The Senate subcommittee knows what the CIA officials tell it. We won’t know – and the senators won’t know – whether they’re getting full disclosure or not until the relevant records are declassified several decades later. Maybe not even then; there’s such thing as a shredder.
This applies under any administration, of course.
Not to my knowledge, but it seems counterintuitive they would be more forthcoming about covert CIA operations than about the DoJ.
This is off-topic to the OP. I will say that making it public doesn’t help our image in that part of the world. Some will surely say “Oh, they can see how free we are.” And that is a minor upside. VERY minor compared to the covert plans remaining covert.
So, if the press knew about the D-Day invasion six months before it occurred—along with the knowledge that it was going to be extremely costly in Allied lives—they should have reported it? Or do you think that person should be tried asw a traitor?
Tony Snow did. In front of the TV cameras.
That’s like saying Al Capone’s image was damaged by those tax evasion charges. We really don’t have a very good image in that part of the world.
Um…no. Its always been the case that the Senate has to rely on what the CIA officals tell them…but there is no way they could cover up something like this from the subcommittee. If they TRIED too, they would be serving prison sentences.
What? You think that these kind of leaks are only to the press? Or that this is unique or something? There is no way that the CIA would deliberately lie to the Senate or Congress. Oh, they may distort the truth some, or give which ever brief best fits the mood of their target audience (like with the run up to the Iraq invasion)…but deliberately lie or withhold something like this? Not bloody likely IMHO.
As for a shredder…its to laugh. Check out the subject of this OP. This was supposed to be a COVERT operation against a foreign and hostile nation…and here we are, Joe Citizen, discussing it.
I don’t see the connection. Even assuming for a moment that Bush COULD simply dictate that Congress no longer has oversight on the DoJ investigations, I don’t see how it relates to this subject.
-XT
Actually, there are two separate issues here:
Do you think it’s a good idea for members of the government to leak classified information?
Do you think it’s a good idea for the press to publish classified information when a member of the government leaks it?
As a former security-clearance holder myself back in the day, who took my oath of confidentiality extremely seriously (even though I never ended up working with any information that was actually classified), my response to (1) is a qualified “No”.
I do think that governmental secrecy exists for a valid reason, and that a pledge to keep classified information secret is not a trivial matter. However, I think that it’s possible for individuals in certain situations to be morally justified in leaking certain kinds of secret information if they think it’s an extremely serious matter that’s being wrongfully concealed from the public. And, natch, such individuals have to be prepared to take the consequences of their actions, if their bosses can catch them.
My response to (2), on the other hand, is a qualified “Yes”. Journalists (usually) do not get government security clearances and do not take oaths to protect governmental secrecy. Their responsibility, on the contrary, is to keep the public informed of whatever important news they get hold of. If a government official chooses to take the responsibility of violating his/her position of trust by leaking classified information, it’s not the journalist’s job to second-guess that choice.
Again, I would qualify this with some exceptions, say in cases where the leaked information consists of particular details of military operations where publishing the details could put US operatives in immediate hazard of their lives, etc. etc.
But for the most part, I am quite comfortable with saying: Usually, government officials should not leak classified information to the media. But if they do, then usually, the media should report it.
(Re: lethal presidential findings. Thanks for the info Captain and John. Does this mean that the president is allowed to target an individual for assassination? I thought assassination was out of bounds.)
Attempted humor aside, because our image is so tarnished it doesn’t help to mar it further.
Reverse the two.
…I’ll add another couple of questions to the mix, if you don’t mind.
I’m not an American citizen, and I do not live in America. If a New Zealand investigative journalist discovered this story, should he have an obligation not to report it? If the NZ journalist did report the story, should the American press report it?
My second question is, Iran decides to launch a plan that includes a coordinated campaign of propaganda, disinformation and manipulation of Iraq’s currency and international financial transactions. If an Iranian journalist discovered this information, (and by Random Act of Gawd, was free to report it) would he be right to report it? If an Iranian journalist found evidence that Iran really was funding elements of the insurgency, should he report that?
So, it would be okay to respect secrecy in order to win a battle, but not, potentially, to prevent a war? Is that right?
Are we at war with Iran?
I got a radical suggestion. Entirely out of character, I know, but still…
How about we just say to hell with covert action. How about we do what we do in the cold light of day, right out in public. Because, you know, you look at the record of covert action we’ve undertaken…Viet Nam, Nicaragua, Chile, Iran and the beat goes on…most of it has been ineffective, short sighted, or downright villainy.
We are the single most powerful military force in human history, fuck with us, we reduce you to your component molecules toot damn sweet. What have we to fear from Iran? They gonna shake their prayer beads at us? Why not try something completely different, honesty, openness, truth? Why not?
Besides, you know who hates the Taliban and AlQ more than we do? Iran. Does that suggest anything to you? Just sayin’, is all.
Why not? Howard Hunt lied to the Warren Commission.
[::d&r::}
No, we are at war with Al Queda. Iran hates Sunni fanatics like Al Queda, so clearly we are…uh, that is…why do you hate America?
SECRET SERVICE AGENT NELSON MUNTZ (TO PRESIDENT LISA SIMPSON): Every president gets three secret murders. If you don’t use 'em by the end of your term, pffft! they’re gone!
To expand a bit on the questions at hand…
The existance and necessity of efforts to undermine the current government of Iran should not come as a surprise to anyone who spends any time at all outside the rectal cocoon. To explain and justify them would take more intellectual spoonfeeding than I am willing to commit to.
Leaking of classified information is a violation of the law. You don’t get to choose whether it is of ideological benefit or not. The people involved in a news organization are involved, they should be prosecuted as much as anyone else.
Yes. We have been in a cold to lukewarm war with them since 1979.
Good point, but at the same time, I can’t imagine the Democratic-controlled Senate having said “Okay” to this somewhat loony plan. Time will tell, I suppose.
But they’re not the leakers, are they? The leaker is presumably someone in government, as mentioned above.
Ermm . . . that is one of the two debate topics here, Evil. If you want to post here at all, can’t you do better than hand-waving?
Remember the Supreme Court’s decision in the Pentagon Papers case?