[Dialogue] On the Subject of Leaks

[Harry Wainwright]

Colleagues, very well said here. Peace, Harry 
  _____  


 <http://www.nytimes.com/> The New York Times <http://www.nytimes.com/> 
January 4, 2006

Editorial

On the Subject of Leaks 

Given the Bush administration's appetite for leak investigations (three are
under way), this seems a good moment to try to clear away the fog around
this issue.

A democratic society cannot long survive if whistle-blowers are criminally
punished for revealing what those in power don't want the public to know -
especially if it's unethical, illegal or unconstitutional behavior by top
officials. Reporters need to be able to protect these sources, regardless of
whether the sources are motivated by policy disputes or nagging consciences.
This is doubly important with an administration as dedicated as this one is
to extreme secrecy.

The longest-running of the leak cases involves Valerie Wilson, a covert
C.I.A. operative whose identity was leaked to the columnist Robert Novak.
The question there was whether the White House was using this information in
an attempt to silence Mrs. Wilson's husband, a critic of the Iraq invasion,
and in doing so violated a federal law against unmasking a covert operative.
There is a world of difference between that case and a current one in which
the administration is trying to find the sources of a New York Times report
that President Bush secretly authorized spying on American citizens without
warrants. The spying report was a classic attempt to give the public
information it deserves to have. The Valerie Wilson case began with a
cynical effort by the administration to deflect public attention from hyped
prewar intelligence on Iraq. The leak inquiry in that case ended up
targeting the press, and led to the jailing of a Times reporter.

When the government does not want the public to know what it is doing, it
often cites national security as the reason for secrecy. The nation's safety
is obviously a most serious issue, but that very fact has caused this
administration and many others to use it as a catchall for any matter it
wants to keep secret, even if the underlying reason for the secrecy is to
prevent embarrassment to the White House. The White House has yet to show
that national security was harmed by the report on electronic spying, which
did not reveal the existence of such surveillance - only how it was being
done in a way that seems outside the law.

Leak investigations are often designed to distract the public from the real
issues by blaming the messenger. Take the third leak inquiry, into a
Washington Post report on secret overseas C.I.A. camps where prisoners are
tortured or shipped to other countries for torture. The administration said
the reporting had damaged America's image. Actually, the secret detentions
and torture did that.

Illegal spying and torture need to be investigated, not whistle-blowers and
newspapers.

 

*	Copyright
<http://www.nytimes.com/ref/membercenter/help/copyright.html>  2006The New
York Times Company <http://www.nytco.com/> 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://wedgeblade.net/pipermail/dialogue_wedgeblade.net/attachments/20060103/58ce243f/attachment.htm
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/gif
Size: 1810 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://wedgeblade.net/pipermail/dialogue_wedgeblade.net/attachments/20060103/58ce243f/attachment.gif