Snipers name,address and picture posted in New York Times

[mad1]

Here is a link to the article, you need to be registered to read the article. I will not repost the name and address of our snipers. The picture of the me is also posted on the article.
This should be illegal.What is the difference between this and the ongoing case in Washington of the leaked CIA operative?

[Theophylact]

I don't get your point. The program is not secret; the snipers are not incognito; they're proud of what they do; and they're not endangered by their names and faces being shown, any more than any other GIs in a combat zone are. Had they wanted to have their names or faces withheld, it would have been done. This was an open interview, and (given the tight control the Department of Defense exercises over embedded reporters) clearly done with the Government's full blessing.

On the other hand, Valerie Plame was acting under non-official cover (that is, she was covert); a law specifically forbids revealing the identity of such agents; she can no longer carry out her mission, and her career of many years has been destroyed. Her life, unlike those of the snipers, was put at risk by blowing her cover. And that was done to smear someone else -- her husband -- because he delivered a truthful message the Government didn't want publicized.

[Epidemic]

Theo,

The address thing is more concerning than a retired field agents secret identity being revealed.

I do not like her information being released but I do not think i hurts her career very much. Do you really think it hurt her career?

Do you think she was going to go out @ what, like, age 97 and do some 007 work. If it was leaked by someone they should be punished accordingly but the threat to her in an office chair in washington is far less than the family of a active sniper involved in a military action.

[Warthog]

It will matter if a price ever was put on the snipers head and contacts back in America decided to hurt his family. Maybe far fetched, maybe not.

During the Vietnam conflict, very large ransoms were put on the death or capture of some famous snipers, specifically Carlos Hathcock.

Warthog

[Theophylact]

Sorry, Epidemic, she's not retired. She was still operating, under NOC, in her early forties, until the White House (a.k.a. "senior Administration officials", according to Robert Novak) burned her.

And who's going to come after the families of the snipers? Some left-wing gun nut who's going to kill all the Davises and Wilsons in Murfreesboro and Muncie on the off chance of getting the right one? If al-Qaida, or Saddam's mujaheddin, have the resources to waste on a long-range hit like that, we're all goners. Get real.

[mad1]

Originally posted by Theophylact
I don't get your point.

The identity and location of the family of a military person should not be exposed, especillay in a time of military conflict. What is stop someone from harming the family of one of these men.

The reporter showed blatant disregard for the military personell and their family's. This is unexcuseable,morally wrong and shows no common sense on the part of the reporter.

[MTAtech]

Valerie Plame's career is finished in that field. She can no longer do undercover work as she has no cover. Depending upon what she knows her life may be in danger. That's why the law exists.

The law does not apply to the Army snipers.

As for a policy of not disclosing the names and addresses of military personnel, there was never such a policy. Even the govt discloses this. Do you know where Pvt. Lynch is from?

Even Stars and Stripes publishes this information.

[Epidemic]

My point is that Valerie was probably not going to be redeployed again (in all likelyhood) at least not for a 007 type mission. Famous husband would more than likely keep her out of harms way for future missions. She is on the political nepatism fast track train. Perhaps it does limit the scope of her future carreer but I will bet that if you had a crystal ball which worked it would not have changed here career one little bit.

MTA, Just because it is perhaps not technically illegal to report such information. I would say even a liberal comie pinko fanatic could see that it would not be wise to list names pictures and addresses of people in harms way.

Maybe you feel different but these guys are still in theater and may yet still create a few enemies by blowing away scum sucking terrorists. As such their families may become targets.


BTW didn't Novack retract the comment that it was a senior whitehouse member.

[Theophylact]

"Senior Administration official" was Novak's term, and he didn't withdraw it. He didn't say "White House", but as far as I'm concerned, that's a distinction without a difference.

I don't know why you continue to defame Plame. She's not a political appointee; she's served in Republican and Democratic administrations; she was undercover when she was burned, and neither she nor that cover can now be used. The CIA is royally ticked off at the loss of a really useful agent.

Nobody who wasn't cleared knew what her job was. The "nepotism" slander goes in the other direction: the claim that she got her husband the "plum" (unpaid) job as special snoop in Africa.

[Epidemic]

Theo are you sure she was undercover when the story broke.

I thought she was deskbound for quite some time before that.

If she was undercover or in a current mission that does change my opinion somewhat.

as far as the senior official thing goes. I do not think that goes far enough. What level does novak consider senior when trying ot hype a story. Intern, VP, Senator, Secretary of state. What is senior.

If there is a serious breach of security in the whitehouse or there abouts I think that the leak should be plugged.

Novak should be wisked away and told to reveal the source or suffer the consequences. Black ops guy types. it should never be revealed that novak was the source but he should be forced to reveal it under penalty of life in prison. The revelation should be to a bi partisan comission with Novaks name as top secret.

It would work because Novak would not talk about having yielded his source (bad for business and future off the record comments).