- Joined
- Feb 12, 2013
- Messages
- 160,900
- Reaction score
- 57,847
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Centrist
House Oversight Committee Chairman Darrell Issa (R-CA) compromised the identities of several Libyans working with the U.S. government and placed their lives in danger when he released reams of State Department communications Friday, according to Obama administration officials.
Nice...following in Dick Cheney's footsteps when he blew Valarie Pflame's cover to gain a political edge, today's House GOP exposes Libyan agents working undercover with the US.
Issa
Some would call that treason.
Little late on the trigger. The story is almost two years old.
Little late on the trigger. The story is almost two years old.
Uhh... Issa nor Cheney blew Plames cover. :lamo Just for you education, it was Armitage at the State Dept. Perhaps if the WH and State Dept were more forthcoming with subpoenaed information over the last 2 years, this little dirty secret could have been kept out of the public eye. I for one am happy it came out, now we get to see some of that promised transparency. And by the way, any other source than the cable? It's tainted with "liberal hack" or was this the only source available?
So is Holder going to charge Issa then? That would be entertaining....
This is not a "dirty secret" its the names of Libyans working for us, people risking their lives and the lives of their families to be employed by us for the purpose of advancing our agenda in Libya. These are our friends not our enemies.
If it's not a secret then what's the problem with the names being on a (reportedly) old report? Are they our friends? You seem to be very quick to take the administrations word on that... wonder why that is.
Nice...following in Dick Cheney's footsteps when he blew Valarie Pflame's cover to gain a political edge, today's House GOP exposes Libyan agents working undercover with the US.
Issa
Some would call that treason.
Because I've worked with a lot of foreign nationals who weren't American citizens while deployed who were our friends and absolutely critical to our mission, and I also understand how intelligence gathering is done where the best intelligence is gathered from locals who are the only people who can accurately collect information for you since no amount of training or preparedness is going to make someone blend in perfectly like a local.
That's why.
Little late on the trigger. The story is almost two years old.
Well, when names aren't redacted in an intelligence report what does that tell you given your vast knowledge?
But the DNC talking points just got around to it.
Why do we let people post on here brash accusations about Cheney to which they can't prove and were never proven? Hmm?
And some would call this thread jumping the shark.Nice...following in Dick Cheney's footsteps when he blew Valarie Pflame's cover to gain a political edge, today's House GOP exposes Libyan agents working undercover with the US.
Issa
Some would call that treason.
And some would call this thread jumping the shark.
Well, the sex change stuff and hormone therapy for starters...How's it different than what Pvt Manning did?
It tells me somebody ****ed up when they prepared that document for public release
It tells me, someone without vast knowledge, that the people mentioned either are named because the names are made up, the names are real and they are no longer in the field and therefore (since it's nearly 2 years old) no longer in danger. What I find funny is that those criticizing the reference of name are so arrogant, they think no one else could possibly see this as anything but a blunder. You'd think this is the first time a congressional committee was provided information from a security report. Gimme a break.
Ok.A blunder is a **** up, just a politer way of saying it. Terrorists and other enemies of the US also will retaliate even if two years have passed, one of Bin Laden's biggest complaints and justifications for attacks like 9/11 was the US being in Saudi Arabia during the Gulf War.
Using an alias is not quite futuristic science fiction - it's pretty much been done since spying and deception were invented.I hadn't thought of the names being fake because there's nothing in the source to suggest they are fake and I don't like to make **** up on the fly.
I've already shown that I am by not rushing to assume... as I already said, listening to your view of the subject, this must be the first time a congressional committee received an intel report. I feel like you should take your own words to heart and internalize it. As you know I'm not a fan of the Federal Government in any sense, but I think assuming they've screwed up by failing to redact names of Libyans who are working for (one assumes) the CIA under cover and using their actual names in a report while those assets are still in the field is lol worthy. Especially since the report is nearly 2 years old.I feel like you shouldbe smarter than this
Ok.
Using an alias is not quite futuristic science fiction - it's pretty much been done since spying and deception were invented.
I've already shown that I am by not rushing to assume... as I already said, listening to your view of the subject, this must be the first time a congressional committee received an intel report. I feel like you should take your own words to heart and internalize it. As you know I'm not a fan of the Federal Government in any sense, but I think assuming they've screwed up by failing to redact names of Libyans who are working for (one assumes) the CIA under cover and using their actual names in a report while those assets are still in the field is lol worthy. Especially since the report is nearly 2 years old.
And what evidence do you have that says the names are real and not an alias?You don't need to redact aliases, if they were aliases this wouldn't be a story.
