SECRETS FOR SALE - CHEAP

[BMT (RIP)]

http://www.nypost.com/postopinion/opedcolumnists/secrets_for_sale___cheap_opedcolumnists_ralph_pete rs.htm

:munchin

BMT

[Books]

This man speaks the truth. . .

[kgoerz]

Has anyone on here ever heard of someone doing time for any of the leaks in these past years. Just one example?
The part about our Allies not wanting to share Intel and our Agencies worried about their own sources being exposed is very disturbing.

[Karl.Masters]

This man speaks the truth. . .

And it is a sad truth that the security of the National Intelligence Estimate was subjugated to political agendas, an especially reprehensible crime when the nation (or at least part of it) is at war. In my mind, these individuals compromising classified and their co-dependent facilitators in the MSM have become defacto intelligence officers for our nation's enemies. We used to call this treason. Outside the beltway, I think we still do.

Karl

[Gypsy]

A punk who robs a convenience store goes to jail, yet an official who passes sensitive intelligence to the press or to the political party he or she favors is rarely pursued at the upper levels of government.

And there you have it.

Until those who leak information are prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law it will continue. :mad:

[Mud Puppy]

Until those who leak information are prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law it will continue. :mad:

And do actual time, not in those "honor" facilities.

I know, I am dreaming :(

Mud Puppy

[CoLawman]

Has anyone on here ever heard of someone doing time for any of the leaks in these past years. Just one example?
The part about our Allies not wanting to share Intel and our Agencies worried about their own sources being exposed is very disturbing.

Only two cases in which the subjects received jail sentences;

Samuel Morison was convicted under the 1917 Espionage Act. He was sentenced to prison on President Reagan's watch and pardoned under President Clinton's ,after Morison had served his sentence. He was a civilian analyst in the Defense Department who sent/sold classified photographs to Jane's.

Morison was the first to be convicted of "leaking" classified information.

In February of 2002, Jonathan Randal was an intelligence analyst in the employ of DEA. He released/sold information to a British newsman about Lord Ashcroft. He never went to trial opting to cop a plea rather than face a 21 count indictment. End result was he agreed to a one year prison sentence, 3 years probation, and $2000 fine.

There is precedence. And the precedence was established under Republican Presidents. I would certainly not bet against POTUS charging someone on this leak.........evidence indicates he will use the DOJ to make a point.

[SF18C]

I think any journalist (Naylor) or media service producer (Army Times) that KNOWING prints classified info should also be jailed, I am not sure if that is the law but it would make since.

I don't keep secrets from the American people. I keep secrets for the American people.
I like that!




In a world of compromise…some men don’t!

[x SF med]

September 27, 2006 -- AFTER more than two decades in the intelligence world, I know a few secrets. Some would merit brief, trumped-up headlines. But keeping those secrets is a matter of honor.

I don't keep secrets from the American people. I keep secrets for the American people. I took an oath not to divulge classified information. In return, I was trusted. And I never broke my word.

That means that I and all those like me who keep the faith don't fit in Washington, D.C., where leaking our nation's secrets is now a competitive sport - for both Democrats and Republicans.

The climate of leaks-without-penalties must end. But it probably won't. Why? Because senior figures in both parties see political advantages in well-timed leaks. They're willing to betray our nation for a brief partisan edge.

I've already used two out-of-date words that mark me as a patsy in D.C.: "honor" and "betray."

What happened to honor? Among our elected and appointed officials? A sense of honor still prevails within our military and among hundreds of thousands of government employees. Honor still prevails in much of our community life. Many Americans beyond the Beltway maintain a strong sense of personal and professional honor.

But honor's dead in Washington. And at "leading" universities (where patriotism, too, is beneath contempt). And in the media. Honor isn't hip. It's as pathetic as a powder-blue, polyester leisure suit.

To journalists and members of Congress, the concept of honor is so alien it's incomprehensible. If you can grab a headline, no matter the cost to your country, tell our secrets - and win an award for your "courage."

If you can bump up your poll numbers before the election, spill the beans. If you can stick it to the other party, by all means tell the terrorists what our senior intelligence officers think. Expose our security programs. Exaggerate our military problems. If we're short on bullets, tell the bad guys.

Honor's for the chumps, the losers, the average voter who "doesn't have a clue." In other words, for people like you and me.

Of course, reporters and political hacks can't just stroll into a secure vault and walk out with classified documents (well, except for a certain former national security adviser . . . ). They need accomplices. So they've created a culture of leaks in which bureaucrats and even military officers convince themselves it's OK to tip our nation's secrets - your secrets - to the media.

