Jump to content


Classified information Leak Probes to expand


  • Please log in to reply
97 replies to this topic

#1 JBSF

JBSF

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 30,872 posts
  • Interests:Racing, diving, cycling, flying, pussy, shooting and any other action sports.

Posted 09 June 2012 - 06:37 AM

Its pretty bad if demcRATs are getting upset now..... Sad that this is about the only thing we can find any bipartisan agreement on in DC

Top Democrats and Republicans today demanded an end to leaks of classified intelligence because, they said, the leaks are putting lives at risk and jeopardizing future operations.

This afternoon, the senior Democrats on the House and Senate intelligence committees joined together with Republicans to denounce a recent flood of national security leaks about U.S. covert actions in counterterrorism and espionage, and to announce their collective effort to investigate the recurring issue of classified information being disclosed in the media.

Earlier this week, the FBI has opened a leak investigation into the disclosures in the New York Times last week that President Obama ordered the intelligence community to speed up cyber-attacks against Iran with the Stuxnet worm, according to federal law enforcement officials. In recent weeks, there have also been stories about the President’s “kill list” of al Qaeda drone targets and another about the double agent who helped the U.S. foil the latest attempted al Qaeda attack on a U.S. airline.

Rep. Dutch Ruppersberger, the top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, called recent leaks “one of the most serious of breaches” that he has seen in 10 years sitting on the committee.

It puts us at risk. It puts lives at risk,” said Ruppersberger, D-Md. “It hurts us in recruiting assets that give us intelligence information that will allow us to protect our citizens, to work through issues that are so important to the whole issue of peace throughout the world and how we protect our citizens throughout the world.”

Read the rest here....




#2 JBSF

JBSF

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 30,872 posts
  • Interests:Racing, diving, cycling, flying, pussy, shooting and any other action sports.

Posted 09 June 2012 - 06:41 AM

THIS is the REAL root of the problem......From the same article:


“Leaks are part of the nature of this town." [Sen Saxby Chambliss R-GA]



#3 Tom Ray

Tom Ray

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 25,780 posts
  • Location:Punta Gorda FL
  • Interests:~~/)/)~~

Posted 09 June 2012 - 09:45 AM

Just so we're clear on what the problem in that town is...

In December of 2010, Agent Brian Terry was killed and people in our government learned that guns "walked" in the Fast and Furious program were found at the scene. They had complained about the idiotic program in various ways, to no effect, and this was the straw that broke the camel's back.

They leaked information about government tactics in that program to various politicians and media. That was against the law and might have compromised ongoing operations. I still think we should all thank them for doing it.

#4 Mike G

Mike G

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,286 posts
  • Location:Ventura County, CA

Posted 09 June 2012 - 02:13 PM

Guns didn't kill Agent Terry, people killed Agent Terry.

#5 TMSAIL

TMSAIL

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,170 posts
  • Location:NW Chicago/Des Plaines

Posted 09 June 2012 - 06:30 PM

Already started a thread on this. The usual suspects have decided that it was no big deal.

#6 Sol Rosenberg

Sol Rosenberg

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 51,132 posts
  • Location:Earth

Posted 09 June 2012 - 06:39 PM

Already started a thread on this. The usual suspects have decided that it was no big deal.

Who said that? I tried to participate in it, but cannot get an answer, yet.

#7 kmccabe

kmccabe

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 22,881 posts
  • Location:Belly of the Beast.

Posted 09 June 2012 - 07:02 PM

Its pretty bad if demcRATs are getting upset now..... Sad that this is about the only thing we can find any bipartisan agreement on in DC

Top Democrats and Republicans today demanded an end to leaks of classified intelligence because, they said, the leaks are putting lives at risk and jeopardizing future operations.

This afternoon, the senior Democrats on the House and Senate intelligence committees joined together with Republicans to denounce a recent flood of national security leaks about U.S. covert actions in counterterrorism and espionage, and to announce their collective effort to investigate the recurring issue of classified information being disclosed in the media.

Earlier this week, the FBI has opened a leak investigation into the disclosures in the New York Times last week that President Obama ordered the intelligence community to speed up cyber-attacks against Iran with the Stuxnet worm, according to federal law enforcement officials. In recent weeks, there have also been stories about the President’s “kill list” of al Qaeda drone targets and another about the double agent who helped the U.S. foil the latest attempted al Qaeda attack on a U.S. airline.

Rep. Dutch Ruppersberger, the top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, called recent leaks “one of the most serious of breaches” that he has seen in 10 years sitting on the committee.

It puts us at risk. It puts lives at risk,” said Ruppersberger, D-Md. “It hurts us in recruiting assets that give us intelligence information that will allow us to protect our citizens, to work through issues that are so important to the whole issue of peace throughout the world and how we protect our citizens throughout the world.”

Read the rest here....


So why would the White House leak this stuff - I don't get it... its an election year I know - but what would they have to gain...

#8 Sol Rosenberg

Sol Rosenberg

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 51,132 posts
  • Location:Earth

Posted 09 June 2012 - 07:16 PM

I'll ask the question posed in the other thread. What leak was made, by whom and when?

Without knowing the particulars, this is just another circle jerk. Not that I would tell y'all not to squirt each other if you are so inclined, but the fantasy stuff ain't my thing.

So far, it's stuxnet, which the NYT wrote about in January of 2011, hardly an election year thumb sucker, and the kill list, which is an absolutely shocking revelation, given the number of Al Q folks that keep turning up dead.

So which leak put us at risk, when was it made, and by whom? Applying the Dog/Plame standard, nothing has happened.

#9 Remodel

Remodel

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,388 posts
  • Location:None
  • Interests:Sailboat racing and long distance cruising

Posted 09 June 2012 - 09:02 PM

I'll ask the question posed in the other thread. What leak was made, by whom and when?

Without knowing the particulars, this is just another circle jerk. Not that I would tell y'all not to squirt each other if you are so inclined, but the fantasy stuff ain't my thing.

So far, it's stuxnet, which the NYT wrote about in January of 2011, hardly an election year thumb sucker, and the kill list, which is an absolutely shocking revelation, given the number of Al Q folks that keep turning up dead.

So which leak put us at risk, when was it made, and by whom? Applying the Dog/Plame standard, nothing has happened.


That is, until it is revealed that a DemocRat did the leaking. Then the dog chorus will be in fine and full voice.

#10 Bull Gator

Bull Gator

    Anarchist

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 29,280 posts

Posted 09 June 2012 - 09:17 PM

Focus is on the pentagon and CIA. I'd guess CIA with that little shit pretraeus in charge. It's not the kind of thing panetta would tolerate (presuming either knew about it)

#11 Olsonist

Olsonist

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,182 posts
  • Location:Oakland, CA

Posted 09 June 2012 - 09:37 PM

I'll ask the question posed in the other thread. What leak was made, by whom and when?

Without knowing the particulars, this is just another circle jerk. Not that I would tell y'all not to squirt each other if you are so inclined, but the fantasy stuff ain't my thing.

So far, it's stuxnet, which the NYT wrote about in January of 2011, hardly an election year thumb sucker, and the kill list, which is an absolutely shocking revelation, given the number of Al Q folks that keep turning up dead.

So which leak put us at risk, when was it made, and by whom? Applying the Dog/Plame standard, nothing has happened.

I think that Stuxnet got detected by Kaspersky so it probably wasn't really a leak per se. It was kind of like the Twitter dude tweeting during the OBL takedown. It was always going to come out.

The other big leak was the Yemeni bomber mole. I'm convinced at this point that was a CIA leak.

Anyone who justifies the Plame leak is an asshole.

#12 Mark K

Mark K

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 36,190 posts

Posted 09 June 2012 - 10:19 PM

They won't say, so we can only guess. By saying exactly what it was that has the entire Intell Committee upset, they would be confirming whatever it was.

