Ghost of BiB Posted March 2, 2006 Share Posted March 2, 2006 Ha, Ha, Ha, LOL: Me thinks you are correct there masterful sensei. 616211[/snapback] Got to love those low bidders. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KRC Posted March 2, 2006 Share Posted March 2, 2006 Got to love those low bidders. 616214[/snapback] Friggin' government contractors. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Coli Posted March 2, 2006 Share Posted March 2, 2006 Where do I say anything about absolving Bush? 616209[/snapback] Sorry, Ken. I was inadvertantly lumping you in with the "deflect the blame" crowd. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YellowLinesandArmadillos Posted March 2, 2006 Share Posted March 2, 2006 I was referring to actual CIA operations that could be blown in the media's haste to publish things to get sales. This has nothing to do with being cynical. It is just flat-out stupidity. Both the media and the leakers need to be held accountable and they need to come down hard. People's lives are at stake. 616207[/snapback] Couldn't agree more, just don't think the press has any sense of a line anymore when the White House is authorizing the leaking. I agree there should somehow be established a bright line that says go to jail, do not pass GO, and treason charges should be applied. How you accomplish it in today's environment, I don't know, they don't take it seriously. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost of BiB Posted March 2, 2006 Share Posted March 2, 2006 Couldn't agree more, just don't think the press has any sense of a line anymore when the White House is authorizing the leaking. I agree there should somehow be established a bright line that says go to jail, do not pass GO, and treason charges should be applied. How you accomplish it in today's environment, I don't know, they don't take it seriously. 616218[/snapback] Might start obeying the law, just a thought. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KRC Posted March 2, 2006 Share Posted March 2, 2006 Couldn't agree more, just don't think the press has any sense of a line anymore when the White House is authorizing the leaking. I agree there should somehow be established a bright line that says go to jail, do not pass GO, and treason charges should be applied. How you accomplish it in today's environment, I don't know, they don't take it seriously. 616218[/snapback] The White House does not always authorize the leaking. There are more stories in the press than just "Plamegate." I agree about the treason charges. You release calssified information, you are tossed in jail for treason and punished to the fullest extent of the law. No hiding behind sources. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YellowLinesandArmadillos Posted March 2, 2006 Share Posted March 2, 2006 Might start obeying the law, just a thought. 616223[/snapback] In DC, oh please, we just write the laws that you can't understand half-of, we don't obey them (sarcasm), even when they are as simple as thou shall not leak. Leaking is power as seen by staffers. Power mostly to destroy your opponent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mickey Posted March 2, 2006 Share Posted March 2, 2006 In DC, oh please, we just write the laws that you can't understand half-of, we don't obey them (sarcasm), even when they are as simple as thou shall not leak. Leaking is power as seen by staffers. Power mostly to destroy your opponent. 616227[/snapback] There are leaks and there are leaks, and then there are leaks. If you classify something that has nothing to do with security, just politics, then sooner or later someone is going to leak it because it never should have been classified to begin with so its easy for them to justify it. If you declassify intel info A and classify intel info B because A supports your argument and B contradicts it, who is the greater crook, you for the bogus juggling of classification to suit your political needs or the yahoo who leaks it so that you get caught? Isn't that how we heard all about aluminum tubes and yellowcake and none of the intel that contradicted that info? Damn, I wish someone had leaked that stuff back then, might have saved us a heap of trouble, a heap of money and a heap of lives. It is a complicated issue in any event. If you can't stop the leaks, maybe you can at least let the leakers leak on one anther so the whole sorry mess comes out and just go after those who have really endangered security. That is kind of why we have laws about not leaking classified info and whistleblower statutes, we recognize the competing goals of keeping secrets that should be kept and exposing the ones that should be exposed. This one is an easy one, what national security interest is involved? The NSA stuff, not such an easy call. That is why the NYT sat on it so long and I'll bet that not all they knew was put in the story based on security concerns. If it turns out that they were breaking the law, does that retroactively make the leak okay? Leaking isn't bad, bad leaks are bad and good leaks are good but you can't determine the goodness or the badness until it is out and then it is too late. The only solution I can think of is discriminating prosecution. Go after leakers who really have endangered security and lives, not people who leak tapes showing that the President was told the levees might break days before he told the public no one expected the levees to break. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YellowLinesandArmadillos Posted March 2, 2006 Share Posted March 2, 2006 Isn't that how we heard all about aluminum tubes and yellowcake and none of the intel that contradicted that info? Damn, I wish someone had leaked that stuff back then, might have saved us a heap of trouble, a heap of money and a heap of lives. 616246[/snapback] Still not sure the press cared enough at that point and Bush team was on its game then, they would've just pivoted and recalled 9/11. Some of that info was already available if my memory serves me right and they did not put it all together. Leaking isn't bad, bad leaks are bad and good leaks are good but you can't determine the goodness or the badness until it is out and then it is too late. 616246[/snapback] Yep, I will know it when I see it syndrome, hard to work with that one, unless you draw a broad bright line. Problem is then the line gets abused in the name of security. The only solution I can think of is discriminating prosecution. Go after leakers who really have endangered security and lives, not people who leak tapes showing that the President was told the levees might break days before he told the public no one expected the levees to break. 616246[/snapback] Maybe the only solution, reactive, not proactive, but hey what can you do. Still sends it back in to the political arena, not judiciary where it should be determined in my opinion and the only shot when the other two branches of government are not balancing each other out.l Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KRC Posted March 2, 2006 Share Posted March 2, 2006 Problem is then the line gets abused in the name of security. 616315[/snapback] ...and in the name of "freedom of the press." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YellowLinesandArmadillos Posted March 2, 2006 Share Posted March 2, 2006 ...and in the name of "freedom of the press." 