Anonimity my A$$!!!

QRQ 30 · 07-04-2005, 08:10

I am tired of this crap. The identity of the mouth in the Pentagon has nothing to do with the sensitivity of the operation. The info he divulges does!! His identity certainly should have something to do with putting his a$$ in a sling!!

The Pentagon needs to be more aggresive in fereting out these anonomous mouths and send them to Kansas for some advenced exercises in reducing the size of rocks!!

Quote:

A U.S. Defense Department official said, speaking on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the continuing search, confirmed the first rescue of a member of an elite U.S. military team.

He declined to say when the rescue occurred or provide other details, including a reaction to reports that the team consisted of several U.S. Navy Seals

Books · 07-08-2005, 12:26

This sh_t kills me. The person who outted NOC Valarie Plame for whatever political reason may have the lives of some of her sources on his or her head. I'm a failed pacifist when it comes to this crap. I'll be the first to wave the 1st ammendment banner for protecting the press, but not when it gets people killed or compromises operations. To me, what the pentagon official is doing is treason and he/she should be prosecuted and, IMHO, shot.

QRQ 30 · 07-08-2005, 12:45

Recent decisions by the courts have led me to think a lot about this. We are a nation built upon freedom. With freedom goes responsibility. When confidentiality means protecting criminals or security leaks I feel that the freedom of the american citizenry takes precedence over individual freedom of the press and its confidentiality.

Look carefully at my original quote. What could the naming of the Pentagon source possibily have to do with compromising sensitive operations? It is the disclosure of the information itself that endangers the operation.

**Bill Harsey** · 07-08-2005, 13:12

Terry,
I'm tracking with you.
The reason the source needs to remain unnamed is because of how much trouble they'll be in if they get caught spilling the beans.

Jimbo · 07-08-2005, 13:30

Quote:

Originally Posted by Books

This sh_t kills me. The person who outted NOC Valarie Plame for whatever political reason may have the lives of some of her sources on his or her head.

Plame may have been the world's worst NOC since the only people who didn't know she was one were those out of earshot when both she and her husband announced the fact at cocktail parties.

Books · 07-08-2005, 13:30

Gentlemen,

I think, perhaps, that my posting was a bit too emotive and not clear enough. I used the Plame example as representative of the problem. Whether it's money for the tip, egos, or who knows what, the nameless pentagon official needs to keep his or her mouth shut. Loose lips sink ships. Perhaps those nameless officials should use the question, "Can I say this in public with my name attached without negative reprocussions?" as a sort of litmus test before they open their pie hole. Or, as my Dad had me do as a kid: "Never say anything you'd be ashamed to say to your Grandma."

Thanks for reading,

Books

uboat509 · 07-22-2005, 16:35

The Valerie Plame fiasco aside, these "anonymous sources" are not always what they seem. I know for a fact that some of the time they are intentional leaks other times the so-called "anonymous source" is just a reporter's means of covering for the fact that whatever they reporting is somthing that they overheard or is a rumor. Think about it, how many times has information from an "anonymous source" turned out to be wrong. I am not saying that this is the case every time but it probably happens more than we know.

SFC W