Might be some little thing that was published in one paper that nobody thought much of. In WW2, a Springfield Ohio paper published an account of how we had broken the Japanese code just before the Battle of Midway. Since it was not a widely distributed paper, it was ignored, and the government quietly tracked down everybody and shut them up, and was careful to draw no attention to it by being outraged.

#13 JBSF

JBSF

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 30,872 posts
  • Interests:Racing, diving, cycling, flying, pussy, shooting and any other action sports.

Posted 10 June 2012 - 05:26 AM

I'll ask the question posed in the other thread. What leak was made, by whom and when?

Without knowing the particulars, this is just another circle jerk. Not that I would tell y'all not to squirt each other if you are so inclined, but the fantasy stuff ain't my thing.

So far, it's stuxnet, which the NYT wrote about in January of 2011, hardly an election year thumb sucker, and the kill list, which is an absolutely shocking revelation, given the number of Al Q folks that keep turning up dead.

So which leak put us at risk, when was it made, and by whom? Applying the Dog/Plame standard, nothing has happened.


Actually Sol, if you had bothered to read the article or even the snippet I post in the OP, it described three specific recent leaks.

Earlier this week, the FBI has opened a leak investigation into the disclosures in the New York Times last week that President Obama ordered the intelligence community to speed up cyber-attacks against Iran with the (1) Stuxnet worm, according to federal law enforcement officials. In recent weeks, there have also been stories about the (2) president's "kill list" of al Qaeda drone targets and another about the (3) double agent who helped the U.S. foil the latest attempted al Qaeda attack on a U.S. airline.

"It's not just an isolated incident, and that's what has brought us together. It seems to be a pattern that is growing worse and more frequent," Rogers said. "The severity of the leaks are serious."

.

And that's not even taking into account a lot of the operational details that came out right after the OBL raid including the Doc that is now sitting in a Pakistani jail right now because of these leaks.

I'm not going apply any motives to this, but when we leak sensitive data, we disclose methods, we disclose activities that put our intelligence officials and our military in a more dangerous position. It should not happen," Boehner said. "The administration should heed the advice of former Defense Secretary Bob Gates, when, after the bin Laden raid and a lot of details were coming out, he promptly went over to the White House and used some colorful language to try to stop any more leaks from occurring."

Seems the WH couldn't keep their fucking pieholes shut after the OBL raid.

The story also goes on to describe quite well HOW these leaks hurt US interests. In summary: leaks disclose sources and methods that enemies can use to their advantage, it puts lives at risk by exposing operations and assets, it hurts future or on-going ops and it ruins US credibility when recruiting assets that we can't protect them because we can't keep our mouth shut!

As to the who.... that's obviously what they're trying to find out.

#14 Olsonist

Olsonist

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,182 posts
  • Location:Oakland, CA

Posted 10 June 2012 - 06:23 AM

Iit isn't clear at all that the White House leaked any of these. Possibly with the kill list there might possibly be a political motive/win but even there I doubt it. The CIA has a reputation for leaking. I'd look there.

#15 Sol Rosenberg

Sol Rosenberg

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 51,132 posts
  • Location:Earth

Posted 10 June 2012 - 02:28 PM


I'll ask the question posed in the other thread. What leak was made, by whom and when?

Without knowing the particulars, this is just another circle jerk. Not that I would tell y'all not to squirt each other if you are so inclined, but the fantasy stuff ain't my thing.

So far, it's stuxnet, which the NYT wrote about in January of 2011, hardly an election year thumb sucker, and the kill list, which is an absolutely shocking revelation, given the number of Al Q folks that keep turning up dead.

So which leak put us at risk, when was it made, and by whom? Applying the Dog/Plame standard, nothing has happened.


Actually Sol, if you had bothered to read the article or even the snippet I post in the OP, it described three specific recent leaks.

Earlier this week, the FBI has opened a leak investigation into the disclosures in the New York Times last week that President Obama ordered the intelligence community to speed up cyber-attacks against Iran with the (1) Stuxnet worm, according to federal law enforcement officials. In recent weeks, there have also been stories about the (2) president's "kill list" of al Qaeda drone targets and another about the (3) double agent who helped the U.S. foil the latest attempted al Qaeda attack on a U.S. airline.

"It's not just an isolated incident, and that's what has brought us together. It seems to be a pattern that is growing worse and more frequent," Rogers said. "The severity of the leaks are serious."

.

And that's not even taking into account a lot of the operational details that came out right after the OBL raid including the Doc that is now sitting in a Pakistani jail right now because of these leaks.

I'm not going apply any motives to this, but when we leak sensitive data, we disclose methods, we disclose activities that put our intelligence officials and our military in a more dangerous position. It should not happen," Boehner said. "The administration should heed the advice of former Defense Secretary Bob Gates, when, after the bin Laden raid and a lot of details were coming out, he promptly went over to the White House and used some colorful language to try to stop any more leaks from occurring."

Seems the WH couldn't keep their fucking pieholes shut after the OBL raid.

The story also goes on to describe quite well HOW these leaks hurt US interests. In summary: leaks disclose sources and methods that enemies can use to their advantage, it puts lives at risk by exposing operations and assets, it hurts future or on-going ops and it ruins US credibility when recruiting assets that we can't protect them because we can't keep our mouth shut!

As to the who.... that's obviously what they're trying to find out.

You know there is another threadgoing on this, right? We've plowed a good bit of this field already.

Spilling sensitive info for political gain should be treated as treason. I think we can all agree on that. All I am saying is that I want to make sure that we are talking about something that actually did happen, and establishing the fact that something did indeed happen, before fast forwarding to the outrage phase. I have become jaded by the malarkey, in other words. The fact that the committee is making noise about it suggests to me that there is something there, not just political bullshit for the partytards (by taking stuff that we knew about for a long time, and claiming that it was leaked for election year purposes. So the question(s) (for me) become(s) what sensitive info was leaked (and when), and how does that make us less secure?

Stuxnet. First off, put that term in the search engine in the top right of this page, and you'll see that we've been talking about it for a while. Were we talking about US involvement long ago, or is this an election year topic? Well, AKA GP was talking about US involvement quite a ways back, November of 2011, to be exact. He refers to a NYT article from January of 2011, about US involvement in Stuxnet. http://www.nytimes.c...?pagewanted=all Here is the key part, in terms of US involvement:

Officially, neither American nor Israeli officials will even utter the name of the malicious computer program, much less describe any role in designing it.

But Israeli officials grin widely when asked about its effects. Mr. Obama’s chief strategist for combating weapons of mass destruction, Gary Samore, sidestepped a Stuxnet question at a recent conference about Iran, but added with a smile: “I’m glad to hear they are having troubles with their centrifuge machines, and the U.S. and its allies are doing everything we can to make it more complicated.”

In recent days, American officials who spoke on the condition of anonymity have said in interviews that they believe Iran’s setbacks have been underreported. That may explain why Mrs. Clinton provided her public assessment while traveling in the Middle East last week.

By the accounts of a number of computer scientists, nuclear enrichment experts and former officials, the covert race to create Stuxnet was a joint project between the Americans and the Israelis, with some help, knowing or unknowing, from the Germans and the British.


Sorry if I am tough to convince about a "leak" of information that the New York Times was writing about a year and a half ago, but I'm going to need more persuasion on that point. As it stands now, it sounds to me like someone is taking something we've known about for quite some time, and trying to paint is as an election year leak. Operationally, I am not too worried about having would-be noocular powers thinking "damn, homey, don't be fuckin with no noocular shit, or you'll have the US, Israel, Germany and the UK getting on the computer and fuckin your shit up, yo. shit be explodin right in front of yo face, dog!"

