In a filing related to the detention of whistleblower Jeffrey Sterling, the Justice Department argued that being a whistleblower and leaking information to the media was a “greater threat to society” than when a spy sells that information to a single foreign country.
The exact details of what Sterling was being charged with leaking were never made public, but there is speculation that it was related to James Risen’s book State of War. The Justice Department filing however insisted that the stance was a general one, and not case-specific.
This might explain why recent officials have shown so little interest in going after actual spies yet are forever riled up by the notion that the American public might have access to similar embarrassing information.
Jeffrey Sterling is the fifth person in US history charged under the Espionage Act related to classified information. His trial is seen by many as a “test case” for a possible move against WikiLeaks. Another interesting aspect is that Sterling’s attorney still has not been granted clearance to discuss the case with his own client.
"Sterling's attorney has not been granted leave to discuss the case with his own client." The dictatorship (or "inverted totalitarianism") is in full swing.
Ah, reasoning to set Mr. Pollard free to Israel. And by the way, he should have been hung.
If you are a public servant, it's always better to get royally owned behind closed doors than embarrassed in public.
That "greater threat to society" would be a lickspittle and servile Department of Justice that serves only treasonous elected officials and those 'elected officials' hired minions.
Under that irritating catch phrase, "we won't look back, we look ahead", war criminals roam free. Justice real justice, is dead in America. We have become a nation of expedience.
The truth is the greatest threat to tyranny so naturally the propagandists in the Ministry of Love fear it.
Seem to recall Ray McGovern mentioning ~'revoking pensions for revealing info,' and that was especially troubling during a time when Bushies would 'reclassify' things already public (pure censorship; recently Anthony Schaefer also had his public-domain info redacted). So a hunch is that this Sterling thing is part of an effort older than Wikileaks.
Definitely ridiculous that Sterling gets nailed for moving info through the normal route –weren't they trying to discourage moving it through leaker-services? Hmmm… If they really want zero-leakage, maybe they should clean up their behavior before they persecute their dissenters.
Well, it's already starting and this proves it. When they run out of Boogie Men outside the confines of the Empire, they turn inwards and they work down the ladder till there is none left. Another thing perfectly clear here is how they're passing all these crazy laws and turning around to use them against the population.
Okay so when the next Laughner has his day and mows down a bunch of innocents, will he be allowed to mount the defense of "but at least I didn't give embarassing information to the media"?
The Ministry of Truth is having trouble keeping up with the amount of information being shoved down the Memory Hole.
Me: Government worse than Mafia.
I thought Obama was to give us an administration transparent to the public?
of course exposing corruption to the sheep would be in breach of national security.
Another nail for Obama's political coffin. The Republicans were hammering them in along with the spineless Democratic members of Congress. Now we see Obama also hammering away.
Perhaps it is true that media disclosures can harm a government more than espionage, but disclosures also supply a Constitutionally approved check against tyranny. With all rights comes risk of abuse. The right to a free press implies that, sometimes, people will be overzealous in publicizing government information. But in a free society we rely on the conscience of the citizens to exercise the right appropriately. In the case of the CIA and Iran, inasmuch as this activity is controversial, but has not been openly debated, it could be argued that the only option to preserve a free and democratic society was for the information to be leaked and publicized. The bottom line: usually it is only tyrants that are harmed by disclosures.
I agree with the government: Free movement of information (via the old FAX technology) was a major factor in the demise of the USSR. The same is happening right now in the USA, only we do it better, faster. They are scared silly.
The reprehensible persecution of guys like Sterling and now Manning is why we need to make clear to serving officials that this resistance is not like that of VIetnam days — we will in due course insist on reciprocity in punishment of these same officials, guilty as they are in both the international and the US law.
WhyLie said…
All men, from the top down have a moral obligation to report and expose evil when they are witnesses to wrongful harm done towards any human being or living creature. Your silence becomes a crime. If I witness a murder and don't report it, I am complicit in that crime.
The War Departments of the world do not have the right nor the legitimation authority to stifle truth.
I will keep TOP SECRET and CLASSIFIED secrets but I will not put a lid on EVIL to let it fester and grow like a disease.
Every soldier has a moral responsibility to report their LEADERS when their LEADERS commit a crime against humanity. War crimes are just that, a crime!!!
If a Whistle blower is worse then a spy then HE, who orders a crime COVERED is the WORST OF THEM ALL.
He's a TYRANT!!!