Comments on: Which Raises the Question… http://firedoglake.com/2006/04/21/which-raises-the-question/ Firedoglake weblog Wed, 25 Nov 2009 17:30:00 -0600 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6 hourly 1 By: bob h http://firedoglake.com/2006/04/21/which-raises-the-question/#comment-74623 bob h Sat, 22 Apr 2006 11:56:06 +0000 http://www.firedoglake.com/2006/04/21/which-raises-the-question/#comment-74623 <p>I do hope they are dumb enough to go after Dana Priest.</p> I do hope they are dumb enough to go after Dana Priest.

]]> By: pax http://firedoglake.com/2006/04/21/which-raises-the-question/#comment-74497 pax Sat, 22 Apr 2006 06:07:23 +0000 http://www.firedoglake.com/2006/04/21/which-raises-the-question/#comment-74497 <p>If my memory serves me correctly…After Aldrich and Hanssen the gov’t said it would routinely subject agents to polygraph tests….</p> If my memory serves me correctly…After Aldrich and Hanssen the gov’t said it would routinely subject agents to polygraph tests….

]]> By: James http://firedoglake.com/2006/04/21/which-raises-the-question/#comment-74494 James Sat, 22 Apr 2006 06:04:47 +0000 http://www.firedoglake.com/2006/04/21/which-raises-the-question/#comment-74494 <p>What does a whistleblower say when they need to give classified information to a reporter?</p> <p>Ans: I need to go take a leak.</p> <p>*****************************************</p> <p>What does a reporter say after receiving classified information from a whistleblower?</p> <p>Ans: I just took a leak.</p> <p>(I didn’t say they would be good jokes.) ;}</p> What does a whistleblower say when they need to give classified information to a reporter?

Ans: I need to go take a leak.

*****************************************

What does a reporter say after receiving classified information from a whistleblower?

Ans: I just took a leak.

(I didn’t say they would be good jokes.) ;}

]]> By: Fool Zero http://firedoglake.com/2006/04/21/which-raises-the-question/#comment-74478 Fool Zero Sat, 22 Apr 2006 05:48:09 +0000 http://www.firedoglake.com/2006/04/21/which-raises-the-question/#comment-74478 <p>orangejumpsuit wrote: <i>There are a couple of misconceptions here about Bush’s authority to declassify documents.</i></p> <p>Thanks for the information but I’m not sure how much weight it’ll carry. Bush himself seems to have lots of serious misconceptions about his authority. Unfortunately, with the present makeup of Congress, whatever Bush misconceives, goes.</p> <p>—————-<br /> wesgpc wrote, <i>#100: good point…</i><br /> The first time I read that, my post was #100, his was #106, and he seemed to be replying to mine. Apparently the numbering has changed since then; mine is now #102, his is #108, and what he says about the present #100 comes across as a non sequitur.</p> orangejumpsuit wrote: There are a couple of misconceptions here about Bush’s authority to declassify documents.

Thanks for the information but I’m not sure how much weight it’ll carry. Bush himself seems to have lots of serious misconceptions about his authority. Unfortunately, with the present makeup of Congress, whatever Bush misconceives, goes.

—————-
wesgpc wrote, #100: good point…
The first time I read that, my post was #100, his was #106, and he seemed to be replying to mine. Apparently the numbering has changed since then; mine is now #102, his is #108, and what he says about the present #100 comes across as a non sequitur.

]]> By: Jeff Leonard http://firedoglake.com/2006/04/21/which-raises-the-question/#comment-74469 Jeff Leonard Sat, 22 Apr 2006 05:42:37 +0000 http://www.firedoglake.com/2006/04/21/which-raises-the-question/#comment-74469 <p>It is my understanding that Non-disclosure agreements are unenforceable with respect to government employees or government contractors because any non-classified information that would be protected by the non-disclosure agreement must be disclosed in response to a FOIA request. Consequently, the government uses classification and security clearances instead of NDAs and confidentiality/trade secrets.</p> <p>At least this was the explanation I was given when I had to get a security clearance when I worked on several sensitive projects for the USPS. In this case the sensitive information was trade secrets (business performance, processes and financial data) that had been classified so that USPS competitors (FedEx and the like) couldn’t file FOIA’s and get access to it.</p> <p>I’m not a lawyer, so feel free to correct me if you are a lawyer and are knowledgeable about the subject.</p> It is my understanding that Non-disclosure agreements are unenforceable with respect to government employees or government contractors because any non-classified information that would be protected by the non-disclosure agreement must be disclosed in response to a FOIA request. Consequently, the government uses classification and security clearances instead of NDAs and confidentiality/trade secrets.