The speeding up of the time frame is a somewhat different issue. In one respect, it is a yawner, because I would expect the President to be calling the shots for a program like that. We've known about the program for a year and a half. Who do we think would be making decisions. On the other hand, if this program is ongoing, and I doubt that we would see democRATS on the oversight committee outraged about this stuff if it were not, then this could be sensitive information. That's why we have law enforcement, but I'm not sure we can trust a democRAT led Justice Department on this one. This one calls for a Special Prosecutor to determine whether secret info was leaked, whether the leak came from the White House, and if so, by whom. Operations and assets at risk? Hmm. If anything, I see it as a recruiting boon to attract the best and brightest nerds we can offer. We're talking computer games. I don't see people at risk any more than they are when flying computer flying devices to kill people on a kill list. Kill list? Holy shit, lets talk about that!

The kill list. How many AQ dickheads have wound up dead lately? A lot, right? Do you think that happened willy nilly? I would be shocked to find out that there was not a kill list. It would be like biting into a drumstick at KFC and thinking that they just threw some shit in the grease and it turned out tasting like it had eleven herbs and spices. Wait. They had a recipe for that? HOLY SHIT, stop the presses! Sorry, I will need to be educated as to how public knowledge that the people we keep killing were on a list puts us in danger.

The OBL raid details are the most pernicious of all, to me, specifically the Paki doctor. I am of the opinion that anyone who exposes a covert asset should be tried for treason and if convicted, introduced to publicly viewed capital punishment. The Paki doc case is the one I'd like to know about most. In terms of operational secrets, though... none were spilled.

I agree with Gates.

#16 benwynn

benwynn

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,016 posts

Posted 10 June 2012 - 04:20 PM

Stuxnet has been around a long time, with the program started under the GW Bush Admin. Iran was losing centrifuges to it, and the engineers did not know why, probably assuming faulty recycled equipment. This thing did it's job, and the secret was kept for years. Again, according to David E. Sanger, the author of "Confront and Conceal: Obama's Secret Wars and Surprising Use of American Power", it appears the program was not leaked. The worm got loose when it hitched onto an engineer's laptop, and the engineer then subsequently connected to the Internet.

#17 Olsonist

Olsonist

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,182 posts
  • Location:Oakland, CA

Posted 10 June 2012 - 04:47 PM

Sanger said he developed the story "from the bottom up" and only then went to the WH for comment:

http://m.networkworl...yberattack-iran

#18 badlatitude

badlatitude

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,172 posts
  • Location:Marina Del Rey, Ca.

Posted 10 June 2012 - 05:12 PM

Well it didn't take long for the usual suspects to start spewing shit:

The daughter of former Vice President Dick Cheney on Sunday suggested that President Barack Obama had personally authorized recent intelligence leaks.

On Friday, Attorney General Eric Holder appointed two U.S. attorneys to investigate leaks about details of drone attacks and special forces strikes. Critics have claimed that the White House disclosed the information to bolster the president’s re-election chances.

“The notion that my White House would purposely release classified national security information is offensive,” Obama told reporters during Friday press conference. “And people I think need to have a better sense of how I approach this office and how the people around me here approach this office.”

But Liz Cheney on Sunday insisted that the president himself could be the one behind the leaks.

“I’d like to see an independent investigation,” she told Fox News host Chris Wallace. “If you’ve got members of the national security team — which is what we know from reading [New York Times reporter] David Sanger’s piece, that’s what he says — giving him chapter and verse of what went on in these National Security Council meetings then somebody’s got to be held accountable for, you know, what is a betrayal to the nation.”

“I do think that it’s important — as Mike Rogers, chairman of the House intel committee, has said — that whoever is looking at this needs to be outside the chain of command so that you can be absolutely sure that it is followed to it’s conclusion,” she added. “And that may well be the president of the United States.”

“If the president of the United States has been authorizing people on his national security team to brief The New York Times about one of our most highly classified programs, the American people have a right to know.”

Former Vice President Dick Cheney’s then-chief of staff, I. Lewis “Scooter” Libby was convicted of perjury, obstruction of justice and lying to investigators in the probe of who leaked the identity of CIA operative Valerie Plame. The vice president pushed for a full pardon and then-President George W. Bush eventually commuted Libby’s 30-month prison sentence before he ever served a day in jail.

Many have assumed that Dick Cheney masterminded outing Plame to discredit her husband, former Ambassador Joseph C. Wilson IV, because he had cast doubt on the Bush administration’s rationale for war with Iraq. But the the vice president told prosecutors that “I don’t recall” telling Libby about Plame’s identity.


http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/06/10/liz-cheney-suggests-obama-personally-behind-intelligence-leaks/




#19 badlatitude

badlatitude

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,172 posts
  • Location:Marina Del Rey, Ca.

Posted 10 June 2012 - 05:20 PM

Yep, they got the storyline from headquarters, now they'll run with it

WASHINGTON -- Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) said on Sunday that "it's very clear" that recently leaked information about the government's national security strategy came from the Obama administration.

"It's obvious on its face that this information came from individuals who are in the administration," he told host Candy Crowley on CNN's "State of the Union." "The president may not have done it himself, but the president certainly is responsible as commander in chief."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/06/10/john-mccain-leaks-barack-obama_n_1584672.html




#20 Olsonist

Olsonist

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,182 posts
  • Location:Oakland, CA

Posted 10 June 2012 - 06:06 PM

Waterboard the bitch and find out what she knows. Waterboard McCain too but you'll have to work him over harder since he's experienced with resisting torture.

#21 Mark K

Mark K

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 36,190 posts

Posted 10 June 2012 - 06:12 PM

Whatever it was, it appears to have undermined the effort to go to war with Iran in some way.

#22 benwynn

benwynn

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,016 posts

Posted 10 June 2012 - 06:14 PM

Waterboard the bitch and find out what she knows. Waterboard McCain too but you'll have to work him over harder since he's experienced with resisting torture.


That brings up an interesting parallel on the disclosure of intel gathering tactics. When it happened under the prior administration, I don't recall the WH being blamed for leaking our hardline on terrorism suspects for the purposes of political gain. Rather, the focus was on the justification and moral implications of those tatics. Now when it happens under THIS adminstration, the focus is on blaming the adminstration for the disclosure, while the justification and moral implications are largely ignored.

John McCain remark real classy, btw.

#23 Olsonist

Olsonist

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,182 posts
  • Location:Oakland, CA

Posted 10 June 2012 - 06:23 PM

Whatever it was, it appears to have undermined the effort to go to war with Iran in some way.

Kinda completely disagree with that.

I listened to the Sanger interview on NPR. Sanger said the purpose of the Stuxnet program was the Bush felt he couldn't attack Iran both because we couldn't afford a third war and his WMD credibility was somewhat shot. Something was necessary and Stuxnet was that something.

Arguably if you don't have covert operations working to push back a nuclear armed Iran, war is more likely not less likely. Following this argument, the leak was more likely from Iran war hawks. There is this other country called Israel who was involved. And they have a lot of people who kinda fit that description including this guy Netenyahu.

Sanger also didn't say who it was but he did say who it wasn't. He said it wasn't the White House:

You know, in the case of Olympic Games, I spent a year working the story from the bottom up, and then went to the administration and told them what I had. Then they had to make some decisions about how much they wanted to talk about it. All that you read about this being deliberate leaks out of the White House wasn't my experience. Maybe it is in -- in other cases. I'm sure the political side of the White House probably likes reading about the President acting with drones and cyber and so forth. National security side has got very mixed emotions about it because these are classified programs.



#24 Olsonist

Olsonist

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,182 posts
  • Location:Oakland, CA

Posted 10 June 2012 - 06:24 PM

John McCain remark real classy, btw.

Sorry, but when Saint McCain accuses President Obama of essentially treason, he's open to that.

#25 benwynn

benwynn

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,016 posts

Posted 10 June 2012 - 06:50 PM


John McCain remark real classy, btw.

Sorry, but when Saint McCain accuses President Obama of essentially treason, he's open to that.


I consider making light of the personal hell that man went through to be inappropriate under any cicumstance, but that's just me.

