TORTURE IF YOU MUST, BUT DO NOT UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES CALL THE NEW YORK TIMES

[kpete]

Monday’s guilty verdict in the trial of former CIA officer Jeffrey Sterling on espionage charges — for talking to a newspaper reporter — is the latest milepost on the dark and dismal path Barack Obama has traveled since his inaugural promises to usher in a “new era of openness.”

Far from rejecting the authoritarian bent of his presidential predecessor, Obama has simply adjusted it, adding his own personal touches, most notably an enthusiasm for criminally prosecuting the kinds of leaks that are essential to a free press.

The Sterling case – especially in light of Obama’s complicity in the cover-up of torture during the Bush administration – sends a clear message to people in government service: You won’t get in trouble as long as you do what you’re told (even torture people). But if you talk to a reporter and tell him something we want kept secret, we will spare no effort to destroy you.

the rest:
https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2015/01/27/torture-must-circumstances-call-new-york-times/

[elias49]

1. Yes indeed.

Of course if the intel community wasn't embarrassed, they wouldn't get so prickly.
Shine a light on their misdeeds at your peril.

[Ichingcarpenter]

2. If you have done nothing wrong

[Jefferson23]

3. +1. n/t

[mountain grammy]

7. wow, powerful and far too true.

[Recursion]

4. DU can't seem to make up its mind about whether outing CIA agents in Iran is OK or not

Generally I'm opposed to it.

[msanthrope]

20. Thank you. nt

[newfie11]

5. They commited crimes

But the reporter goes to jail!
I'm so glad lady liberty is blindfolded!

[msanthrope]

23. The reporter didn't go to jail. nt

[leveymg]

26. Not yet. nt

[RKP5637]

6. Transparency. Yep, right, sure. n/t

[frazzled]

8. This case had nothing to do with torture

It was about divulging details of an operation to disrupt Iran's nuclear capability (during the Bush administration). When you work for the CIA and expose classified methods and operations, it's your choice ... but it would be against the law, so you do the time.

But nice try with the scare headlines.

[jtuck004]

9. Freeing black folks was against the law at one time. You support that too?

Justice is not always the outcome of law.

[Enthusiast]

18. +1 an entire shit load.

[frazzled]

27. Huh?????

I think maybe a cup of coffee might help. Surprised you didn't throw Hitler in there as well.

[2banon]

11. You're right this case wasn't about torture, but Sterling didn't work for the CIA..

That was the other guy they prosecuted who was a former agent. That said, this article seems to go along with the Prosecutors claims that Sterling was in fact, with no actual evidence, guilty of leaking intel to Risen. Their case was completely -100% - circumstantial.

Quite a serious charge based on nothing but a theory. The jury had great difficulty in coming to an agreement to a verdict on any of the counts levied on Sterling. The extreme pressure issued from the circuit court judge in demanding that they go back to deliberations and come back with a decision, time and time again (juries don't get to 'call it a day' when they need to) did they finally give in and issued "guilty" verdicts on enough of the charges to satisfy the prosecutors and the judge who no doubt was sympathetic to the govt's "case".

Sterlings defense team made the case that the leak was likely from staffer(s) on the Senate Intelligence Committee. I tend to think that was just as likely as any other scenario.

But the State Dept wanted Risen's head, they couldn't go after him for political reasons, so they grabbed another reporter with less notoriety instead.

Given that the Prosecutors had no actual evidence other than a theory they presented to the court, I'll stick to mine, or rather the Defense atty's, it has far more plausibility.

[msanthrope]

21. According to his indictment, Sterling was a CIA employee. If you don't have THAT essential

fact correct...why do you think anything you write about this case is trustworthy and correct?

[KingCharlemagne]

12. The CIA used a Russian scientist to provide the Iranians with flawed

nuclear component schematics; the government alleges and a jury agrees that Sterling fed details of that government op to Risen.

However, the CIA did torture detainees and John Kiriakou, a CIA agent, was tried and found guilty of leaking information about that torture program to journalists also.

So, while the Sterling case here does not revolve around torture, Kiriakou's prosecution did\does. So the moral the authors of the article seem to be drawing appears valid, as no CIA torturers are currently incarcerated, only the CIA whistleblower to said torture.

The U.S. government tortured people in your name paid for by your tax dollars. I think that deserves some scare quote myself.

[Duval]

13. Appreciate the clarification, frazzled!nt

[sabrina 1]

25. We have had lots of laws that prevented this country from doing progressing. Some have been

rescinded though I'm sure they were used as a hammer over the heads of those who wanted their country to be better than it was/is.

As someone said recently, Howard Zinn I believe, 'more harm has been caused by obedience than by disobedience'.

It takes courage to be disobedient when you see wrong doing. So many choose instead to turn to the law as their excuse.

On this day of all days, that is something to consider.

[zeemike]

10. Well we should have known

that when they say openness they intend to crack down on disclosure...It is SOP for our leaders to use the Orwellian labels.
Some day I hope we figure it out...but that would require the ability to think critically, and we seem to have lost that.

[Thespian2]

14. The Obama Administration

lost me when they refused to turn the spotlight on W., Cheney, Rummy, Rice, et al. Let the war criminals walk free to earn millions from the GREEDY BASTARDS who put them in power.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

15. But, but, Sterling wasn't "just following orders"....like the torturers were.

[bigtree]

16. Holders statement that they can prosecute these cases and still allow journalists to do their jobs

...is utter bullshit, given that they pressure news orgs all of the time (as they did in this case) to restrict reporting on stories. This was so much less a case of protecting national security as it was an effort to save the U.S. government from embarrassment and accountability to the American people. The espionage law needs revising, if this is somehow a just verdict under the law.

[riderinthestorm]

19. + 10000. K&R. nt

[gcomeau]

17. Sigh...

Is it a travesty of justice that torturers have not been prosecuted? Yes.

Does the guy who violated the law by disclosing classified material he was legally obligated to hold in confidence belong in prison? Also Yes.


But by all means, don't let me slow down the indiscriminate outrage machine...

[msanthrope]

22. Excellent post. nt

[FiveGoodMen]

24. Just follow orders

It's what Hitler would have wanted (yes, it certainly is)

AND it's what Obama wants.

Rant away, but that's the truth.