Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 10 to 18 of 47

Thread: WikiLeaks could be vulnerable to Espionage Act

  1. #10

    Default Re: WikiLeaks could be vulnerable to Espionage Act

    Quote Originally Posted by kr1963 View Post
    Funny how when Bush outed that spy reporter many on the right justified that but are condemning this.
    Bush outed the spy reporter? Who are you referring to? Armitage outed Plame.

  2. #11

    Default Re: WikiLeaks could be vulnerable to Espionage Act

    Quote Originally Posted by kr1963 View Post
    Actually NO as the supposed DEEP THROAT that W & B got their data from was covered by the same Espionage Act so their source was breaking the law. Did W & B know that? Maybe, maybe not but as the LAW says, "not knowing, is NO excuse."
    I am no lawyer, so I will take your statement as truth. Which doesn't, then, explain why W & B weren't prosecuted. But even by your statement, Assange is guilty and that is all that matters right now.

  3. #12
    Olympic Champ kr1963's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Clearwater, Florida, United States
    Posts
    7,028

    Default Re: WikiLeaks could be vulnerable to Espionage Act

    Quinn-
    Yes under the Espionage Act he probably would be tried & found guilty but then again I am not a lawyer either, (though I play one on TV) & I don't think that what he released would be considered "intelligence."

    Flop-
    When I said Bush I was referring to his Administration, not him personally.

    Must have been a big enough deal for Sean Penn to make a movie about it...

    Ugly-
    The analogy of leaked info killing soldiers doesn't apply here as what Wikileaks released was Diplomatic cables. If they would have done as you said then I would probably have to agree that that would be an act of espionage. This was not the case however.

    There were probably more embarrassed faces in Washington then anything else, now that world knows that Saudi Arabia would like to bomb Iran, (surprise!) & that China would be willing to part ways diplomatically with North Korea, (Communist Party disinformation there!). Most of it is "rubber-stamped" by the embassy mission chief just like the cables leaving the State Dept all end with H. CLINTON though she probably had NEVER seen said cable. Hardly intelligence, more like a bulleted fact sheet you would see listed on some DC blog.

    Prosecuting this guy is a waste of tax payer money as far as I am concerned. Meanwhile the true intents & purposes of this war go completely unmentioned by the MSM. The real crimes are being perpetrated by the members of the corporatocracy who benefit from the deaths of the young people in the military & the civilians in those countries we occupy. Unfortunate.

  4. #13

    Default Re: WikiLeaks could be vulnerable to Espionage Act

    Quote Originally Posted by kr1963 View Post
    Quinn-
    Flop-
    When I said Bush I was referring to his Administration, not him personally.

    Must have been a big enough deal for Sean Penn to make a movie about it...
    Armitage wasn't in Bush's administration, he was #2 at the State Department. That movie was the lefty version of what happened, not the truth. Here is a pretty decent takedown of the movie http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...ORDS=fair+game

  5. #14
    Olympic Champ kr1963's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Clearwater, Florida, United States
    Posts
    7,028

    Default Re: WikiLeaks could be vulnerable to Espionage Act

    Armitage is a lifelong Neocon & spook. To say he was not in Bush's Administration is incorrect. He came back into the State Dept with Colin Powell. He has had ties to super-spy Ted Shakley & Former CIA head & Prez Geo Bush Sr. He served as under-Secretary of State under Reagan & was implicated in the iran-contra scandal, (which when I first hard about the guy & I followed his career ever since.)

    He outed Palme & then Libby took the fall only to be pardoned.

    Your link goes to the WSJ website & has only about 2 paragraphs of the article.

  6. #15
    Olympic Champ kr1963's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Clearwater, Florida, United States
    Posts
    7,028

    Default Re: WikiLeaks could be vulnerable to Espionage Act

    Also with regards to the killing of people, the cables told us that the U.S. has been bombing the people of Yemen for the last year. Amnesty International found that an air strike in December 2009 killed dozens of local residents. Should we echo the AI report that said that "those responsible for unlawful killings must be brought to justice?"