#26 Mark K

Mark K

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 36,190 posts

Posted 10 June 2012 - 06:58 PM


Whatever it was, it appears to have undermined the effort to go to war with Iran in some way.

Kinda completely disagree with that.

I listened to the Sanger interview on NPR. Sanger said the purpose of the Stuxnet program was the Bush felt he couldn't attack Iran both because we couldn't afford a third war and his WMD credibility was somewhat shot. Something was necessary and Stuxnet was that something.

Arguably if you don't have covert operations working to push back a nuclear armed Iran, war is more likely not less likely. Following this argument, the leak was more likely from Iran war hawks. There is this other country called Israel who was involved. And they have a lot of people who kinda fit that description including this guy Netenyahu.

Sanger also didn't say who it was but he did say who it wasn't. He said it wasn't the White House:

You know, in the case of Olympic Games, I spent a year working the story from the bottom up, and then went to the administration and told them what I had. Then they had to make some decisions about how much they wanted to talk about it. All that you read about this being deliberate leaks out of the White House wasn't my experience. Maybe it is in -- in other cases. I'm sure the political side of the White House probably likes reading about the President acting with drones and cyber and so forth. National security side has got very mixed emotions about it because these are classified programs.


The war-mongers would have it that there is no option besides bombing. Successful ops hinder that. They would also like to paint Obama as not doing anything effective at all. His getting credit for doing something undermines their ability to get their guy in the WH.

#27 Olsonist

Olsonist

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,182 posts
  • Location:Oakland, CA

Posted 10 June 2012 - 10:23 PM

I agree with your first three sentences.

However, the lede story right now isn't that we successfully put a mole into AQ or that we set back the Iranian nuclear program or that we killed OBL. The story is that someone put out the mole story a few weeks early, that we did Stuxnet (duh), and that the CIA was too stupid to extract the doc after the failed vaccination op. Did I get anything wrong there? And according to according to Saint McCain all of these collossal failures reside at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. It would be nice if said Saint had a shred of evidence.

In the case of Stuxnet Sanger specifically said he got his information from the ground up and only then showed it to the WH. Further, this operation was run in parallel with the Israelies. Who don't like Obama. At all.

In the case of the Pakistani doctor it was a monumental CIA fuckup that he got left behind. CIA not White House.

In the case of the mole leak, where is the motive for the White House? Where is the evidence? The CIA leaks. We know that.

#28 Bull Gator

Bull Gator

    Anarchist

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 29,280 posts

Posted 10 June 2012 - 10:31 PM

As I have reasonably pointed out there is evidence that the doc refused our offer of extraction. Nonetheless less he is a rat face traitor who condemned several possibly hundreds of Pakistani children to polio he is where he belongs....

#29 Mark K

Mark K

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 36,190 posts

Posted 10 June 2012 - 11:53 PM

I agree with your first three sentences.

However, the lede story right now isn't that we successfully put a mole into AQ or that we set back the Iranian nuclear program or that we killed OBL. The story is that someone put out the mole story a few weeks early, that we did Stuxnet (duh), and that the CIA was too stupid to extract the doc after the failed vaccination op. Did I get anything wrong there? And according to according to Saint McCain all of these collossal failures reside at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. It would be nice if said Saint had a shred of evidence.

In the case of Stuxnet Sanger specifically said he got his information from the ground up and only then showed it to the WH. Further, this operation was run in parallel with the Israelies. Who don't like Obama. At all.

In the case of the Pakistani doctor it was a monumental CIA fuckup that he got left behind. CIA not White House.

In the case of the mole leak, where is the motive for the White House? Where is the evidence? The CIA leaks. We know that.



I be guessin', no doubt about it.

#30 Saorsa

Saorsa

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,885 posts

Posted 11 June 2012 - 01:26 AM

those expanding probes are the WORST.

#31 TMSAIL

TMSAIL

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,170 posts
  • Location:NW Chicago/Des Plaines

Posted 11 June 2012 - 02:32 AM

So did that water boarding everyone was up
In arms about a few years ago take place in the basement of 1600 Pennsylvania? Oh wait in that case it was the presidents responsibility. Just like Abu Graib was Bush's fault because the buck stops with the boss. What a difference the letter after the presidents name can be when assigning responsibility

#32 JBSF

JBSF

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 30,872 posts
  • Interests:Racing, diving, cycling, flying, pussy, shooting and any other action sports.

Posted 11 June 2012 - 08:05 AM

Let's get something clear for both of the teams here...... I'm outraged that these leaks are happening whether they were intentionall or unintentionally leaked or not. It matters not to me if some CIA guy told his girlfriend over pillow talk one night or Obama himself phoned up the NYT to break a story..... the fact of the matter is disclosing classified information is harmful regardless of the motives or intent of the people or how long it has been supposedly "known" about. Just because the most obvious players in Stuxnet were the US and Israel - it doesn't fucking mean we have to confirm it for the Iranians. Its NOT just "duh". Sometimes the confirmation of a "commonly understood" rumor has intelligence value all its own.

Interestingly, we were pretty damn good back in the cold war where it was assumed there was a Soviet spy behind every tree. Hell, now we just publish it in the WaPo to make foreign intelligence officer's jobs that much easier.

And for those of you (Sol) that say, "well.... really, not that many operational details were revealed". The problem with that statement is that on the surface, it may seem benign to say that a team of 18 SEAL TEAM 6 operators fast-roped into a compound....blah, blah, blah.... and they were out in 34 min from the word go..... A good intelligence operator can take that snippet, put it together with all the shit from wikileaks and all the other shit that is floating out there in the ether and paint a pretty damn detailed picture of sources and methods. And then with some fairly easy detective work, analyzing patterns and putting other pieces of the puzzle together - you just told the enemy how we operate and maybe even who the mole is inside their organization.

#33 Sol Rosenberg

Sol Rosenberg

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 51,132 posts
  • Location:Earth

Posted 11 June 2012 - 09:18 AM

Where did I say that?

#34 Olsonist

Olsonist

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,182 posts
  • Location:Oakland, CA

Posted 11 June 2012 - 12:47 PM

If you want to deal with leaks, you deal with them quietly. Track down the leakers quietly. Still, we will have leaks. They are, to a certain degree, a price we pay for an open society.

But the sturm und drang going on right now is not NOT about the leaks. When you have Senator McBlowhard weighing forth on the Sunday talk shows, this is NOT about the leaks.

And it isn't as if Senator McBlowhard doesn't leak:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mobileweb/2008/07/18/mccain-leaks-details-of-o_n_113682.html

#35 Saorsa

Saorsa

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,885 posts

Posted 11 June 2012 - 12:54 PM

If you want to deal with leaks, you deal with them quietly. Track down the leakers quietly. Still, we will have leaks. They are, to a certain degree, a price we pay for an open society.

But the sturm und drang going on right now is not NOT about the leaks. When you have Senator McBlowhard weighing forth on the Sunday talk shows, this is NOT about the leaks.

And it isn't as if Senator McBlowhard doesn't leak:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mobileweb/2008/07/18/mccain-leaks-details-of-o_n_113682.html

I think this is somebody getting spanked.

As to Obama making the decision, I suspect that somewhere around the DOD is a file cabinet with presidential findings that an operation is deemed necessary in spite of some little technicality like killing american citizens without a trial.

#36 JBSF

JBSF

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 30,872 posts
  • Interests:Racing, diving, cycling, flying, pussy, shooting and any other action sports.

Posted 11 June 2012 - 01:13 PM

Where did I say that?


Post #15. 2nd to last sentence.

In terms of operational secrets, though... none were spilled.



#37 Sol Rosenberg

Sol Rosenberg

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 51,132 posts
  • Location:Earth

Posted 11 June 2012 - 01:36 PM


Where did I say that?


Post #15. 2nd to last sentence.

In terms of operational secrets, though... none were spilled.

The article I linked said "None ", not "not many."

"Operational secrets" are what we are worried about, are they not?

