Blowing an agent’s cover
From the start of the latest underwear bomber story, I wondered who the leaker was. Now we learn more, including the fact that the undercover agent who was exposed wasn’t even our own guy, he was a British operative:
The leaks about the operation from the American side have infuriated British intelligence officials, who had hoped to continue the operation. The leaks not only scuttled the mission but put the life of the asset in jeopardy. Even CIA officials, joining their MI5 and MI6 counterparts, were describing the leaks as “despicable,” attributing them to the Obama administration.
And especially interesting is the relative disinterest of the MSM in this matter. Remember the Plame affair? Compare and contrast. And Plame’s risk was nothing compared to this guy’s.
It’s all Scooter Libby’s fault, no doubt.
If the leak came from the Obama Admin (and who suspects it didn’t? No one suspects it didn’t.), then the leak is despicable.
An interesting aspect: if the leak was authorized by the President, then the leak is no crime. The President has the authority to decide what is and is not in the best interests of the United States. If the President decides the nation’s interests are best served by outing an undercover agent, then that was the President’s best judgement, and that was the President’s call, and no crime has been committed.
The possible reasons (bad or good) for leaking are what?
BHO will blame the leak on the bust of Winston Churchill that he sent back to the UK.
An interesting aspect: if the leak was authorized by the President, then the leak is no crime.
It wouldn’t be a crime if you or I had done it. The guy is a British officer, and I am unaware that outing a foreign operative is against US law.
What Teh Won had done is poked an ally in the eye solely for political gain. This is the guy who is supposed to make the world love us?
“This is the guy who is supposed to make the world love us?”
Not the First World, IRADA. Not the First World.
Gcotharn. No decision stands alone. A President obviously cannot imperil national security when such imperil transgresses his right to consider what imperil is. Obama has done that (consider the Egyptian betrayal) but since there are enough idiots to confound a clear and consensual agreement that such decision was traitorous, then were left with partisan jabbing. But, at some point, close to Obama’s remark to Putin that he will have “flexibility,” Obama is traitorous because he subsumes his duty to defend the Constitution and the United Stated against foreign and domestic enemies.
“Obama is traitorous because he subsumes his duty to defend the Constitution and the United Stated against foreign and domestic enemies.”
Constitution?!?!? BHO don’t need no stinking Constitution.
Gotta be Scooter’s fault…But, we know it’s really Cheney behind & above him. And, hey, Boooosh.
Plame was an ally of the Left. Thus she is covered so long as she is useful. This British guy? He’s worth less than the Marines Obama sent to die in Afghanistan for his own amusement. “Fighting on his behalf” no less.
All this reminds me of a reality as played out in a John LeCarre novel. And it makes sense. The Brits have a long history with the Paks/Afghans and would be the most logical handlers of a mole in that region, especially since the US devalued humint long ago to concentrate on high tech spy toys. It’s also no surprise, if you’ve read LeCarre, that the Americans are causing trouble. The novels written by a guy who’d been there always saw the Americans as unserious about intel. Of course, they have had their homosexual spy problems over the years. (Not that there’s anything wrong with that.)
No takers of the question I posed yesterday.
Don Carlos, ask yourself ‘cui bono?’ Having seen the recent push to make Obama seem mucho macho and HS Dept’s push to tamp down on the terrorist meme, I’ll put words in someone’s mouth and suggest that this serves to further both of those projects. Anyway you look at it, this is evidence that O’s carrying out an aggressive policy to keep us safe. People won’t know of his success, however, unless people know of his success. Tautological, I know, but you get the point. If you can’t sing of a booming economy, you go with what you’ve got.