| CBS News | 0 | |
| WaPo | 0 | |
| Zogby | North Dakota Senator Byron Dorgan Trails in Potential 2010 Senate Match-up |
0 |
| SF Chron | 0 | |
| KDVR | 0 |
Audacity of Truth
Big Government- Hot Air
- Michelle Malkin
- Wheeling & dealing: Snowe pow-wows with Obama; Landrieu, Schumer, Daschle behind the scenes
- Saturday in the Senate: Cash for Cloture; Reid gets 60; Update: 8:15pm Eastern cloture vote – 60-39; Voinovich absent; Dems invoke Teddy Kennedy; Reid: “Ted would be happy.”
- Another day, another Berkeley tantrum
- Jake Tapper
- Lynn Sweet
Whistleblower or leaker?
In pLamegate, we all know that the person(s) suspected of ‘outing’ a ‘covert’ (heh) agent were routinely called ‘leakers’ – well the media has now ordained the leakers of the NSA eavesdropping ’scandal’ not as leakers, but as ‘whistleblowers’. Newsbusters explains.
Why won’t the press refer to both of them as ‘leakers’? It seems to me that the only time the media prefers to use the term “leaker” is when they want to push someone’s guilt, but use the “whistleblower” term in order to try and make the leaker look like a maverick.
And as a sidenote, it’s also not clear whether or not the Plame ‘leak/outing’ was intentional.
Once again, this goes to show how the media sets the tone and frames the debate, leaving the rest of us to try and clear up the confusion they’ve created in the meantime.
Hat tip: Rob at Say Anything
RSS feed for comments on this post.
Trackbacks
21 Responses to “Whistleblower or leaker?”
Comments
Blogads
Disclaimer: The views expressed on this blog do not necessarily reflect those of ST's advertisers, nor do their opinions necessarily reflect ST's. Stats
Intent. It all hinges on intent. In the Plame case the intent was to destroy a common person. In the NSA debate the intent was to alert the public of possible lawbreaking. The public will condemn the former and applaud the later. Peace
no, steve, it is liberals like you who do that. It is time to stop being so hypocritical. The NSA leaker needs to be indicted and tried. If we were being equal and fair, we’d be ruining several Democrats without a shread of evidence, just hate for them being Liberal Democrats.
I become a leaker after about a six back…after a twelve pack, I blow my own whistle AND I am a leaker.
PCD I wouldn’t go so far as talking about indicting this guy. Whistleblowers have gotten smeared since Col Dave Hackworth to Deep throat to the people who exposed Iran-contra to travelgate to 9/11 FBI agents about the 20th hijacker,etc,etc,etc…… Nobody outside the NSA knows what really happened at the moment because the info is classified. Let’s investigate sure and if this guy broke the law the feds will throw his tail in the joint.
tommy, you are being hypocrital here. Weren’t you one who called for the firing if not jailing of Rove in the Plame (Democrat) Fiasco?
Also, can’t you say anything that doesn’t come of ScamAmerica or Daily Krap?
LOL FT!
PCD give it a rest dude. Rove is being investigated they don’t have enough to charge him so he’s a free man. As far as the firing part his boss said that anyone involved in this scandal will be fired. Yeah the President said that if I recall. 43 didn’t say to the American public I’ll only fire any member of my staff who gets indicted He said He’d fire anyone involved. That’s the fact Jack.
tommy, you have a double standard. You’re the one who needs to be real. Bet you didn’t say negative word about Craig Livingstone, the bar bouncer the Clintons hired who ordered up 900 FBI files on Republicans. You were probably real outraged at the FBI guy who told the country about Livingstone and the illegalities going on at the Clinton White House.
I think you need to focus on your self. If you can’t hack support wrong and losing views, time to change or start drinking the Kool-aid.
Listen PCD Clinton left office 5 years ago do you hear us on the left bringing up watergate? Or Iran-contra. No?Why? Because it is history dude. Damn bro what’s so hard to understand about that.
Sounds like everyone in here needs to stop for a moment and take a deep breath.
Read Fat Tone’s comment, maybe it will cheer you up.
Good idea 4thelittleguy. Time for everyone to take a chill-pill!
>Intent. It all hinges on intent.
Heh. Yeah, the intent of the media.
Unfortunately, lacking facts causes some to assign motives to an action. That descends into ad hominem attacks.
Take a moment to realize there is no kind word in the English language for a “Whistleable” and legislatures have seen fit to create laws to protect individuals who chose to expose wrongdoing. Children learn early to not be a tattletale and adults reinforce the behavior with ’stool pigeon’ or ‘informer.’
The NSA leaker claims to have inside information about potential criminal actions— but so far makes no claim that a person’s privacy has been violated. He tells of the ability to monitor messages independent of the messenger. When messages suggested a threat, presumably an agent would examine the data and identify the sender. Harmless messages could be stored and linked with other harmless messages to describe a pattern that may eventually uncover a threat to public safety.
The government claims this data mining has thwarted terrorist attacks. The NY Times there is a potential for abuse. But there are insufficient facts to support either side of the argument.
If a person’s privacy has been violated by this conduct, the public would know as the MSM has been searching for a legitimate victim to appear.