#38 JBSF

JBSF

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 30,872 posts
  • Interests:Racing, diving, cycling, flying, pussy, shooting and any other action sports.

Posted 11 June 2012 - 02:35 PM

The article I linked said "None ", not "not many."

"Operational secrets" are what we are worried about, are they not?


Actually sol, I was being generous to you when I said "not many" and I was using you as one specific example because others have said or implied: "what's the big deal".

And your assertion that none were spilled comes from this one sentence that was put in parens as an afterthought????

(In fact, it appears no real secrets were divulged.)

Appears to who? The reporter? And he would know how? Given that Mullen (I assume he's referring to Adm Mike Mullen, CJCS at the time) was still furious about the press conference a year later - I'd say that might be a pretty damn good indication of what was spilled and what wasn't. If nothing was spilled, why did Gates feel the need to go to the WH and tell them to STFU?

Sorry, I don't take a reporter's assessment of operational secrets as gospel.

#39 Olsonist

Olsonist

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,182 posts
  • Location:Oakland, CA

Posted 11 June 2012 - 02:46 PM

If you recall, we left a smoldering operational detail on the ground. And there were if I recall correctly a few witnesses, one with a Twitter acct.

The real reason this is in the news at all is Republican pushback.

#40 A_guy_in_the_Chesapeake

A_guy_in_the_Chesapeake

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,459 posts
  • Location:Virginia

Posted 11 June 2012 - 02:46 PM



Where did I say that?


Post #15. 2nd to last sentence.

In terms of operational secrets, though... none were spilled.

The article I linked said "None ", not "not many."

"Operational secrets" are what we are worried about, are they not?


Operational Security doesn't necessarily imply that every detail of the operation is a secret - but, that unclassified details improperly divulged can be collected and aggregated to provide insight to our plans & methods that we (the US) would prefer our opponents to not have.

#41 Olsonist

Olsonist

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,182 posts
  • Location:Oakland, CA

Posted 11 June 2012 - 02:50 PM

Embedding reporters is bad. Sometimes.

#42 TMSAIL

TMSAIL

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,170 posts
  • Location:NW Chicago/Des Plaines

Posted 11 June 2012 - 03:17 PM

BY CHRISTINA HARTMAN



Was it an over-share of epic national security proportions?

Critics say Obama administration officials jeopardized national security by working too closely with the producers of an upcoming movie about the raid that killed Osama bin Laden.

First, here’s WUPW with the headline:

“Conservative watchdog group Judicial Watch says it’s obtained documents that indicate the CIA and Defense Department gave the filmmakers special access including a tour of the CIA’s model of the bin Laden compound...”

Other access, according to those documents, include access to a “planner, operator and commander of SEAL Team 6.”

Kathryn Bigelow, best known for her Academy Award-winning film “The Hurt Locker,” is directing the upcoming film in question.

Conservatives are raising eyebrows over the level of access new documents suggest she might have gotten. Politico’s Josh Gerstein says...

“The documents ... show the White House and the CIA also rolled out the welcome mat for the filmmakers. … CIA officials seemed aware that cooperating with Boal was in some tension with the government’s public line that it was trying to crack down on leaks.”

But White House officials say all the same information was given to the press corps. Fox’s Ed Henry doesn’t seem to be buying it.

“The White House press corps got a lot of information about the bin Laden raid but the administration never made Navy SEAL planners available to us. And I’ve never gotten an invite over to the CIA’s vault.”

The vault Henry’s referring to is a CIA building where some of the planning took place. Pentagon officials say the building was empty when the producers visited. But on MSNBC, a different take from the network’s Jim Miklashevski.

“But anybody at that level connected to SEAL Team 6 would have been a highly, tightly-held secret. And quite frankly, some of us reporters here at the Pentagon were a little jealous they had that access.”

Pentagon Press Secretary George Little says the meeting with the raid’s planner never ended up happening — and that the Defense Department regularly engages filmmakers with the goal of making them “as realistic as possible.” Politico reports, the Pentagon’s Inspector General says an investigation is underway into what was disclosed by Defense Department officials.

#43 badlatitude

badlatitude

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,172 posts
  • Location:Marina Del Rey, Ca.

Posted 11 June 2012 - 03:18 PM

If you recall, we left a smoldering operational detail on the ground. And there were if I recall correctly a few witnesses, one with a Twitter acct.

The real reason this is in the news at all is Republican pushback.


When a person gives criticism nearly 100% of the time and little or no praise, most of his criticism can be disregarded. For McCain to use the term "taking some responsibility" is complete irony. If you recall, during the 2008 campaign McCain stated that he knew where Osama Bin Laden was hiding and would get him if elected president. So, telling OBL that we know where you are, and informing the world that an operation will be shortly activated is not worthy of investigation? This is the best kind of hypocrisy, Obama is untouchable in matters of National Security, this is just a partisan attempt to make the president look bad prior to an election. McCain should go and take a nap now, Maybe when he wakes up Sarah will take him back.

#44 TMSAIL

TMSAIL

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,170 posts
  • Location:NW Chicago/Des Plaines

Posted 11 June 2012 - 03:30 PM

I agree with your first three sentences.

However, the lede story right now isn't that we successfully put a mole into AQ or that we set back the Iranian nuclear program or that we killed OBL. The story is that someone put out the mole story a few weeks early, that we did Stuxnet (duh), and that the CIA was too stupid to extract the doc after the failed vaccination op. Did I get anything wrong there? And according to according to Saint McCain all of these collossal failures reside at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. It would be nice if said Saint had a shred of evidence.

In the case of Stuxnet Sanger specifically said he got his information from the ground up and only then showed it to the WH. Further, this operation was run in parallel with the Israelies. Who don't like Obama. At all.

In the case of the Pakistani doctor it was a monumental CIA fuckup that he got left behind. CIA not White House.

In the case of the mole leak, where is the motive for the White House? Where is the evidence? The CIA leaks. We know that.

The Motive is very simple The only area that Obama is polling high in is Foreign Policy, any political adviser would advise playing to your strengths.

Jan Schakowsky (one of the most Liberal members of congress) was on the radio this morning. She stated quite clearly that the leaks had to come from a very small group of people that were with the president at the meetings. She is one partisan lady and for her to say that tells me that it is extremely serious and even the most partisan congress person is putting national security ahead of Obama's campaign.

#45 Me too

Me too

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 200 posts

Posted 11 June 2012 - 03:47 PM

Who would come out in favor of leaks?

#46 badlatitude

badlatitude

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,172 posts
  • Location:Marina Del Rey, Ca.

Posted 11 June 2012 - 04:07 PM

Who would come out in favor of leaks?


People who want to hold their government accountable and know that everything the government does is not necessarily moral, legal, or justified.

#47 Saorsa

Saorsa

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,885 posts

Posted 11 June 2012 - 04:10 PM


Who would come out in favor of leaks?


People who want to hold their government accountable and know that everything the government does is not necessarily moral, legal, or justified.

Or, people who like to shoot of their mouth to show how important they are.

#48 badlatitude

badlatitude

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,172 posts
  • Location:Marina Del Rey, Ca.

Posted 11 June 2012 - 04:11 PM



Who would come out in favor of leaks?


People who want to hold their government accountable and know that everything the government does is not necessarily moral, legal, or justified.

Or, people who like to shoot of their mouth to show how important they are.


Ain't that the truth.

#49 Olsonist

Olsonist

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,182 posts
  • Location:Oakland, CA

Posted 11 June 2012 - 04:33 PM

Who would come out in favor of leaks?

Good question. Perhaps you should ask John McCain. We know he leaks.

#50 Olsonist

Olsonist

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,182 posts
  • Location:Oakland, CA

Posted 11 June 2012 - 04:35 PM




Who would come out in favor of leaks?


People who want to hold their government accountable and know that everything the government does is not necessarily moral, legal, or justified.

Or, people who like to shoot of their mouth to show how important they are.


