Guardian.com: Kiriakou and Stuxnet: the danger of the still-escalating Obama whistleblower war

[SkinsHokieFan]

One of the bigger outrages of President Obama's term has been the vast Cheney like increase in secrecy across all of our national security agencies.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisf...lowers-purpose

Kiriakou and Stuxnet: the danger of the still-escalating Obama whistleblower war

The permanent US national security state has used extreme secrecy to shield its actions from democratic accountability ever since its creation after World War II. But those secrecy powers were dramatically escalated in the name of 9/11 and the War on Terror, such that most of what the US government now does of any significance is completely hidden from public knowledge. Two recent events - the sentencing last week of CIA torture whistleblower John Kirikaou to 30 months in prison and the invasive investigation to find the New York Times' source for its reporting on the US role in launching cyberwarfare at Iran - demonstrate how devoted the Obama administration is not only to maintaining, but increasing, these secrecy powers.

When WikiLeaks published hundreds of thousands of classified diplomatic cables in 2010, government defenders were quick to insist that most of those documents were banal and uninteresting. And that's true: most (though by no means all) of those cables contained nothing of significance. That, by itself, should have been a scandal. All of those documents were designated as "secret", making it a crime for government officials to reveal their contents - despite how insignificant most of it was. That revealed how the US government reflexively - really automatically - hides anything and everything it does behind this wall of secrecy: they have made it a felony to reveal even the most inconsequential and pedestrian information about its actions.

This is why whistleblowing - or, if you prefer, unauthorized leaks of classified information - has become so vital to preserving any residual amounts of transparency. Given how subservient the federal judiciary is to government secrecy claims, it is not hyperbole to describe unauthorized leaks as the only real avenue remaining for learning about what the US government does - particularly for discovering the bad acts it commits. That is why the Obama administration is waging an unprecedented war against it - a war that continually escalates - and it is why it is so threatening.

Link for rest

[skinfan2k]

I don't understand why Americans think they need to know everything their government is doing to maintain their safety. That's why it is important to punish those who release this kind of information

[SkinsHokieFan]

I don't understand why Americans think they need to know everything their government is doing to maintain their safety. That's why it is important to punish those who release this kind of information

The last paragraph sums it up well

It has everything to do with destroying those who expose high-level government wrongdoing. It is particularly devoted to preserving the government's ability to abuse its power in secret by intimidating and deterring future acts of whistleblowing and impeding investigative journalism. This Obama whistleblower war continues to escalate because it triggers no objections from Republicans (who always adore government secrecy) or Democrats (who always adore what Obama does), but most of all because it triggers so few objections from media outlets, which - at least in theory - suffer the most from what is being done.

Without leaks, we never find out about Abu Gharib, waterboarding, torture, Watergate, etc, etc.

But Abu Gharib and torture were just there to keep Americans safe, right? We didn't need to know about that

[skinfan2k]

If Abu Gharib and waterboarding are techniques to get information from terrorist, then i am all for it

[B.A.M.F.]

The people have the right to know. What we need is another Jack Anderson. Too bad they don't make muckrakers like they used to.

[skinfan2k]

The people have the right to know. What we need is another Jack Anderson. Too bad they don't make muckrakers like they used to.

for what though? just because you want to know. I apologize if this is getting away from the origin of the original post.

[HeluCopter29]

for what though? just because you want to know. I apologize if this is getting away from the origin of the original post.

For me it all goes back to the patriot act and provisions outlined in the NDAA.

If the US is gonna spy on me, I have a right to know what they're trying to find.

[B.A.M.F.]

for what though? just because you want to know. I apologize if this is getting away from the origin of the original post.

To know what the government is doing? We elect these people. They promise us all kinds of things to obtain our votes. Why do they feel the need to hide? You don't think we deserve to know what they are actually doing?

[skinfan2k]

To know what the government is doing? We elect these people. They promise us all kinds of things to obtain our votes. Why do they feel the need to hide? You don't think we deserve to know what they are actually doing?

I guess i view it differently than you guys. National security is different from changing things as discussed in the constitution. Like the government has a duty to protect americans but i don't think the average person needs to know what they do to protect us. On the other hand, things like increasing taxes, changing the right to bear arms rules are something else. And the government people doing these actions are not elected, they are people from the CIA and NSA and other intelligence agencies that we dont necessarily elect

[B.A.M.F.]

I guess i view it differently than you guys. National security is different from changing things as discussed in the constitution. Like the government has a duty to protect americans but i don't think the average person needs to know what they do to protect us. On the other hand, things like increasing taxes, changing the right to bear arms rules are something else. And the government people doing these actions are not elected, they are people from the CIA and NSA and other intelligence agencies that we dont necessarily elect

I agree to an extent. Though those we elect help decide how these agencies are run, and or decide what actions they take, no? We don't need to know/have access to the every day details of certain agencies. If the information were readily available, most of us wouldn't bother looking. But I think it is important to have the information available to some who can alert the rest of us if something screwy is going on. The press used to act in this function. These days, I don't believe half of what the press tells me, much less the government.

[budussy]

I don't understand why Americans think they need to know everything their government is doing to maintain their safety. That's why it is important to punish those who release this kind of information

I really really hope this stance is held by a very very small minority of citizens. Good article OP.

This is one of the most dangerous developments I've seen at this level in my life. No hyperbole. A free press beats back tyranny. Threatening/punishing/making examples of whistle blowers and those that would make their stories public is disheartening. Times sure are a-changin.

[SkinsHokieFan]

There is a difference between exposing methods and sources and exposing government wrong doing

[budussy]

The article points out that Kiriakou ( the torture whistle blower) was sentenced to time in jail, yet the actual torturers themselves haven't even been brought up on charges.

[Redskins Diehard]

There is a difference between exposing methods and sources and exposing government wrong doing

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_...OpenGovernment