I don't read blogs, I think for myself. You should try it sometime.I'm not assuming, I'm reading a reliable source. You should do that instead of reading those crap blogs
And what evidence do you have that says the names are real and not an alias?
I don't read blogs, I think for myself. You should try it sometime.
Because it says so in the article several times.
Can you cut and paste the parts that specifically says the names were not an alias? I don't have access to that site and wont sign up to read old news.
It doesn't address if those assets are still in the field or not though does it... ?
House Oversight Committee Chairman Darrell Issa (R-CA) compromised the identities of several Libyans working with the U.S. government and placed their lives in danger when he released reams of State Department communications Friday, according to Obama administration officials.
Issa posted 166 pages of sensitive but unclassified State Department communications related to Libya on the committee's website afternoon as part of his effort to investigate security failures and expose contradictions in the administration's statements regarding the Sept. 11 attack on the U.S. mission in Benghazi that resulted in the death of Amb. Christopher Stevens and three other Americans.
"The American people deserve nothing less than a full explanation from this administration about these events, including why the repeated warnings about a worsening security situation appear to have been ignored by this administration. Americans also deserve a complete explanation about your administration's decision to accelerate a normalized presence in Libya at what now appears to be at the cost of endangering American lives," Issa and Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-UT) wrote today in a letter to President Barack Obama.
But Issa didn't bother to redact the names of Libyan civilians and local leaders mentioned in the cables, and just as with the WikiLeaks dump of State Department cables last year, the administration says that Issa has done damage to U.S. efforts to work with those Libyans and exposed them to physical danger from the very groups that had an interest in attacking the U.S. consulate.
"Much like WikiLeaks, when you dump a bunch of documents into the ether, there are a lot of unintended consequences," an administration official told The Cable Friday afternoon. "This does damage to the individuals because they are named, danger to security cooperation because these are militias and groups that we work with and that is now well known, and danger to the investigation, because these people could help us down the road."
One of the cables released by Issa names a woman human rights activist who was leading a campaign against violence and was detained in Benghazi. She expressed fear for her safety to U.S. officials and criticized the Libyan government.
"This woman is trying to raise an anti-violence campaign on her own and came to the United States for help. She isn't publicly associated with the U.S. in any other way but she's now named in this cable. It's a danger to her life," the administration official said.
Another cable names a Benghazi port manager who is working with the United States on an infrastructure project.
"When you're in a situation where Ansar al-Sharia is a risk to Americans, an individual like this guy, who is an innocent civilian who's trying to reopen the port and is doing so in conjunction with Americans, could be at risk now because he's publicly affiliated with America," the official said, referring to the group thought to have led the Benghazi attack.
One cable names a local militia commander dishing dirt on the inner workings of the Libyan Interior Ministry. Another cable names a militia commander who claims to control a senior official of the Libyan armed forces. Other cables contain details of conversations between third-party governments, such as the British and the Danes, and their private interactions with the U.S., the U.N., and the Libyan governments over security issues.
"It betrays the trust of people we are trying to maintain contact with on a regular basis, including security officials inside militias and civil society people as well," another administration official told The Cable. "It's a serious betrayal of trust for us and it hurts our ability to maintain these contacts going forward. It has the potential to physically endanger these people. They didn't sign up for that. Neither did we."
One administration official accused Issa of doing harm to the investigation for the sake of creating negative news stories days before the final presidential debate, which will focus on foreign policy. In previous investigations, Issa has acknowledged and respected the need to protect information that could be important to completing the administration's own investigations, the official noted.
"He's trying to gather all the facts, but he's blurting out all the evidence before the State Department and FBI investigation is done," the official said.
Frederick Hill, a spokesman for the Oversight Committee, defended the release of the documents in a Friday afternoon interview with The Cable. He said some of the documents had been released by the committee after the Oct. 10 hearing Issa held with State Department officials and the State Department has not directly complained to the committee so far.
Hill said it was the administration that had endangered lives by failing to put adequate security measures in place before the attack.
"Certainly there are people who made reckless decisions and put lives in danger in this situation and these people have motivations to discredit efforts to hold them accountable rather than having their true motivations be the security of people on the ground," he said.
The administration failed to protect sensitive information when it fled the compound during the attack, so its complaints about Issa's release are hypocritical, Hill argued.
The net net being we don't know if the names are real or not given the article. What little I did read in the small space under the large sign up block that pops up sounded to me like a ideological mole hill being squawked about by a highly partisan blog. Wait... didn't you accuse me of reading blogs - isn't that basically what this is?It also didn't say the names were not OKcupid profiles, but it does clearly say that their identities were compromised (which would suggest it was not an alias) and never takes the time to say it was aliases which would be something a decent source like this would include if that were the case.
You've been going on this whole time without even having read the article?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?