Ain't that the truth.

Like Stanley McChrystal giving an interview in fucking Rolling Stone. Dude is a special ops general; you'd think he felt good enough about himself.

#51 TMSAIL

TMSAIL

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,170 posts
  • Location:NW Chicago/Des Plaines

Posted 11 June 2012 - 04:53 PM





Who would come out in favor of leaks?


People who want to hold their government accountable and know that everything the government does is not necessarily moral, legal, or justified.

Or, people who like to shoot of their mouth to show how important they are.


Ain't that the truth.

Like Stanley McChrystal giving an interview in fucking Rolling Stone. Dude is a special ops general; you'd think he felt good enough about himself.

Leaking security INTEL had nothing to do with the uproar that caused his resignation. It was his comments about Obama and Biden that landed him in hot water. Talk about a straw man.

#52 Me too

Me too

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 200 posts

Posted 11 June 2012 - 04:57 PM

McCain was in the Hanoi Hilton any idea what that was like? Leaking classified information that would get people killed or damage our national intetest is not in his nature.

#53 badlatitude

badlatitude

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,172 posts
  • Location:Marina Del Rey, Ca.

Posted 11 June 2012 - 05:08 PM

McCain was in the Hanoi Hilton any idea what that was like? Leaking classified information that would get people killed or damage our national intetest is not in his nature.


Didn't McCain leak information while in the Hanoi Hilton or was that confession just propaganda?

#54 Me too

Me too

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 200 posts

Posted 11 June 2012 - 05:27 PM

Do you have any idea what they did to you in the Hanoi Hilton. Do a little research to keep from looking like an idiot. They all broke or died at some point.

#55 badlatitude

badlatitude

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,172 posts
  • Location:Marina Del Rey, Ca.

Posted 11 June 2012 - 05:32 PM

Do you have any idea what they did to you in the Hanoi Hilton. Do a little research to keep from looking like an idiot. They all broke or died at some point.


McCain leaked information I cannot say if people were killed because of it, or if national security was damaged, McCain blocked release of that information as a Senator. You said it was not in his nature I just wanted to show you that it was.

#56 Olsonist

Olsonist

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,182 posts
  • Location:Oakland, CA

Posted 11 June 2012 - 05:47 PM

Whatever McCain said in Hanoi means nothing. But he did leak Obama's pending Iraq trip.

http://www.huffingto...o_n_113682.html

Period. Dude runs his mouth off every Sunday as nauseum.

As for McChrystal, who I admire, my point was not that he leaked but that he bothered to talk to the press at all. This need to see his name in print means nothing in comparison to who he is. It would be like Michael Jordan settling a grade school score; what would be the point?

#57 Me too

Me too

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 200 posts

Posted 11 June 2012 - 05:51 PM

You are going to need a better cite than the Huffing ton Puffingtoon Post.

#58 Olsonist

Olsonist

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,182 posts
  • Location:Oakland, CA

Posted 11 June 2012 - 05:59 PM

Actually, I don't.

#59 badlatitude

badlatitude

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,172 posts
  • Location:Marina Del Rey, Ca.

Posted 11 June 2012 - 06:03 PM

You are going to need a better cite than the Huffing ton Puffingtoon Post.


It must be very claustrophobic in that head of yours. It is a wonder that you ever came out of the trees at all. Let me explain it to you. You see the Huffington post which you apparently dislike, won a Pulitzer prize just last April. It also rates among the most highly read sites on the internet. So if you were to actually understand that it is a responsible news site and not a left wing hole of disinformation you might actually learn something.




#60 VwaP

VwaP

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,242 posts
  • Location:Sunny South Florida
  • Interests:Private investigator by day party gurl by night

Posted 11 June 2012 - 06:08 PM

You are going to need a better cite than the Huffing ton Puffingtoon Post.


Posted Image

#61 Me too

Me too

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 200 posts

Posted 11 June 2012 - 06:19 PM

It is just a fact that the Huffiton Post was established as a left leaning website. Nothing wrong with that but don't sourse it as though it were mainstream because it isn't.

#62 badlatitude

badlatitude

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,172 posts
  • Location:Marina Del Rey, Ca.

Posted 11 June 2012 - 06:32 PM

It is just a fact that the Huffiton Post was established as a left leaning website. Nothing wrong with that but don't sourse it as though it were mainstream because it isn't.


You start winning Pulitzers you become mainstream.

#63 Me too

Me too

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 200 posts

Posted 11 June 2012 - 06:52 PM

I think it was only one. Read it if you like but it is still a biased site.

#64 Tom Ray

Tom Ray

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 25,780 posts
  • Location:Punta Gorda FL
  • Interests:~~/)/)~~

Posted 11 June 2012 - 07:17 PM

Who would come out in favor of leaks?


Me.

#65 Me too

Me too

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 200 posts

Posted 11 June 2012 - 08:20 PM

You would be OK with our agents getting killed so you can know what they were doing to protect your sorry ass?

#66 A_guy_in_the_Chesapeake

A_guy_in_the_Chesapeake

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,459 posts
  • Location:Virginia

Posted 11 June 2012 - 08:30 PM

Actually, I don't.


That - in and of itself, says much...

#67 JBSF

JBSF

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 30,872 posts
  • Interests:Racing, diving, cycling, flying, pussy, shooting and any other action sports.

Posted 11 June 2012 - 08:46 PM


Didn't McCain leak information while in the Hanoi Hilton or was that confession just propaganda?


Do a little research to keep from looking like an idiot.


Too late! Posted Image

#68 Olsonist

Olsonist

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,182 posts
  • Location:Oakland, CA

Posted 11 June 2012 - 08:51 PM

You would be OK with our agents getting killed so you can know what they were doing to protect your sorry ass?

There are three leaks we're talking about:

(1) the OBL takedown. He dead. His son, he dead too. Deal with it.

(2) Stuxnet. It worked. Deal with it.

(3) the Yemeni mole. We killed a few AQ. Sorry about that.

The reason y'all are yacking about these 'leaks' is that you don't want to give Obama credit. Fine. Don't.

But OBL is still dead, the Iranians have been set back and a bunch of AQ are pushing daisies.

Deal with it.

#69 Me too

Me too

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 200 posts

Posted 11 June 2012 - 09:14 PM

1. OBL is dead but the doc that helped us get him is in jail because we could not stfu.

2. Stuxnet started under Bush continud by O. Would have been more effective to keep them guessing.

3. Yemnni double agent outed. Not so easy to get another double in AQ.

#70 badlatitude

badlatitude

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,172 posts
  • Location:Marina Del Rey, Ca.

Posted 11 June 2012 - 09:30 PM

1. OBL is dead but the doc that helped us get him is in jail because we could not structure.

2. Stuxnet started under Bush contact by O. Would have been more effective to keep them guessing.

3. Ye mini double agent outed. Not so easy to get another double in AQ.


1. OBL is dead period. Collateral damage is unfortunate.

2. How long did you believe Stuxnet would be operational before even the dumbest Iranian figured it out?

3. Couple of things here, the agent was doomed to be outed unless you expected him to remain silent and blow up the airplane to keep his credibility.
While operational security is important, the fact that we are in Yemen and elsewhere should be a matter of public discussion unless you think the president should do whatever he wants to do, whenever he wants.

#71 Me too

Me too

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 200 posts

Posted 11 June 2012 - 09:48 PM

3 This was a CIA open. CIA goes wherever they have to to protect national interest.

#72 badlatitude

badlatitude

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,172 posts
  • Location:Marina Del Rey, Ca.

Posted 11 June 2012 - 10:08 PM

3 This was a CIA open. CIA goes wherever they have to to protect national interest.


That's a good line if you're one of the Avengers and live in a Marvel comic book.

#73 Sol Rosenberg

Sol Rosenberg

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 51,132 posts
  • Location:Earth

Posted 11 June 2012 - 11:05 PM

Investigate. Find out if something illegal happened, or if this is just an example of attacking one of Obama's strengths (foreign policy ) to make it a weakness.

