Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: capt. apathy on October 23, 2003, 02:33:19 PM
-
on the cia identity leak
"We're doing everything we can," Attorney General John Ashcroft said. "I have assured the president that I will let him know the second we find either the leak or a decent scapegoat. It will happen. He's out there somewhere."
"The team is hard at work, but the process of finding the perfect scapegoat is very time-consuming," Bush said. "While we can assume that this person will not be a member of my senior staff, we have few other concrete ideas about his identity. Why, the scapegoat may turn out to be someone who knew absolutely nothing about the leak. You can see how difficult the job is."
Last week, Bush ordered 2,000 staff members to turn over any documents that may help the Justice Department choose a scapegoat.
link (http://www.theonion.com/3941/news1.html)
-
Can't you write your own?
-
Isn't Clinton available as a scapegoat any more?
Novak said the leak came from a high level White House officials... he didn't say it came from this Administration.
-
No, I think Clinton is clean on this one. Cant say for sure about Bill though.
Time will tell, but by damned, someone better swing for this.
Doesnt have to be the guilty party either. A good "jerk to jesus" on the account of an innocent man will sure as hell straighten out the perp. Thats fer sure and fer certain.
And besides, the innocent guy gets a free pass to heaven. Everyone comes out a winner! Its a win-win scenario.
-
Seems to me this is all a media circus from the start. Why have a freaking investigation when the "reporter" who got the alleged story and the paper that printed it already know the answer. By hiding the source, if any exists, the artificially created situation can be extended indefinately creating more sales of papers. The media have absolutely no reason to want to end it, it's job security. :rolleyes:
-
who cares what the media wants or gets from it. we need an investigation because it would apeare someone has comitted treason. IMO that would warrent an investigation.
btw- that reporter should be doing some time too.
-
btw- that reporter should be doing some time too.
A pesky little problem tho....
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."
-
A pesky little problem tho....
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."
Another pesky problem.........
Sec. 2381. - Treason
Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less than five years and fined under this title but not less than $10,000; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States
It could be argued that by revealing the identity of a member of the CIA in a published medium, the publisher is giving aid to the enemies of the United States.
Either way, I think the 'journalist' could have had more common sense in his reporting. Revealing the identities of the people in question wasn't neccesary. The fact that the information was given to him would have sufficed.
IMO of course.
-
The journalist and his publisher knew better. Free speech and other rights come with responsibilty, which in this case should mean their little goose is cooked.
They always have to push the envelope, I hope this time they are used as an example to others who would be tempted with similar information.
Idiots. :mad:
-
Why spend the time and effort on an investigation, when the reporter knows who the leak is? Why not just compel him to say whom, if the fact of the release was illegal?
It is not making him incriminate himself, but by NOT saying, in front of a federal jury, he is commiting perjury.
As an example, say that a reporter interviewed a terrorist, who provided the reporter with the specific information of an attack, in advance. The reporter reported the story, but with no specifics or names, and the attack took place. Would he then be protected? I don't think so.
-
And I thought it had been turned over to the DOJ. Glad the Onion cleared this all up.
-
Originally posted by Lazerus
It could be argued that by revealing the identity of a member of the CIA in a published medium, the publisher is giving aid to the enemies of the United States.
That exact claim has been made over and over. If it is true that a CIA operative was compromised and lives endangered then why haven't charges been filed against Robert Novak? If criminal charges aren't made against him then I have to believe that all these claims are bull**** and the ones making them liars.
-
It isn't a crime for a journalist, or any private citizen, to name a CIA agent.
It IS a crime for someone who has authorized access to classified information to name a CIA agent.
-
If the journalist uses privileged information, why is he exempt?
edit-Exempt form disclosure, not prosecution, that is.
-
Originally posted by Montezuma
It isn't a crime for a journalist, or any private citizen, to name a CIA agent.
It IS a crime for someone who has authorized access to classified information to name a CIA agent.
Can you substantiate that?
-
It is treason no matter who does it. Not surprising a journalist would put it in the news. They wrong mindedly think the people have the right to know.
Yep, the media is the fifth column, and they didn't get that name for nothing. I agree, the journalist and everyone involved in the leak needs jail time to think about the price of freedom.
Les
-
Originally posted by Gadfly
If the journalist uses privileged information, why is he exempt?
edit-Exempt form disclosure, not prosecution, that is.
Because Novak is protected by the freedom of the press clauses in the US Constitution.
Novak did not comit a crime. The law which was broken only applies to federal employees - which Novak is not.
If he were a Patriot and a true American he wouldn't be protecting this "traitor" to our National Security.
I would think in times of war... the White House could exercise the Patriot Act on Novak... take him to Cuba, wrap wet towels around his face, and hang him from ceiling on a meat hook with jumper cables clamped to his testicals.