At least this was the explanation I was given when I had to get a security clearance when I worked on several sensitive projects for the USPS. In this case the sensitive information was trade secrets (business performance, processes and financial data) that had been classified so that USPS competitors (FedEx and the like) couldn’t file FOIA’s and get access to it.

I’m not a lawyer, so feel free to correct me if you are a lawyer and are knowledgeable about the subject.

]]> By: Dan Robinson http://firedoglake.com/2006/04/21/which-raises-the-question/#comment-74331 Dan Robinson Sat, 22 Apr 2006 03:50:01 +0000 http://www.firedoglake.com/2006/04/21/which-raises-the-question/#comment-74331 <p>Tweety said “I just got off the phone with Karl Rove. He said your wife is fair game.”</p> <p>Seems pretty cut-and-dried to me.</p> <p>Absent cut-and-dried, I’d settle for flayed.</p> Tweety said “I just got off the phone with Karl Rove. He said your wife is fair game.”

Seems pretty cut-and-dried to me.

Absent cut-and-dried, I’d settle for flayed.

]]> By: J. Smith http://firedoglake.com/2006/04/21/which-raises-the-question/#comment-74281 J. Smith Sat, 22 Apr 2006 03:04:28 +0000 http://www.firedoglake.com/2006/04/21/which-raises-the-question/#comment-74281 <p>“I have a question. Is this standard operating procedure within the government?”</p> <p>Ans. Your question properly should have been specific to Intelligence organizations. In that regard, after hard won experience, the answer is yes. If your not willing to submit to a random, unannounced poly, don’t apply. If you do apply and are offered a job you sign your understanding and acceptance. You don’t like, go check out at WalMart. Call V. Plame, she will tell you.</p> <p>As a fat and happy citizen, you should be thankful.</p> “I have a question. Is this standard operating procedure within the government?”

Ans. Your question properly should have been specific to Intelligence organizations. In that regard, after hard won experience, the answer is yes. If your not willing to submit to a random, unannounced poly, don’t apply. If you do apply and are offered a job you sign your understanding and acceptance. You don’t like, go check out at WalMart. Call V. Plame, she will tell you.

As a fat and happy citizen, you should be thankful.

]]> By: orangejumpsuit http://firedoglake.com/2006/04/21/which-raises-the-question/#comment-74279 orangejumpsuit Sat, 22 Apr 2006 03:02:36 +0000 http://www.firedoglake.com/2006/04/21/which-raises-the-question/#comment-74279 <p>Oops! Change “from that person” to “for that person.”</p> Oops! Change “from that person” to “for that person.”

]]> By: orangejumpsuit http://firedoglake.com/2006/04/21/which-raises-the-question/#comment-74276 orangejumpsuit Sat, 22 Apr 2006 03:01:25 +0000 http://www.firedoglake.com/2006/04/21/which-raises-the-question/#comment-74276 <p>There are a couple of misconceptions here about Bush’s authority to declassify documents.</p> <p>1) Bush cannot willy-nilly change the <i>security level (Confidential, Secret, Top Secret) of an individual</i>. His authority to declassify pertains to <i>documents</i> not people. He may certainly recommend that someone who works for him be given security clearance, but the FBI has to do due diligence (a drawn out process) to get security clearance from that person. </p> <p>2) By the same token Bush cannot declassify the operative status of a NOC, which Valerie Plame was. Again, Bush’s declassification authority pertains to documents, not individuals. So whatever Bush declassified during the push back on Wilson, it was not Plames security status.</p> There are a couple of misconceptions here about Bush’s authority to declassify documents.

1) Bush cannot willy-nilly change the security level (Confidential, Secret, Top Secret) of an individual. His authority to declassify pertains to documents not people. He may certainly recommend that someone who works for him be given security clearance, but the FBI has to do due diligence (a drawn out process) to get security clearance from that person.

2) By the same token Bush cannot declassify the operative status of a NOC, which Valerie Plame was. Again, Bush’s declassification authority pertains to documents, not individuals. So whatever Bush declassified during the push back on Wilson, it was not Plames security status.

]]> By: Beef http://firedoglake.com/2006/04/21/which-raises-the-question/#comment-74259 Beef Sat, 22 Apr 2006 02:40:43 +0000 http://www.firedoglake.com/2006/04/21/which-raises-the-question/#comment-74259 <p>“Is this how it always works? I’d very much like to know.</p> <p>Because I have a leak I’d like to report….”</p> <p>Bwahahahahaha……….</p> “Is this how it always works? I’d very much like to know.

Because I have a leak I’d like to report….”

Bwahahahahaha……….

]]>