#74 Olsonist

Olsonist

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,182 posts
  • Location:Oakland, CA

Posted 11 June 2012 - 11:28 PM

1. OBL is dead but the doc that helped us get him is in jail because we could not stfu.

2. Stuxnet started under Bush continud by O. Would have been more effective to keep them guessing.

3. Yemnni double agent outed. Not so easy to get another double in AQ.

1. You have to demonstrate how the doc is in jail because of us. It's kinda sounding like he wasn't the sharpest knife in the drawer.
2. The Israelies were chortling something fierce about this.
3. The Yemeni agent pulled himself. The only issue was timing. We still stopped an airline bombing and killed some high level AQ.

Read something besides Breitbart. Hell, read HuffPo.

#75 Mark K

Mark K

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 36,190 posts

Posted 11 June 2012 - 11:48 PM

Wouldn't surprise me if Obama is just as pissed. Somebody talking to the press without permission is pretty typical in Washington. Might be one of his own people.

The prosecutors can get warrants to examine all kinds of things. They may be able to find who's been talking to Sanger.

#76 TMSAIL

TMSAIL

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,170 posts
  • Location:NW Chicago/Des Plaines

Posted 12 June 2012 - 01:18 AM

Wouldn't surprise me if Obama is just as pissed. Somebody talking to the press without permission is pretty typical in Washington. Might be one of his own people.

The prosecutors can get warrants to examine all kinds of things. They may be able to find who's been talking to Sanger.

+1

#77 TMSAIL

TMSAIL

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,170 posts
  • Location:NW Chicago/Des Plaines

Posted 12 June 2012 - 03:07 AM

Investigate. Find out if something illegal happened, or if this is just an example of attacking one of Obama's strengths (foreign policy ) to make it a weakness.

Remind me was the Plame investigation run out of the Bush justice department or a special prosecutor authorized by congress?

#78 Sol Rosenberg

Sol Rosenberg

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 51,132 posts
  • Location:Earth

Posted 12 June 2012 - 03:17 AM

Fitzgerald

#79 TMSAIL

TMSAIL

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,170 posts
  • Location:NW Chicago/Des Plaines

Posted 12 June 2012 - 03:26 AM

Fitzgerald

That's what I thought. So wouldn't this investigation be better served with the same type of apointment rather than lawyers appointed by holder?

#80 Sol Rosenberg

Sol Rosenberg

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 51,132 posts
  • Location:Earth

Posted 12 June 2012 - 03:29 AM

Get him to do it.

Fitz

#81 TMSAIL

TMSAIL

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,170 posts
  • Location:NW Chicago/Des Plaines

Posted 12 June 2012 - 03:31 AM

Get him to do it.

Fitz

Works for me I think is unemployed at the moment

#82 Mark K

Mark K

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 36,190 posts

Posted 12 June 2012 - 04:47 AM

Fitz is a dirty rotten Democrat. I thought everybody knew that.

http://web.archive.o...241744137262638

#83 Olsonist

Olsonist

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,182 posts
  • Location:Oakland, CA

Posted 12 June 2012 - 05:12 AM

The CIA requested the DOJ to do the investigation.

#84 Regatta Dog

Regatta Dog

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 20,206 posts

Posted 12 June 2012 - 05:14 AM


1. OBL is dead but the doc that helped us get him is in jail because we could not structure.

2. Stuxnet started under Bush contact by O. Would have been more effective to keep them guessing.

3. Ye mini double agent outed. Not so easy to get another double in AQ.


1. OBL is dead period. Collateral damage is unfortunate.

2. How long did you believe Stuxnet would be operational before even the dumbest Iranian figured it out?

3. Couple of things here, the agent was doomed to be outed unless you expected him to remain silent and blow up the airplane to keep his credibility.
While operational security is important, the fact that we are in Yemen and elsewhere should be a matter of public discussion unless you think the president should do whatever he wants to do, whenever he wants.


Are you fucking kidding me? Really? Now, BL, after all these years in Iraq and Afghanistan "collateral damage" is simply "unfortunate"?

You vilified Bush for unintentional civilian casualties in a theater of war, and lauded Obama as a Nobel Peace Prize Laureate. You have proven yourself either a sycophant or an idiot.

#85 JBSF

JBSF

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 30,872 posts
  • Interests:Racing, diving, cycling, flying, pussy, shooting and any other action sports.

Posted 12 June 2012 - 05:31 AM


1. OBL is dead period. Collateral damage is unfortunate.


Are you fucking kidding me? Really? Now, BL, after all these years in Iraq and Afghanistan "collateral damage" is simply "unfortunate"?

You vilified Bush for unintentional civilian casualties in a theater of war, and lauded Obama as a Nobel Peace Prize Laureate. You have proven yourself either a sycophant or an idiot.


\Why does it have to be an either/or? I think BL could easily qualify for C. All of the above.

#86 Olsonist

Olsonist

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,182 posts
  • Location:Oakland, CA

Posted 12 June 2012 - 05:53 AM

The Pakistani ISI figured this out. It doesn't appear to have been a leak at all.

http://m.guardian.co...-bin-ladens-dna

#87 Dog

Dog

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,402 posts

Posted 12 June 2012 - 10:48 AM

Wouldn't surprise me if Obama is just as pissed. Somebody talking to the press without permission is pretty typical in Washington. Might be one of his own people.

The prosecutors can get warrants to examine all kinds of things. They may be able to find who's been talking to Sanger.

Wouldn’t surprise me if Obama was involved in the decision to leak the information or that Pat Caddell is right that Tom Donilon is the leaker.

#88 Mike G

Mike G

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,286 posts
  • Location:Ventura County, CA

Posted 12 June 2012 - 11:42 AM


Wouldn't surprise me if Obama is just as pissed. Somebody talking to the press without permission is pretty typical in Washington. Might be one of his own people.

The prosecutors can get warrants to examine all kinds of things. They may be able to find who's been talking to Sanger.

Wouldn’t surprise me if Obama was involved in the decision to leak the information or that Pat Caddell is right that Tom Donilon is the leaker.

Would that make you a "Leaker?"

:)

#89 A_guy_in_the_Chesapeake

A_guy_in_the_Chesapeake

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,459 posts
  • Location:Virginia

Posted 12 June 2012 - 01:12 PM


You would be OK with our agents getting killed so you can know what they were doing to protect your sorry ass?

There are three leaks we're talking about:

(1) the OBL takedown. He dead. His son, he dead too. Deal with it.

(2) Stuxnet. It worked. Deal with it.

(3) the Yemeni mole. We killed a few AQ. Sorry about that.

The reason y'all are yacking about these 'leaks' is that you don't want to give Obama credit. Fine. Don't.

But OBL is still dead, the Iranians have been set back and a bunch of AQ are pushing daisies.

Deal with it.


BULLSHIT! The leaks can result in good people, Americans and those who cooperate with us (and their families) getting compromised and killed. These leaks also impede our ability to gain the cooperation necessary from local citizens whom we want to help, and whom we want to help US, as they rightly doubt our ability to keep quiet about their involvement.

I don't care about who gets credit - I care about being able to provide the security, safety and opportunity for my children that *I* have enjoyed as a citizen of this country.

Some people think that they have a right to know everything, without accepting the responsibility that comes with handling that information. I disagree.

#90 Olsonist

Olsonist

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,182 posts
  • Location:Oakland, CA

Posted 12 June 2012 - 01:40 PM

This Pakistani doctor ran a ham handed op to try to get DNA samples. It didn't work. But he bribed a bunch of officials along the way and left a trail. When the ISI investigated after the OBL takedown they uncovered the doctor.

You might ask why neither the doctor nor the CIA thought it wise to get him out. He's in jail now and the nurses who worked for him are declared unfit for future employment.