I'm sure the Traitor's name will flow freely from his change in attitude.
ah but we don't do that in America... (only in Cuba)
-
The press is not protected by the constitution from a treasonous act. That's just plain bull****. If what Novak did was treason he should be prosecuted. If it wasn't then those making these accusations should shut the hell up.
-
Originally posted by Yeager
Time will tell, but by damned, someone better swing for this.
Doesnt have to be the guilty party either. A good "jerk to jesus" on the account of an innocent man will sure as hell straighten out the perp. Thats fer sure and fer certain.
And besides, the innocent guy gets a free pass to heaven. Everyone comes out a winner! Its a win-win scenario.
You make it sound so inviting. I'm sure a quick note to GWB explaining the benefits of your plan will result in hundreds of volunteers. I bet you'd be first in line too.
-
The press is not protected by the constitution from a treasonous act. That's just plain bull****. If what Novak did was treason he should be prosecuted. If it wasn't then those making these accusations should shut the hell up.
thats an interesting way of looking at it. I'm sure Bush would be more comfortable if we all took that stance. or whoever is in the whitehouse(assumeing you keep that atitude when a democrats in).
It doesn't take a harvard law degree to figure out that naming covert intelligence opertatives is treason.
It could very well be that Novak isn't being pursued at this time because they aren't sure if higher ranking officials are well enough insulated from blame.
what ever the reason, he should be tried on treason charges. whoever suplied him with the name should be tried for treason.
as citesen we have a right and a responsability to judge what the gov't does and call for action if we don't feel they are doing what they should.
and as far as the opinions some have that him being a member of the press, or his right to free speach, somehow protect Novak, thats pure crap, we've always had reasonable limits.
to me this is the equivilant 'outting' under-cover police officers. maybe posting pictures names addresses, who their spouse is, where their kids go to school. should that be legal too?
the day after an arest you could have stories like-
"local gang member arrested today, evedence was recieved with help of undercover officer joe smith (pictured above), his wife sue(also pictured) works the night shift as a warehouse security guard at 11th and main, where she is alone from 10pm to 4am every weeknight. the couple have a beautyful 7 year old daughter (also pictured) who attends east side elementary and walks home where she waits alone for her parents until 5."
we've already had cases that proved that not everything is fit to print. remember the websight that posted names, pics and addresses of abortion doctors? If I remembor corectly the courts shut that one down.
-
Originally posted by capt. apathy
It doesn't take a harvard law degree to figure out that naming covert intelligence opertatives is treason.
Exactly. Which leads me to believe that she wasn't. Indicting Novak doesn't let anyone off the hook. In fact, it will be even more likely that the leak will be revealed.
All sounds like a lot of political posturing and bull**** to me. When charges are prosecuted I may change my mind.
-
Well BUSH Supporters.....
Why hasn't the Bush Administration asked his conservative ally and friend Robert Novak to give up the person who committed this crime of TREASON?
I would think that Novak being an American, and now realizing the seriousness of what has happened... would give this guy up.. this guy is not a whistle blower but a Traitor to this country.
There's no reason for Novak to protect him.
This is stituation is everything the Republicans have been saying they are fighting against.
Why hasn't Bush pursued this?
Bush is holding Americans with out due process to fight the war on Terrorism. He's holding them in Cuba - off American Soil... so that they can be tortured and coherced for information.
Novak knows who the official is... why doesn't Bush ask?
Why doesn't Bush want to know who this guy is?
This country is at WAR!
Who ever leaked the CIA information.... may do it again... what other sensative information will they reveal and to whom?
The guy who can put an stop to the leak - Robert Novak - should be interrogated and compelled to give it up.
Don't you all agree?
-
You really should go easier on the caffein Nexus.
-
Or the drugs.
-
Originally posted by DmdNexus
Why hasn't the Bush Administration asked his conservative ally and friend Robert Novak to give up the person who committed this crime of TREASON?
Do you know for a fact that they haven't?
sources please
-
Originally posted by majic
Can you substantiate that?
Who do you think you're talking to?
;)
Intelligence Identities Protection Act of 1982:
CHAPTER 15--NATIONAL SECURITY
SUBCHAPTER IV--PROTECTION OF CERTAIN NATIONAL SECURITY INFORMATION
Sec. 421. Protection of identities of certain United States undercover intelligence officers, agents, informants, and sources
(a) Disclosure of information by persons having or having had access to classified information that identifies covert agent Whoever, having or having had authorized access to classified information that identifies a covert agent, intentionally discloses any information identifying such covert agent to any individual not authorized to receive classified information, knowing that the information disclosed so identifies such covert agent and that the United States is taking affirmative measures to conceal such covert agent's intelligence relationship to the United States, shall be fined not more than $50,000 or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.