What can be done? It's simple: Enforce the law.

Leaking classified information is a crime punishable with prison time. The statutes are on the books, folks. Those who leak classified information and those who publicize it should go to jail.

This isn't a matter of creating a police state, for God's sake. We're at war. In war (and in peace, as well), we have secrets to keep. When we fail to keep those secrets, soldiers die, our enemies are encouraged, our allies grow reluctant to share intelligence with us, and our own agencies worry about the danger of sharing information from their top sources. And you, the American people, are betrayed.

"Betrayal" is the other un-cool word I used up above. But it's the right word. Whether a senator or a low-level staffer in a government department, the man or woman who intentionally compromises classified information has betrayed you, your family and your country.

The latest example was a selective leak from a National Intelligence Estimate - a high-level document that reports not only a consensus view, but also dissenting opinions (I know - I read plenty of 'em in the past). According to the media's version of whatever was leaked, we're less secure now than before Iraq was invaded. It was a cynical set-up just over a month before national elections: In order to challenge the allegations, the president had to declassify a very sensitive document.

The leak wasn't about some phony "right to know." It was a political stunt performed for political gain. And now our enemies know what our intelligence community thinks. Gee, thanks. We don't need to know what intelligence documents say. What matters is what our leaders do or fail to do.

What will it take to inspire a nonpartisan crackdown on those who betray our secrets, who selfishly expose our country to mortal danger?

A punk who robs a convenience store goes to jail, yet an official who passes sensitive intelligence to the press or to the political party he or she favors is rarely pursued at the upper levels of government.

Why? Same answer as above. Your politicians like the culture of leaks. They complain about it, fingers crossed way down in their deep pockets. But they do nothing. Washington's a club - and you're not in it, brothers and sisters.

This shouldn't be a Democratic or Republican issue. It's an American issue. Keeping our country safe is more important than Sen. Sweetspot's re-election campaign or a Pulitzer Prize for another self-adoring, America-loathing journalist.

Put 'em in the slammer. Where these criminals belong. Enforce our laws. And maybe - just maybe - folks in Washington will start obeying those laws again.

There's one more reason why I keep old secrets and actively avoid exposure to new ones now that I'm out of the system. In this great, free country, I can figure out anything I need to know from open sources. I don't have to dishonor myself or the United States of America.

And if honor's a joke to those in power, I'm proud to be the butt of it.

Ralph Peters is a retired Army intel officer and the author of "Never Quit the Fight."

[incommin]

The fact that the "people on the hill" only have a 25% approval rating indicates that most Americans don't like crap like this. The problem is that the "people on the hill" are lost in their own little world and will not come forth and fix things. Even if not fixing things means good people die!

Jim

[Monsoon65]

What tightens my colon is when the leak is credited to an "military official in the Pentagon." Now, this guy should know better. He is exposed to the same regs as I am, but if I did something like that, I'd have a new speciality code: Prisoner.

I think some of them, if not most, have lost touch with the grunt in the field doing the dirty work.

[Warrior-Mentor]

Gotta play Devils' Advocate for discussion here.

We are a free and open society. Some can argue (Woodward, Ricks, etc) that the secrets (classified info) aren't being used or are being manipulated for the political process. Reading Fiasco and State of Denial, one could conclude that the perceived failure of the NCA (SecDef & POTUS) to listen to the classified reports and report an honest assessment to the American people has resulted in their belief of need to expose the lack of honest reporting to the public.

Woodward (and others) argue there is a problem. Attacks in Iraq continue to increase. Denying that a problem exists isn't going to fix it.

What I don't understand is why the Generals don't send up the star cluster about the problem? If the Chain of Command won't listen (according to several books recently published - they're not), then why not resign and out your opinion in the best interests of the service memers who are over there getting shot at?

What have they got to lose?

Anyone read H.R. McMaster's book Dereliction of Duty? Sound familiar?

I'm not saying the leaks are right, just that it's becoming moreunderstandable why someone might do that in what they believe is in the simultaneous best interests of the service members and the American People.

[The Reaper]

That is the second controversial book McMasters has written.

Will be interesting to see what the Army does with him. Very indicative of the organization's current tolerance for dissenting opinions.

TR

[Warrior-Mentor]

Have read/heard good hings about what COL McMasters was able to do with 3rd ACR in Iraq.

Seems he's the real deal.

[x SF med]

How the hell do these leakers get clearances? Why the hell do they get clearances? Who the hell clears them?

Ok, 'nuff said.