Main Area and Open Discussion > Living Room

U.S. Intelligence Analyst Arrested in Wikileaks Video Probe

<< < (4/6) > >>

40hz:
Security through obscurity...
-wraith808 (June 09, 2010, 12:53 PM)
--- End quote ---

And the natural human tendency not to want to walk around with a sign that reads: This Joker Knows Something They Don't Want You to Know - Grab Him!

 ;D

wraith808:
A person that works with sensitive, classified information is not just some guy from the street. If an institution gives him this responsibility, it means it trusts him and his judgment and that he is prepared to analyze classified data from all points of view. It is not an ordinary job and it bears a lot of responsibility (or it should).
-bgd77 (June 09, 2010, 11:06 AM)
--- End quote ---

I'd have to respectfully disagree.  Just because you have access to some of the information, doesn't mean that you have access to all of the information.  And without a high level view of the information, you don't know enough to even know what you're looking at in a lot of cases.  Especially with sigint.  In the case of a lot of information that's not gathered by having assets on the ground, there's a really high noise-to-signal ratio.  So a lot of people paid to handle that information are just people paid to basically sift through a lot of detritus.  If they come across something, they shoot it to someone with a higher pay grade.  They are *not* equipped to do *anything* with the information.  If you leave that open to personal interpretation, your whole intelligence system is going to go to pot really quickly.  And these are not just random pieces out there... but people in harm's way.

Classified means just that.  And people who can't get that don't need to be in the business.  One good deed does nothing but make the situation murkier for all of the people in the field, IMO.

Josh:
It was more of a hypothetical, not a real call for people to disclose. I grow weary of listening to persons who have never dealt with this type of system before talk as thou they are the end-all-be-all when it comes to knowledge on a subject. Information is classified for a reason. Some persons might think this is to cover up something illegal happening but often times even those in the know do not know everything. The only thing I say is when claims such as this are made, please realize that while you might know one piece, there are probably 200 other pieces to a puzzle. On that note, I gracefully withdraw my comment above as it was not intended to have people violate their NDA.

40hz:
@Josh - hear ya!

Part of the problem with this discussion is that it's branched into four separate but interwoven topics. First, we have the incident of several unfortunate civilian deaths due to actions by US military personnel. Next is the case of a US serviceman who probably pulled one of the more boneheaded and irresponsible acts of the last 6 months. Third is the issue of what constitutes necessary and justifiable government regulations regarding secrecy and security. And last is the whole whistle-blower issue.

I think it's safe to say that most of us would agree:


* Governments have a genuine need to keep certain things secret.
* Most responsible people can understand and accept that necessity.
* Laws have been passed that allow the government to protect information that should be kept secret.
* Such laws should generally be respected and obeyed.
* Governmental secrecy is invoked, on occasion, for less than noble or legal purposes.
* Because of this potential for abuse, oversight and regulation of clandestine activities is essential in order to safeguard the rule of law.
* In reality, the oversight and regulation of clandestine activities is only as real as those who are being regulated will allow it to be.
* Courts usually defer to the Executive on matters of security.
* Some people feel compelled to come forward when they become cognizant of abuse of powers or other illegal activity on the part of government agencies and personnel.
* Whistle-blower laws have been enacted to encourage them to do so - and to protect them from retaliation when they do.
* The protection clauses of such laws are generally ineffective in preventing or punishing retaliation against whistle-blowers.
Which brings us back to SPC Bradley Manning...

On the topic of him, I think it's safe to say:


* He is most definitely not what anyone would consider a whistle-blower.
* He acted in an extremely reckless manner.
* He broke the law and violated his oath as a serviceman.
* He will likely get his head handed to him following his court martial.
Did I miss anything? ;D

bgd77:
To Josh and wraith808:
So what you say is that, for example, W. Mark Felt was wrong to leak information about the illegalities committed by the Nixon administration?

In my opinion, the rule of law should be above any other rules in a state because it is the only thing that (at least theoretical) makes us equal no matter of our origins or of our wealth or of our connections. So, when someone breaks the law, he must be prosecuted and, if found guilty, punished. When a person working with classified information discovers that crimes or irregularities have been committed, it should be his moral (and hopefully legal) duty to inform the appropriate authorities. If they do not do their job (as it sometimes happens), it is usually in the public interest to know about those crimes and irregularities because the public opinion will change the way the authorities will do their investigations. This is my view on this subject and I will need some strong arguments to change my opinion.

As I said above, I do not consider what this person has done to be whistleblowing. I agree with you, wraith808, in the intel field you might have only bits of data and would be hard for someone to understand the whole picture. And if this happens, then you cannot tell what really happened so you have no reason to whistleblow (if it were the case).

I do not consider that it is a general rule that classified information only covers illegal information. That would be absurd. Quite the opposite, it is important to have data classified, in order to protect national interests. But when it is used to cover illegal activities, I do not agree with it anymore and I am glad that people break the silence in order to inform us of the government's illegalities.

Indeed, I do not work with classified data, so I do not know all the details regarding this subject. I only read some stories about some whistleblowers, people that have put their careers and even lifes in jeopardy in order to stop bad things and bad people (or at least to inform us about their existence). And I am glad that they did it.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page