world out there; some of our nation’s enemies may treat knowing and unknowing associates the same, and let God sort them out.
Ms. Wilson supposedly was employed by Brewster Jennings, a front company. Any Americans abroad who also used Brewster Jennings as their cover are now blown. As are their contacts.
That’s a lot of people at risk, for one instance of political payback.
Then there’s our secret prisons. The WaPo story wasn’t specific about what countries these prisons were in, let alone what street they were on, or who worked there. If there’s a need to protect the American operatives working in this gulag, there’s plenty of time to whisk them (and their captives) home before they’re discovered. There’s supposedly only a hundred or so captives; it’s not like we’re talking about a Texas-sized state pen.
If anyone’s at risk, I haven’t heard an explanation of how so.
[QUOTE=Kimstu]
We are all morally opposed to illegal and abusive covert interrogation and detention practices [\QUOTE]Based on the justifications for and equivocation about such interrogation I see on SDMB and from Justice Department attorneys I’d like to see some evidence that “we are all morally opposed etc., etc.”
Like you, I think leaking to smear someone who is making it difficult for you to practice deception is morally worse than leaking to expose illegal acts of officials.
If it seems like a law was violated, then investigate away. Selectively conducting investigations based on where the political fallout may land is no way to run a nation.
Of course, the shocking outrage that Congressional Republicans have over the “black prisons” leak – coming after months of downplaying the Valerie Plame affair – simply shows where their misplaced priorities are.
Don’t service members and office holders take an oath to protect the Constitution and the Laws of the nation? Don’t they then have a duty to expose illegal activities? As 'luci is wont to point out, paraphrasing Justice Brandeis, sunlight is the best disinfectant.
Let it all come out in the open. It’s funny. Leaking the names of CIA agents is OK if the administration wants to get even with someone. Leaking is only bad when it puts the administration in a bad light, for things they should not be doing to begin with. The whole thing stinks of hypocrisy.