Comments on: Sometimes leaking classified information is perfectly fine

By: krimsonpage

krimsonpage — Thu, 14 Jun 2012 14:40:30 +0000

@tmc Uh, no. Read the article. You are “confusing means (secrecy) and ends (security).” Read the whole article. Thank you.

By: deLafayette

deLafayette — Thu, 14 Jun 2012 09:26:27 +0000

{If members of Congress are determined to impose punitive measures “each time” that classified information is disclosed, then they will be confusing means (secrecy) and ends (security). They run the risk of turning an already sluggish classification system into one that is so rigid as to be self-defeating.}

I suggest that were the members of Congress asked to explain the difference between “secrecy” and “security” not many would do so correctly.

By: PetrinaHahn

PetrinaHahn — Thu, 14 Jun 2012 01:43:25 +0000

I was listened to by a Karen Ann Mc Carthy a sister of an IRS Agent in Springfield, MA. She made a tape of me I knew someone was listening to me I diden’t know who it was? I have a cousin who is related to a President a grandson of one and he is a Marine in the United States Service. There were woman screaming at me and I recognized Karen Ann Mc Carthy as one of them. I tried to press charges but the city of Chicopee, MA woulden’t let me. This was back in 2005. It would seem that the folks wanting to listen in just do – I never served in the military nor have I worked for the government except for the census. I wonder what she was trying to do? The guy I was with was rather good looking – I geuss if you are conected with the government and a little jealous – what listen to him in the bathroom?

By: tmc

tmc — Wed, 13 Jun 2012 10:49:25 +0000

The author is wrong just by the title of the article. If it is classified it is treason to reveal it. Period. End of story.

By: Ian_Kemmish

Ian_Kemmish — Tue, 12 Jun 2012 18:19:40 +0000

On the other hand, the Official Secrets Act does not appear to have left us Brits significantly worse off than you Merkuns.

In practice, all it appears to mean is that someone accountable has thought carefully about what to publish and what not to publish, and that what is published is published on a fair and equitable basis, instead of having unaccountable (and presumably unattributable) generals decide who does and does not get “scoops”.

By: steve778936

steve778936 — Tue, 12 Jun 2012 06:07:38 +0000

A large amount of information is routinely classified based on standard procedures rather than any informed decision as to whether release of the information would really damage security. Much of this information, when it is released, may cause embarrassment or consternation, but does not actually damage security in any way. The other side of the coin is, however, worthy of note. People in possession of classified information have explicitly agreed not to release it in an unauthorized way. What Bacon and Jones did seems fall under the banner of ‘authorized’ disclosure. If no one can be trusted to keep a secret, and there are no sanctions for unauthorized disclosure, we have a big problem. The better solution is to limit what is classified, and to exercise better oversight over what actually should be classified to protect security.

By: TheUSofA

TheUSofA — Mon, 11 Jun 2012 21:12:09 +0000

Transparency and openness is fundamental to any functioning democracy. Most certainly in government as well as other institutions.

The else transparent, the more we will need to rely on whistleblowers and leaks.

The Obama administration has gone overdrive in the other direction, seemingly surpassing even the Bush and Cheney regime.