Chilling message
A short article (see NOTE below) in today's Washington Post reports that:
The first is a sin of omission, in the guise of objective reporting by WaPo staff writer Dan Eggen. It seems to me that the way in which Mr. Eggen describes the domestic spying probe as simply "the latest in a series of controversial investigations into leaks of classified information," intentionally glosses over the fundamental differences between Mr. Bush's illegal surveillance program and the politically retaliatory Plame outing. Offhandedly mentioning the revelation of CIA "black sites" with the same lack of explanatory detail only compounds the misleading tone of the report.
These cases are not similar at all, at least not in the way that Eggen's careful wording would imply. They are apples and oranges. One concerns the exposure, for purposes of vicious partisan revenge, of an undercover agent working legally to prevent the distribution of WMD's to America's enemies. The other two issues involve the revelation of illegal and unethical activities being carried out by our government, activities which violate the Constitution and Geneva Conventions, and have yielded no discernible information beneficial to the protection of the nation. For the Post to leave these differences unmentioned is to omit the meat of the story.
Which brings me to the second, more disturbing aspect of the topic. Given the obvious dissimilarities I've mentioned, I'm bothered that the Justice Department would initiate investigations focused on the whistleblowers, and not on the domestic and international crimes over which those whistles were blown in the first place. Of course, my incredulity is admittedly rhetorical, since it is well known that the Justice Department itself played a significant role in green-lighting those illegal activities to begin with.
But the real story, in my opinion, is the chilling message these new investigations send to those who would dare to reveal evidence of the Bush Administration's continued contempt for the rule of law and basic human rights. The course of action taken by the Justice Department is a clear warning to anyone opposed to the illegal activities of this White House that acts of true patriotism will not be tolerated. It is nothing short of a dictatorial attempt to suppress the truth.
And that's something at which this Administration has proved quite adept.
[NOTE: Interestingly, the 3:00 PM version of the linked article on which I originally commented was updated during the course of the day, with changes reflecting many of the concerns I raised in the post. In fact, what appears to be the final revision (which is slated for Saturday's Page One) now ends with the following:
The Justice Department has opened an investigation into the disclosure of classified information about a domestic surveillance program authorized by President Bush after the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks...There are two things that trouble me about this piece.
The probe is the latest in a series of controversial investigations into leaks of classified information during the Bush administration, including the disclosure of a CIA agent's identity that has resulted in criminal charges against former vice presidential adviser I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby.
The Justice Department has also opened a probe into whether classified information was illegally disclosed to The Washington Post, which reported on a network of secret CIA prisons in Eastern Europe and elsewhere.
The first is a sin of omission, in the guise of objective reporting by WaPo staff writer Dan Eggen. It seems to me that the way in which Mr. Eggen describes the domestic spying probe as simply "the latest in a series of controversial investigations into leaks of classified information," intentionally glosses over the fundamental differences between Mr. Bush's illegal surveillance program and the politically retaliatory Plame outing. Offhandedly mentioning the revelation of CIA "black sites" with the same lack of explanatory detail only compounds the misleading tone of the report.
These cases are not similar at all, at least not in the way that Eggen's careful wording would imply. They are apples and oranges. One concerns the exposure, for purposes of vicious partisan revenge, of an undercover agent working legally to prevent the distribution of WMD's to America's enemies. The other two issues involve the revelation of illegal and unethical activities being carried out by our government, activities which violate the Constitution and Geneva Conventions, and have yielded no discernible information beneficial to the protection of the nation. For the Post to leave these differences unmentioned is to omit the meat of the story.
Which brings me to the second, more disturbing aspect of the topic. Given the obvious dissimilarities I've mentioned, I'm bothered that the Justice Department would initiate investigations focused on the whistleblowers, and not on the domestic and international crimes over which those whistles were blown in the first place. Of course, my incredulity is admittedly rhetorical, since it is well known that the Justice Department itself played a significant role in green-lighting those illegal activities to begin with.
But the real story, in my opinion, is the chilling message these new investigations send to those who would dare to reveal evidence of the Bush Administration's continued contempt for the rule of law and basic human rights. The course of action taken by the Justice Department is a clear warning to anyone opposed to the illegal activities of this White House that acts of true patriotism will not be tolerated. It is nothing short of a dictatorial attempt to suppress the truth.
And that's something at which this Administration has proved quite adept.
[NOTE: Interestingly, the 3:00 PM version of the linked article on which I originally commented was updated during the course of the day, with changes reflecting many of the concerns I raised in the post. In fact, what appears to be the final revision (which is slated for Saturday's Page One) now ends with the following:
The American Civil Liberties Union, which has argued that a special prosecutor should be appointed to determine whether Bush violated federal wiretapping laws, called the leak probe an unwarranted attack on whistle-blowers.Hear, hear, Mr. Romero - my point exactly.]
"Attorney General Gonzales is cracking down on critics of his friend and boss," said ACLU Executive Director Anthony D. Romero.
posted by Bob P @ 3:25 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home