No leak.

In the cases of the Yemeni mole and Stuxnet there were after the fact leaks. In the case of Stuxnet, Sanger said he got the information bottom up, not from the White House. In the case of the Yemeni mole, Congress wasn't even briefed which meant it was closely held. That leak is being investigated and I'm guessing it was CIA horn tooting.

You can get outraged. But OBL is still dead, Stuxnet worked, an airliner didn't get blown up and a few more AQ are dead.

#91 Sol Rosenberg

Sol Rosenberg

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 51,132 posts
  • Location:Earth

Posted 12 June 2012 - 02:14 PM

This Pakistani doctor ran a ham handed op to try to get DNA samples. It didn't work. But he bribed a bunch of officials along the way and left a trail. When the ISI investigated after the OBL takedown they uncovered the doctor.

You might ask why neither the doctor nor the CIA thought it wise to get him out. He's in jail now and the nurses who worked for him are declared unfit for future employment.

No leak.

In the cases of the Yemeni mole and Stuxnet there were after the fact leaks. In the case of Stuxnet, Sanger said he got the information bottom up, not from the White House. In the case of the Yemeni mole, Congress wasn't even briefed which meant it was closely held. That leak is being investigated and I'm guessing it was CIA horn tooting.

You can get outraged. But OBL is still dead, Stuxnet worked, an airliner didn't get blown up and a few more AQ are dead.

The results are what they are, and nothing will change that. Congress (and oversight committees) provide(s) our representation (in theory), and the committee seems to think that something wrong happened on at least one occasion. I would like it investigated by someone independent, with the specific power to investigate the specific matter(s) identified by the committee, not to continue an expensive campaign to defend the rights of millions of murdered sperm on a dress.

I would like to know if something really happened or if this is just election-year "attack the strengths not the weaknesses" bullshit.

#92 A_guy_in_the_Chesapeake

A_guy_in_the_Chesapeake

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,459 posts
  • Location:Virginia

Posted 12 June 2012 - 02:20 PM

This Pakistani doctor ran a ham handed op to try to get DNA samples. It didn't work. But he bribed a bunch of officials along the way and left a trail. When the ISI investigated after the OBL takedown they uncovered the doctor.

You might ask why neither the doctor nor the CIA thought it wise to get him out. He's in jail now and the nurses who worked for him are declared unfit for future employment.

No leak.

In the cases of the Yemeni mole and Stuxnet there were after the fact leaks. In the case of Stuxnet, Sanger said he got the information bottom up, not from the White House. In the case of the Yemeni mole, Congress wasn't even briefed which meant it was closely held. That leak is being investigated and I'm guessing it was CIA horn tooting.

You can get outraged. But OBL is still dead, Stuxnet worked, an airliner didn't get blown up and a few more AQ are dead.


Are you discussing the efficacy of the individual operations, or that in the name of transparency that everyone ought to know everything?

#93 Sol Rosenberg

Sol Rosenberg

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 51,132 posts
  • Location:Earth

Posted 12 June 2012 - 02:28 PM


This Pakistani doctor ran a ham handed op to try to get DNA samples. It didn't work. But he bribed a bunch of officials along the way and left a trail. When the ISI investigated after the OBL takedown they uncovered the doctor.

You might ask why neither the doctor nor the CIA thought it wise to get him out. He's in jail now and the nurses who worked for him are declared unfit for future employment.

No leak.

In the cases of the Yemeni mole and Stuxnet there were after the fact leaks. In the case of Stuxnet, Sanger said he got the information bottom up, not from the White House. In the case of the Yemeni mole, Congress wasn't even briefed which meant it was closely held. That leak is being investigated and I'm guessing it was CIA horn tooting.

You can get outraged. But OBL is still dead, Stuxnet worked, an airliner didn't get blown up and a few more AQ are dead.


Are you discussing the efficacy of the individual operations, or that in the name of transparency that everyone ought to know everything?

The whole "transparency" angle that was on talk radio all day yesterday is what makes me think this is all election year bullshit. Leaking and transparency are not the same thing. The more I hear the arguments against "transparency" the less I think this is about leaks, and the more I think it is about politics.

#94 A_guy_in_the_Chesapeake

A_guy_in_the_Chesapeake

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,459 posts
  • Location:Virginia

Posted 12 June 2012 - 02:35 PM


<SNIP>

Are you discussing the efficacy of the individual operations, or that in the name of transparency that everyone ought to know everything?

The whole "transparency" angle that was on talk radio all day yesterday is what makes me think this is all election year bullshit. Leaking and transparency are not the same thing. The more I hear the arguments against "transparency" the less I think this is about leaks, and the more I think it is about politics.


I'd be inclined to agree with you on this.

We absolutely NEED transparency, but, the tough part is deciding at which level we share details about methods, ops and individuals. Too little, and there's insufficient oversight. Too much - and our abilities to collect intelligence and conduct operations is greatly impeded.

#95 JBSF

JBSF

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 30,872 posts
  • Interests:Racing, diving, cycling, flying, pussy, shooting and any other action sports.

Posted 12 June 2012 - 05:14 PM



<SNIP>

Are you discussing the efficacy of the individual operations, or that in the name of transparency that everyone ought to know everything?

The whole "transparency" angle that was on talk radio all day yesterday is what makes me think this is all election year bullshit. Leaking and transparency are not the same thing. The more I hear the arguments against "transparency" the less I think this is about leaks, and the more I think it is about politics.


I'd be inclined to agree with you on this.

We absolutely NEED transparency, but, the tough part is deciding at which level we share details about methods, ops and individuals. Too little, and there's insufficient oversight. Too much - and our abilities to collect intelligence and conduct operations is greatly impeded.


That's why we have elected reps on intelligence oversight committees so that it isn't public knowledge. The public doesn't have a need or a right to know everything, we elect representatives to do that for us so these details we keep reading about in the papers don't end up in the papers.

#96 Olsonist

Olsonist

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,182 posts
  • Location:Oakland, CA

Posted 12 June 2012 - 05:18 PM


This Pakistani doctor ran a ham handed op to try to get DNA samples. It didn't work. But he bribed a bunch of officials along the way and left a trail. When the ISI investigated after the OBL takedown they uncovered the doctor.

You might ask why neither the doctor nor the CIA thought it wise to get him out. He's in jail now and the nurses who worked for him are declared unfit for future employment.

No leak.

In the cases of the Yemeni mole and Stuxnet there were after the fact leaks. In the case of Stuxnet, Sanger said he got the information bottom up, not from the White House. In the case of the Yemeni mole, Congress wasn't even briefed which meant it was closely held. That leak is being investigated and I'm guessing it was CIA horn tooting.

You can get outraged. But OBL is still dead, Stuxnet worked, an airliner didn't get blown up and a few more AQ are dead.


Are you discussing the efficacy of the individual operations, or that in the name of transparency that everyone ought to know everything?

I am all about efficacy. I think transparency is important but secondary. As concrete examples, I thought leaking the Pentagon Papers was a national blessing. On the other hand, I think there was a leak in the Yemeni mole case. It should be investigated, thoroughly.

#97 TMSAIL

TMSAIL

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,170 posts
  • Location:NW Chicago/Des Plaines

Posted 18 June 2012 - 12:59 PM

http://www.govexec.c...313/?oref=river

Lieberman calling for special prosecutor to look into leaks. I guess old Joe sees a problem with a lead attorney investigating the guy he donates money to.

I guess he doesn't understand Chicago style politics

#98 Olsonist

Olsonist

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,182 posts
  • Location:Oakland, CA

Posted 06 January 2013 - 02:44 AM

This CIA Officer is going to jail for leaking a covert operative's identity.


http://www.nytimes.c...ified-leak.html


The journalist didn't actually print the name so this sentence might be excessive. They could have just fired him. But it does send a message. The point is that the CIA leaks.

Nothing new on the Yemeni bomber leak.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users