| Submit your comments on this article |
| Home Front: Politix |
| Loose Lips Sink Spies - by Porter Goss |
| 2006-02-10 |
| AT the Central Intelligence Agency, we are more than holding our own in the global war on terrorism, but we are at risk of losing a key battle: the battle to protect our classified information. Judge Laurence Silberman, a chairman of President Bush's commission on weapons of mass destruction, said he was "stunned" by the damage done to our critical intelligence assets by leaked information. The commission reported last March that in monetary terms, unauthorized disclosures have cost America hundreds of millions of dollars; in security terms, of course, the cost has been much higher. Part of the problem is that the term "whistleblower" has been misappropriated. The sharp distinction between a whistleblower and someone who breaks the law by willfully compromising classified information has been muddied. As a member of Congress in 1998, I sponsored the Intelligence Community Whistleblower Protection Act to ensure that current or former employees could petition Congress, after raising concerns within their respective agency, consistent with the need to protect classified information. Exercising one's rights under this act is an appropriate and responsible way to bring questionable practices to the attention of those in Congress charged with oversight of intelligence agencies. And it works. Government employees have used statutory procedures — including internal channels at their agencies — on countless occasions to correct abuses without risk of retribution and while protecting information critical to our national defense. On the other hand, those who choose to bypass the law and go straight to the press are not noble, honorable or patriotic. Nor are they whistleblowers. Instead they are committing a criminal act that potentially places American lives at risk. It is unconscionable to compromise national security information and then seek protection as a whistleblower to forestall punishment. Today America is confronting an enemy intent on brutal murder. Without the capacity to gain intelligence on terrorist organizations through clandestine sources and methods, we and our allies are left vulnerable to the horrors of homicidal fanaticism. The C.I.A. has put many terrorists out of action since 9/11. In our pursuit of the enemy, we accept the unique responsibility we bear as officers of a clandestine service serving an open, constitutional society. But we also know that unauthorized disclosure of classified intelligence inhibits our ability to carry out our mission and protect the nation. Revelations of intelligence successes or failures, whether accurate or not, can aid Al Qaeda and its global affiliates in many ways. A leak is invaluable to them, even if it only, say, prematurely confirms whether one of their associates is dead or alive. They can gain much more: these disclosures can tip the terrorists to new technologies we use, our operational tactics, and the identities of brave men and women who risk their lives to assist us. Such leaks also cause our intelligence partners around the globe to question our professionalism and credibility. Too many of my counterparts from other countries have told me, "You Americans can't keep a secret." And because of the number of recent news reports discussing our relationships with other intelligence services, some of these critical partners have even informed the C.I.A. that they are reconsidering their participation in some of our most important antiterrorism ventures. They fear that exposure of their cooperation could subject their citizens to terrorist retaliation. Last month, a news article in this newspaper described a "secret meeting" to discuss "highly classified" techniques to detect efforts by other countries to build nuclear weapons. This information was attributed to unnamed intelligence officials who "spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the effort's secrecy." Whether accurate or not, this is a direct acknowledgment that these unnamed officials apparently know the importance of secrecy. Recently, I noticed renewed debate in the news media over press reports in 1998 that Osama bin Laden's satellite phone was being tracked by United States intelligence officials. In the recent debate, it was taken for granted that the original reports did not hurt our national security efforts, and any suggestions that they did cause damage were dismissed as urban myth. But the reality is that the revelation of the phone tracking was, without question, one of the most egregious examples of an unauthorized criminal disclosure of classified national defense information in recent years. It served no public interest. Ultimately, the bin Laden phone went silent. I take seriously my agency's responsibility to protect our national security. Unauthorized disclosures undermine our efforts and abuse the trust of the people we are sworn to protect. Since becoming director, I have filed criminal reports with the Department of Justice because of such compromises. That department is committed to working with us to investigate these cases aggressively. In addition, I have instituted measures within the agency to further safeguard the integrity of classified data. Our enemies cannot match the creativity, expertise, technical genius and tradecraft that the C.I.A. brings to bear in this war. Criminal disclosures of national security information, however, can erase much of that advantage. The terrorists gain an edge when they keep their secrets and we don't keep ours. |
| Posted by:Dan Darling |
| #10 One is certain that those who are not concerned about security issues in this situation are fools. |
| Posted by: trailing wife 2006-02-10 18:49 |
| #9 The former, CS. |
| Posted by: Ptah 2006-02-10 17:47 |
| #8 One has to wonder if those on the right are more concerned with leakers/whistleblowers because of national security concerns or political damage to President Bush. |
| Posted by: Common Sense 2006-02-10 16:01 |
| #7 I am not at all certain that anything is being done and if something is, I seriously doubt it is being done to the right person(s). There has to be some way to try these people without security risks. They deserve a jury of their peers. Maybe the jury should be made up from a pool of those with a similar clearance with the portions of the trial that involve classified material held in camera. Or perhaps the entire trial should be held in camera with the transcript redacted and released daily to the internet. |
| Posted by: Nimble Spemble 2006-02-10 13:23 |
| #6 "I'm certain they are already quietly locking these ass holes up and destroying their lives and careers." This may be, but I for one would like to see it done with as much visibility as possible. I want to see perp-walks, and crying spouses! These..."leakers" need to be vilified and humiliated as publicly as possible, if only to punish and dissuade (sp?) others that might be thinking of leaking. JMO! FS3190 |
| Posted by: Flaitle Snomong3190 2006-02-10 12:26 |
| #5 On the other hand, those who choose to bypass the law and go straight to the press are not noble, honorable or patriotic. Nor are they whistleblowers. Instead they are committing a criminal act that potentially places American lives at risk. It is unconscionable to compromise national security information and then seek protection as a whistleblower to forestall punishment. Simple solution, eschewing the procedures already in place for submission of grievances and instead bringing said items to the media should disqualify individuals from any further protections provided by the whistleblower act. Untimely release to the media then becomes a national security issue, to be addressed in closed door sessions with subsequent sentencing to military prison without civilian penal privileges. Use the avenues already put in place or face denial of any further legal protections. |
| Posted by: Zenster 2006-02-10 11:22 |
| #4 I'm certain they are already quietly locking these ass holes up and destroying their lives and careers. It would be nice if the agency would do one of these guys who leak info in public courts. I'm not sure what the right answer is and it is a tricky wire the agencies walk down. When they catch them they will get the convictions they want but if they do it in public court the guy will spew more information about the leak and the techniques surrounding them to the public, something we don't need. |
| Posted by: 49 Pan 2006-02-10 08:08 |
| #3 AGREED!!! Everyone in the intelligence comunty signs a NDA and NDS!! If your going to follow the rules,FOLLOW THEM!!! Bring ALL who "LEAK" to the standard and charge with TREASON!!!!!!!!!!! LOCK EM' UP AND THROW AWAY THE KEY!!!! |
| Posted by: ARMYGUY 2006-02-10 07:47 |
| #2 Stop firing warning shots across these assholes' bows, and start hauling them off to prison-- or shoving them up against the wall blindfolded. |
| Posted by: Dave D. 2006-02-10 05:56 |
| #1 The NYT. The irony. The indictments. The firing squads. |
| Posted by: .com 2006-02-10 02:41 |