  7. #16
    Super Moderator UGLY's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Littleton, CO
    Posts
    4,934

    Default Re: WikiLeaks could be vulnerable to Espionage Act

    So because it didnt happen this time we should let it go. What we should do is send the message that this is not acceptable.

    As I said uncovering corruption is one thing but just releasing classified info in order to hurt the U.S is different.

    KR I understand what you are saying and I respectfully disagree.

  8. #17

    Default Re: WikiLeaks could be vulnerable to Espionage Act

    Quote Originally Posted by kr1963 View Post
    Armitage is a lifelong Neocon & spook. To say he was not in Bush's Administration is incorrect. He came back into the State Dept with Colin Powell. He has had ties to super-spy Ted Shakley & Former CIA head & Prez Geo Bush Sr. He served as under-Secretary of State under Reagan & was implicated in the iran-contra scandal, (which when I first hard about the guy & I followed his career ever since.)

    He outed Palme & then Libby took the fall only to be pardoned.

    Your link goes to the WSJ website & has only about 2 paragraphs of the article.
    Do you consider all employees in government to be a part of the current administration? Armitage was Powell's boy, not Bush's.

    Who pardoned Libby? His sentence was commuted and he paid over $250K in fines, but he still wound up with five felonies on his record, resulting in him losing his license to practice law.

    Here is the full piece.

    The Plame Affair, Hollywood Style
    An antiwar State Department official leaked the spy's name. You won't find that in the plot of 'Fair Game.'.Article
    By JUDITH MILLER
    I went to jail in the summer of 2005 to protect the identity of a confidential source who spoke to me about Valerie Plame, the former CIA spy whose identity was disclosed after her husband publicly challenged part of the evidence that President Bush cited to justify his invasion of Iraq. I'm the only person to have gone to jail in what became known as Plamegate. But you wouldn't know it from the recently released movie "Fair Game."

    There is no character based on me in the film—and that turns out to be a good thing. Although the movie is brilliantly acted, it is also a gross distortion of a complicated political saga.

    Based on books by Joseph C. Wilson IV and his wife, Ms. Plame, the film purports to be what Mr. Wilson has called a "fair and accurate" rendition of the story. According to their view, her name was leaked by White House apparatchiks to punish Mr. Wilson for challenging the Bush administration's case for war.

    Here are some of the movie's untruths:

    • Although Ms. Plame was apparently a covert undercover officer in the CIA's counterproliferation division trying to gather intelligence on Iraq's WMD programs, several of her colleagues said that she did not play the key role in the agency's effort, as the film asserts. She was not directly involved in the CIA's attempts to provide safe haven for Iraqi scientists who had worked in Iraq's WMD programs. Nor was she the CIA official, as the film also claims, who recruited an Iraqi-American woman in Ohio to travel to Iraq and visit her brother, a scientist who was working on Saddam's alleged nuclear program in Baghdad.

    • Also contrary to the film's portrayal, the revelation of Ms. Plame's identity did not cause the CIA to abandon contacts among Iraqi scientists so that Israel's Mossad could kill them. Nor did it do so because the scientists weren't saying what the agency wanted to hear.

    • As the film would have it, the CIA's leadership resisted the notion that Saddam Hussein had WMD and challenged the intelligence being provided to the White House. I was a reporter who covered what the CIA said about Iraqi WMD prior to the war, and I wrote stories in the New York Times based on what turned out to be that flawed intelligence.

    .In fact, the agency led the effort to draft the National Intelligence Estimate in 2002 that concluded with "high confidence" on behalf of more than a dozen intelligence agencies that Iraq had chemical and biological weapons and an active nuclear program. Former CIA director George Tenet insists in his memoir that he and the agency's other top analysts considered the Iraqi WMD case "rock solid." Later, he adds: "We told the president what we did on Iraq WMD because we believed it."

    • If there was a grand plot to punish Mr. Wilson for his candor by outing his wife, as the film suggests, no one was ever indicted for it. Patrick Fitzgerald, the special prosecutor who would have indicted the proverbial ham sandwich, never indicted anyone for having outed Ms. Plame.