Lacking a victim, perhaps one should look to the language of the Constitution which directs government to provide for the common defense. When the specific language of the Constitution conflicts with the penumbra right to privacy, the reasonable man may prefer to have his life protected and leave the legal arguments to intellectuals.
This is a good time to re-post these thoughts…
“They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.” Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania, 1759
“I believe there are more instances of the abridgement of freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments by those in power than by violent and sudden usurpations.”– James Madison
The main thing that has made this the greatest country in the world are our constitutional guarantees of freedom of speech and thought; freedom from fear of the thought police breaking the door down in the middle of the night; freedom from the fear of disappearing into some unknown cell somewhere without representation or hearing.
The possibility of this country sliding into a police state scares me a lot more than the possibility of any terrorist attack. Our society, our freedoms, will survive a terrorist attack. They won’t survive a takeover by some self-anointed, self-righteous and self-serving ruling cabal.
What’s been reported in the media about the allegedly illegal spying seems to be a dangerous step in that direction, and I applaud the person who brought the actions into the sunshine. The Bush admin has perfected the art of scaring the people into giving him greater, more far-reaching and unprecedented power… a clear case of the “gradual and silent encroachments” referred to by Madison.
More and more people are beginning to push back against the Bush crew’s over-reaching grasp for power. It’s about time.
Cordially,
Ken G
Tommy: “Listen PCD Clinton left office 5 years ago do you hear us on the left bringing up watergate? Or Iran-contra. No?Why? Because it is history dude. Damn bro what’s so hard to understand about that.”
ST: What are you talking about? This ’scandal’ gets compared to Watergate everyday now. I take it you don’t read much in the media and/or liberal blogs? And on Iran Contra, you better believe it still gets mentioned. Why is it that we can discuss Watergate, Reagan’s “relationship” with Iraq, the Iran Contra scandal, and GHWB’s ignoring of the gassing of the Kurds, yet Clinton is off limits?? I know I’d get tired of defending him too (because he is, for the most part, indefensible) but the man was president for 8 years and made decisions that affect us even today.
Ken jumps from monitoring communications to sliding into a police state. Can there be no middle ground? Is it possible to protect privacy and public safety at the same time? And if the two are in conflict, do we need a Constitutional Amendment to direct our government agents to surrender safety to protect privacy.
Until such amendment is ratified, the responsibility of our elected leaders should be as defined in the Constitution. Otherwise we have the very state of affairs Ken fears- a few elite unelected persons will make arbitrary decisions for the rest of us.
It may be of interest that communications have been monitored by business concerns, media consultants, marketing tecnocrats, and of course hackers. This may or may not be legal, but it occurs. There are laws against murder, rape, robbery and assault, yet these crimes continue.
We are not a great country because we have many laws ; our greatness is proportional to our consent to respect the rights and property of others. There are many unenforced laws, and poor legislation has resulted in poor practices, but we continue to consent to the rule of law.
Rather than jump to any conclusions about the current whistle blower, wait for the facts that show where a right was violated and no action taken to correct the wrong. Don’t be so quick to reject the law for fear of potential abuses.
Omapian,
I’m not sure where you were going with your posts (after mine), but it seems you’re saying the “whistle blower” should have waited to see if the wrongs were corrected. I agree, but only to a point. When a clear pattern of willing and deliberate abuse is demonstrated with no indication that the abuser intends to stop, it’s time to blow the whistle.
Of course the important question is “when is that point reached”. We probably disagree on that – I could give a long list of reasons why I think the time was right, but you’ve probably already heard them all…
But I do agree with you that it’s always good to avoid jumping to conclusions, especially when national security is involved.
Also, regarding the middle ground between “monitoring communications” and “sliding into a police state” – the middle ground is the slide. The time to step in – the middle ground – is before the police state is established; when the government, for example, begins acting as if it is above the law.
Cordially,
Ken G.
Kenwg wrote, “What’s been reported in the media about the allegedly illegal spying
It aint illegal if it’s “international” calls with terrorists that are being monitored. Clear language that I posted. I could be wrong and I applaud you for at LEAST using the word “allegedly”. The rest of that post was more scaremongering by you.
Kenwg wrote for some reason, “but it seems you’re saying the “whistle blower” should have waited to see if the wrongs were corrected.
Nope. The whistleblower shouldn’t have whistleblown “illegally“. He should’ve alerted the people who were supposed to be alerted. If he would’ve done that if something was done illegally the proper people could’ve taken the proper action without the terrorists having been alerted. Unfortunately the whistleblower broke the law and went to the New York Times and will go to jail and he has hurt national security. ON TOP OF THAT, the whistleblower seems to not have knows constitutional law very well and didn’t know that the President has the right to monitor “international” communications and that isn’t breaking the law.
Kenwg wrote, “When a clear pattern of willing and deliberate abuse is demonstrated with no indication that the abuser intends to stop, it’s time to blow the whistle.
To the PROPER people. He broke the law (the whistleblower).
tommy, you are so full of crap. You Democrats are carping on Alito’s past of more than 5 years ago. I think that makes all y’all Democrats a bunch of psychotic hypocrites.
Now, I haven’t seen any of you Democrats be at all consistent on the law. Maybe living by situational ethics all your lives has warped all y’all.