(b) Disclosure of information by persons who learn identity of covert agents as result of having access to classified information Whoever, as a result of having authorized access to classified information, learns the identify of a covert agent and intentionally discloses any information identifying such covert agent to any individual not authorized to receive classified information, knowing that the information disclosed so identifies such covert agent and that the United States is taking affirmative measures to conceal such covert agent's intelligence relationship to the nited States, shall be fined not more than $25,000 or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.
-
That does not cover Novak, unless he has a security clearance and saw the information in Classified documents. It may not even cover the leaker.
-
So I read both (a) and (b) to try and discern a difference in status between the two, and couldn't find it. Why is one $50,000 and ten years, and the other is $25,000 and five years?
-
but it would cover whoever leaked it to the leaker. just follow the leak back to the person with a security clearance.
-
So I read both (a) and (b) to try and discern a difference in status between the two, and couldn't find it. Why is one $50,000 and ten years, and the other is $25,000 and five years?
as I read it
person (a) has access to classified info naming the identity.
person (b) has acess to classified info and from that was able to figure out the identity.
-
During WWII... if Novak had printed any secret infomration, I think he would have been interrogated, charged, tried as an enemy agent and promply executed.
Just like the Rosenburgs.
Gawd, this country has changed...
No one denies the leak was illegal and it involved national security.
Everyone knows who the information was leaked to..
Again... why isn't the Bush Administration interrogating Novak?
-
Bush is holding Americans with out due process to fight the war on Terrorism. He's holding them in Cuba - off American Soil...
I wasn't aware of this. Can you provide information on American citizens, arrested on American soil, being held in Cuba? I really am curious.
Again... why isn't the Bush Administration interrogating Novak?
Again...
Do you know for a fact that they haven't?
sources please
-
Originally posted by DmdNexus
No one denies the leak was illegal and it involved national security.
You're wrong, Novak denies it. I haven't seen anyone say otherwise except a few blowhard politicians and rabid bbs posters.
-
Originally posted by Lazerus
I wasn't aware of this. Can you provide information on American citizens, arrested on American soil, being held in Cuba? I really am curious.
Again...
Sure can here's one American
http://www.freemikehawash.org/JACL-article.pdf
Here's an excerpt from teh Congressional record
http://www.fas.org/irp/congress/2003_cr/s071403.html
http://magic-city-news.com/article_208.shtml
I would find the full list of names... but I have a date tonight... and she's waiting impatiently
There are US born citizens detained in CUBA... with out the right to see their lawyer... they've been there for a year and a half...
no charges have been filed. they are not allowed to see or dispute the evidence the US Governemne (Bush administration) is using to hold them there.
AKiron
Novak said on CNN and Face the Nation several weeks ago that he did not know the information given to him was a secret.
Go to either one of these websites and search for Novak and CIA.
You'll get the full story.
Why do you research your facts before you say someone didn't say something... Isn't that right blowhard! :rofl :rofl
-
Novak is still contending it wasn't secret. Will you go on record as saying that you know for a fact she was a covert operative?
-
being held in Cuba?
Sure can here's one American
http://www.freemikehawash.org/JACL-article.pdf
Sorry bud, he's in Sherida, Oregon. Last I checked, that was outside the boundries of Cuba.
Bush is holding Americans with out due process to fight the war on Terrorism. He's holding them in Cuba - off American Soil...
While the example you gave is certainly a topic for speculation(discussion being ruled out because the facts are sealed by a court), it is definately not an example of what you claimed in your earlier post.
To date, the administration is holding three individuals within the
United States as enemy combatants, and close to 700 are being held at
the United States military base at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. In all cases,
these individuals are being held incommunicado, with no access to
counsel and no opportunity for judicial review.
Again, doesn't fulfill the accusation you made in your earlier post.
Most of these individuals were taken into custody in Afghanistan
or Pakistan and are alleged to have been engaged in action against
United States troops. At least a few of those held as enemy combatants
are citizens of allied countries.
No US citizens mentioned here either.
At least
one, Jose Padilla, is a U.S. citizen being held in South Carolina.
Another, Ali Saleh Kahlah Al-Marri, is a citizen of Qatar and had been
scheduled to go on trial this month in Illinois on charges of lying to
the FBI. With the trial date approaching last month, the Justice
Department removed him from the court system and jailed him in a Navy
brig in South Carolina.
Seems this is another example of a US citizen being held in the US.
Opinion
Found that at the top of your third link. I think there is enough of that going around.
There are US born citizens detained in CUBA... with out the right to see their lawyer... they've been there for a year and a half...
I would find the full list of names... but
But you can't.
The question as to how you know Novak isn't being questioned is still hanging out there too.
Still curious.