    Finding no such conspiracy, he eventually indicted my source, I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, Vice President Cheney's chief of staff—not for leaking Valerie Plame's name, as the film suggests, but for lying about what he said to federal officials about the episode.

    • The person who first leaked the fact that Mr. Wilson's wife worked at the CIA to conservative columnist Robert Novak—who published that information, and her name, despite his opposition to the Iraq war—was not a White House official. He was State Department official Richard Armitage. Like his boss, Secretary of State Colin Powell, Mr. Armitage was critical of the push to war.

    Yet Mr. Armitage has no on-screen role in the film. He is mentioned only in the film's text epilogue.

    The tension between the hawks in the White House and the more skeptical State Department is one of those inconvenient truths the filmmakers apparently chose to ignore. Acknowledging it would contradict the notion of a grand government conspiracy to punish Mr. Wilson, as well as the "Bush Lied, People Died" mantra.

    • The film also wrongly portrays Mr. Wilson as a whistleblower who debunked the White House claim that Iraq had tried to purchase uranium from Niger. An editorial in the Washington Post last Friday reminds us that an investigation by the Senate Intelligence Committee found that the oral assessment Mr. Wilson presented over Chinese food at his house to two CIA analysts "did not affect the intelligence community's view on the matter." (Amazingly, the CIA never asked him to write down a single word about the trip.)

    • "Fair Game" suggests that Ms. Plame's outing inflicted severe damage on the CIA's sources. But this, too, may be untrue. In a letter to the Washington Post on Nov. 12, R.E. Pound, a retired CIA agent who helped assess the damage allegedly caused by the leak at one location, concluded: "There was none." He also challenged as "ludicrous" Ms. Plame's claim, echoed in the film, that her outing forced her resignation.

    Mr. Pound ought to know: His own CIA affiliation was exposed in 1978 by Philip Agee in his book, "Dirty Work II." Yet he continued working at the agency for nearly 34 years. Ms. Plame famously posed in a Jaguar wearing spy gear for Vanity Fair, and later left the agency. The film portrays that decision as her reluctant acquiescence to her heroic husband's desire to "tell our side of the story."

    And so they have. Having bought an expensive home in Sante Fe, Mr. Wilson and Ms. Plame now make a living giving speeches about WMD and the Bush administration's venality. Asked about the film's accuracy by the Washington Post, Mr. Wilson gave this review: "For people who have short memories or don't read, this is the only way they will remember the period." Precisely.

    Ms. Miller is an adjunct fellow at the Manhattan Institute and a commentator for Fox News.

    Copyright 2010 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved

  9. #18
    Olympic Champ kr1963's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Clearwater, Florida, United States
    Posts
    7,028

    Default Re: WikiLeaks could be vulnerable to Espionage Act

    Quote Originally Posted by UGLY View Post
    So because it didnt happen this time we should let it go. What we should do is send the message that this is not acceptable.

    As I said uncovering corruption is one thing but just releasing classified info in order to hurt the U.S is different.

    KR I understand what you are saying and I respectfully disagree.
    Well if you read my other post, DEATHS have been occurring, (however not to US military & not due to the cables as you are concerned about). People have been dying according to the cables. I didn't know we were bombing Yemen. Civilians are dying & we do nothing cuz we are being told that those people dying were really terrorists & the President of Yemen is going around saying, "Um those American planes are NOT really American planes bombing us, they are OUR planes bombing us..." wow.

    And what do you think those people in those bombed out villages in the Arabian peninsula think of our country now? Now that they know that they haven't been bombed by Yemenite planes but by American planes? Completely not what our civilized & polite Christian-Judeo heritage would want them to think of us, I am sure.

    I think it will take a court of law to decide if his intent was to damage the US. As I said most of the stuff wasn't "intelligence." I got that you disagree but I think if you were in a bombed out village in Yemen you might be glad someone revealed those cables. Maybe?

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •