And One Leak Plugged
A CIA officer has been fired after being caught leaking classified information to the media. The officer admitted he had given information to and held unauthorized discussions with the media.
WTF is with the CIA?
UPDATE: WaPo coverage.
UPDATE: Another take on it.
Other Links to this Post
-
CARRY ON AMERICA » Blog Archive » Maybe Porter Goss Can Root These People Out of the CIA — Friday, 21 April , 2006 @ 7:36 pm
By Sven, Friday, 21 April , 2006 @ 4:29 pm
WTF is with the CIA?
Is that a rhetorical question, or are you genuinely curious?
By Gauis Arbo, Friday, 21 April , 2006 @ 4:48 pm
More rhetorical. It’s an out of control bureaucracy, this inablity to keep secrets is a real problem.
By Sven, Friday, 21 April , 2006 @ 5:21 pm
Yes, there is that. But there is another extemely powerful motivator here - CYA.
In 2002, a senior attorney at the FBI issued a finding that “extraordinary rendition” was illegal and that anyone tangentially responsible - even those who merely discussed plans for it - could be found criminally liable.
The memo sent shockwaves through the agency, followed by even bigger aftershocks after Abu Ghraib. It became apparent that “bad apples” at the bottom of the totem pole would probably be left holding the bag if the lid ever blows off the congressional pressure cooker.
Abu Ghraib also inadvertently put human rights activists on the scent of the rendition trail; they found out about it through their own overseas observations and contacts long before it was leaked to the newspapers.
The spooks split into three camps - those who tried to stuff everything down the memory hole, those who tried to wash their hands of the whole deal, and those who tried to hedge their bets by talking to the press. It was obviously a big risk, but some felt the bigger risk was waiting for indictments to come down.
Which raises an interesting question. Who really caused the leaks - the rats trapped in the hold, trying to dig their way out, or those who locked them in there?
By Gauis Arbo, Friday, 21 April , 2006 @ 5:32 pm
Well, there’s something badly wrong there - people should be highly skeptical of these leaked stories. There’s a very strong possibility that these big revelations are only a small, slanted bit of the story. For CYA purposes what else would someone leak?
By Sven, Friday, 21 April , 2006 @ 7:08 pm
For CYA purposes what else would someone leak?
Precisely. Some leaks may be caused by goody two-shoes who know not what damage they wreak. There aren’t many do-gooders in the CIA; it’s a pretty cut-throat bunch. Many leaks are caused by bureaucratic infighting, but at least in those cases there’s usually a Machiavellian calculation of costs and (selfish, yes, but mostly rational) benefits.
But really desperate people do really desperate things. That’s my fundamental problem with the way this administration operates. In it’s (often otherwise admirable) zeal to act, roll the dice and Get Things Done, it gets reckless, setting off an uncontrollable chain of events with unpredictable results.
The declassification fiasco played out on similar lines. Yes, the president has the power, and yes, his critics were and are playing dirty politics. But more often than not, issuing blanket “git er’ done” orders and delegating authority in sensitive areas leads to all kinds of distractions and potentially damaging consequences.
By Gauis Arbo, Friday, 21 April , 2006 @ 7:17 pm
Frankly, I think a lot of the outcry here is simply the way the media always acts. That and they hate the fact that Bush cracked down, pretty darn hard, on the business as usual leaks. That made the media’s job harder and they resent it.
This relentless scandal of the day crap is ridiculous.