Some leaks are different than others
By wmoriarty Posted in User Blogs — Comments (13) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
To listen to the left, you would think that Valerie Plame, her family, and anybody she worked with while in the CIA is in grave danger because of "the leak". As it happens, this narrative conflicts directly with (sarcasm alert) notorious GOP hack Bob Woodward's assertion that the CIA has found that the publication of Ms. Plame's name did "quite minimal damage" and "there was no physical danger to anyone, just some embarassment." Even an article that lefties seem to think shoots down Woodward's assertion cites intelligence pros as believing that "there is no indication that...the risk of anyone's life...resulted from her outing." (The article seems to suggest that an "informal" damage assessment has been conducted by the CIA to find out what damage the leak did.)
So basically, it turns out that the leak that has consumed Washington probably didn't do the kind of damage left-wing hyperbolists would have us believe. However, who knows if the same can be said for "that other leak"? In case you haven't heard, the Washington Post recently reported on a network of secret CIA prisons in Eastern Europe. Now, if the prisons are secret, doesn't it follow that the WaPo may well have gotten the story via...a leak? And these prisons, I would guess, are staffed by people working undercover for the CIA right now, as opposed to well over five years ago.
To borrow a phrase, where's the outrage, from everyone...left, right, center, whatever, about the leak of the existence of secret CIA prisons? Certainly this situation is an "outing" at least as serious as that of Valerie Plame. Could it be that the Bush-haters, the "neo-con" bashers, and the raging moonbats just don't care about any leak that can be construed to make Chimpy McHitlerburton look bad? Or am I just overly cynical about the motives of the Angry Left?
By the way, I'm glad to see that Andrew Sullivan, a critic of the Bush administration's detention policies, has at least acknowledged the possible existence of a leak in the secret prison story. Unfortuantely, he seems none too concerned about the leak, though:
THEY STILL DON'T GET IT: Secret CIA prisons are now licensed to torture detainees in former Soviet camps in Eastern Europe. And Frist and Hastert are more concerned about punishing the leak than stopping the torture? It's good to know they have their moral priorities straight, isn't it?
OK, I'll admit it- finding out who leaked information that may endanger the lives of "clandestine soldiers of the republic" (Bill Buckley's wonderful phrase to refer to CIA agents, found in the last sentence of this piece) is more important to me than making sure detained jihadists don't go through sleep deprivation, or water-boarding, or whatever (I must confess I don't really care about the well-being of captured terrorists as much as Sullivan tells me I should). If that's misplaced moral priorites, then I plead guilty, and am proud to do so.
But regardless of Sullivan...am I right to see a double standard here reagrding leaks (i.e. the elite media and the Angry Left only get upset about ones that can be made to hurt Bush), or am I just being a paranoid right-wing nutcase?
So the investigation of this leak might turn up a Republican as the guilty party. I'm fine with that, and I hope anybody who illegally leaked classified info is properly punished, I don't care if they're an R or a D.
The point of my post wasn't really that one party or another has a greater respect for classified information. My point was that there does not seem to be nearly as much irateness about this situation as there was about the Plame affair, leading me to believe that the outrage we heard from elite media/liberals in the latter case was entirely fake.
then said Republican congresscritter should be perp-walked down the steps of the Capitol - preferably in leg-irons.
Same goes for any guilty parties from the other side of the aisle.
Fair enough?
The Rule of Law is what this country is based on and anyone who commits a crime should be punished.
"What is happening in these camps is illegal," said Saenen. "You cannot just arrest people without trail, transport them halfway across the globe and not give them access to a lawyer. Even terrorist suspects are guaranteed basic rights -- such as the right not to be tortured."
Members of the European Parliament, who have been highly critical of incidents of abuse of prisoners in Iraq, Afghanistan and Guantanamo Bay by U.S. troops, are also up in arms about the charges. "It is deeply disturbing that European countries are involved in acts that are illegal under international law and the European Convention on Human Rights," said Claude Moraes, a British legislator from Prime Minister Tony Blair's governing Labor Party. Calling on the U.K. presidency of the European Union to look into the claims, Moraes said: "No EU member state should be let off the hook when the club's moral code is breached and when there is prima facie of malpractice occurring."
Pressed on whether the existence of such camps would contravene EU law, Roscam Abbing added: "As far as the treatment of prisoners is concerned ... it is clear that all 25 member states, having signed up to European Convention on Human Rights and to the International Convention Against Torture, are due to respect and fully implement the obligations deriving from those treaties.
=
But this is even more disconcerting than the lack of interest in the leak -- there is going to be an investigation by the European Union?
UPI is reporting the following:
==
BRUSSELS, Nov. 3 (UPI) -- Allegations that the Central Intelligence Agency is running prison camps for suspected al-Qaida terrorists in Eastern Europe have sparked howls of protest from EU legislators and human rights groups, but strenuous denials from politicians in Poland -- one of the countries said to host the secret jails.
* * *
* * *
The European Commission waded into the rapidly escalating transatlantic row Thursday, pledging to investigate the allegations. "I don't think we have such things as secret prisons in the European Union, fortunately," spokesman Friso Roscam Abbing told reporters.
=
I tried what it says below the box here...but I get errors...I'll learn...
If the leak came from GOP senators, isn't it odd that every one of the sources cited in the Washington Post article (link provided in diary) is described as an "intelligence official", "foreign intelligence official", "CIA agent", or "CIA official."
Did I miss the elections where Republicans filled all their Senate seats with former spies and foreign intelligence officials?
It doesn't seem to add up. The actual article looks a bit deeper then something that came from a Republican lunch meeting. It would be interesting to know why Lott said what he said.
is an idiot who frequently engages his big, fat pie-hole before fully ramping-up his underpowered cranium. See Thurmond, Strom.
That he also appears to be sliding into media whoredome doesn't help matters, either.
If I had to guess, the reason Lott sometimes goes out of his way to be a thorn in the side of the administration is that he's still bitter about getting tossed from his post as Majority Leader. (Of course, Bill Frist, though he seems like a good guy, hasn't exactly done a great job since taking over.)
If it were up to me, I'd take Frist out of his job and put in either Sen. Cornyn, Sen. Coleman or Sen. Allen as leader. Actually, anyone with more poliical sense than Frist or Lott would do, but as it happens Cornyn, Coleman, and Allen are my favorite GOP senators and being the Senate Majority leader would certainly help any of those three who may have ideas about 2008.
But is there a specific target to this statement? Does he know who it might be and it trying to clue in the press, or is he falsly saying it to reflect badly on Frist even if it does prove false?
Today on CNN, Trent Lott said in an interview that the leak came from a GOP senator.
link