616359[/snapback] Granted, if you had to chose, where would you go with, straight no leaks, bright line or open freedom of the press, or the current hypocritical mess we have right now? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KRC Posted March 2, 2006 Share Posted March 2, 2006 Granted, if you had to chose, where would you go with, straight no leaks, bright line or open freedom of the press, or the current hypocritical mess we have right now? 616369[/snapback] If I was forced to choose, I would go with no leaks. Of course, in reality, I am a proactive idealist. I would be cleaning up the government so that there is no reason to try to get leaked information. The government would be stripped down to only providing Constitutionally mandated functions. Congress would be a part-time job, where they only meet a few times a year. Government work would not be about power and money, because you would have very little of both. Media types would be jailed for publishing classified information. I could go on, but I am already well beyond the topic of this thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YellowLinesandArmadillos Posted March 2, 2006 Share Posted March 2, 2006 If I was forced to choose, I would go with no leaks. Of course, in reality, I am a proactive idealist. I would be cleaning up the government so that there is no reason to try to get leaked information. The government would be stripped down to only providing Constitutionally mandated functions. Congress would be a part-time job, where they only meet a few times a year. Government work would not be about power and money, because you would have very little of both. Media types would be jailed for publishing classified information. I could go on, but I am already well beyond the topic of this thread. 616379[/snapback] Man you are a true believer, I bow to you for I am not worthy And you do not run on the libertarian ticket? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted March 2, 2006 Share Posted March 2, 2006 Granted, if you had to chose, where would you go with, straight no leaks, bright line or open freedom of the press, or the current hypocritical mess we have right now? 616369[/snapback] There is no such thing as a bright red, yellow or any color that makes a bunny glow in the dark, bright line because it all depends on perspective. Larry Franklin is going to jail due to a leak that was due to his belief that US security is endagered by not enough attention being paid to Iran. Someone in the CIA and nsa is not going to jail due to their belief that US security is endagered by Valerie Plame's outing and "illegal" wiretaps of US citizens. I'm guessing we differ a lot in our perspectives on which one was a good leak vs bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KRC Posted March 2, 2006 Share Posted March 2, 2006 And you do not run on the libertarian ticket? 616403[/snapback] I ran and won local office as a libertarian. I am no longer a member of the Libertarian Party (although, I am still a registered libertarian). There is a movement afoot to change the Libertarian Party, to make it more moderate. I am watching the results of that movement. If they are not successful, they are going to branch out and form their own party. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taro T Posted March 2, 2006 Share Posted March 2, 2006 Granted, if you had to chose, where would you go with, straight no leaks, bright line or open freedom of the press, or the current hypocritical mess we have right now? 616369[/snapback] I would go with a system where there were straight no leaks, but also (and importantly) only material that could truly compromise national security would be classified. Not much of a chance of the 2nd part happening unfortunately. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YellowLinesandArmadillos Posted March 2, 2006 Share Posted March 2, 2006 There is no such thing as a bright red, yellow or any color that makes a bunny glow in the dark, bright line because it all depends on perspective. Larry Franklin is going to jail due to a leak that was due to his belief that US security is endagered by not enough attention being paid to Iran. Someone in the CIA and nsa is not going to jail due to their belief that US security is endagered by Valerie Plame's outing and "illegal" wiretaps of US citizens. I'm guessing we differ a lot in our perspectives on which one was a good leak vs bad. 616406[/snapback] That was Mickey's arguement, bright line was just one of the options. I agree there is no bright line, except that Ken would clean up government enough so he believes there could be one. An impossible task...one of the rhetorical circles...tautology. Still could be eutopic if ever accomplished. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted March 2, 2006 Share Posted March 2, 2006 I would go with a system where there were straight no leaks, but also (and importantly) only material that could truly compromise national security would be classified. Not much of a chance of the 2nd part happening unfortunately. 616411[/snapback] And part 1 deals with changing the nature of mankind's zeal to be heard and the natural urge to listen to gossip. Good night & good luck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RkFast Posted March 2, 2006 Share Posted March 2, 2006 Ya know....as much as a Bush aplogist Ive been, I really think this is terrible. He should have done more, been better prepared and the Federal response should have been better as a whole. I think that is a settled issue. We all know that. BUT WHY THE EFF IS NAGIN AND THE LOUISIANA GOVERNOR GETTING A FREE PASS WITH ALL THIS??????? Isnt it the LOCAL GOVTS responsibility to evacuate and handle disaster prep and response? After 9/11, all we heard about was "first responders". There seems to be no mention of them when it comes to this disaster. What? They only are for "certain" disasters? And Nagin......word is that he was hiding under his desk, sobbing like a little girl while Katrina was raging. But he seems to get (almost) as much "good press" as Giuliani did after 9/11. Again, Im not saying the Feds are absolved of blame. But the fact that its pretty much been implied by the press and a lot of others that Bush and Brown were the ONLY TWO MEN responsible for post, and now PRE-Katrina response from ALL LEVELS of Government speaks volumes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YellowLinesandArmadillos Posted March 2, 2006 Share Posted March 2, 2006 I ran and won local office as a libertarian. I am no longer a member of the Libertarian Party (although, I am still a registered libertarian). There is a movement afoot to change the Libertarian Party, to make it more moderate. I am watching the results of that movement. If they are not successful, they are going to branch out and form their own party. 616410[/snapback] That is interesting, heard some of that through the grape vine and probably read it from you too, let me know what happens. Politically, my college thesis dealt with the conflicts within group dynamics and when one group appears to win an arguement how does the loser actually fair? I was dealing with the Manassas Battlefield preservation issue a few years back. Developer v. Preservationists...interesting political dynamics though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts