Author Topic: Here is why there is not more outrage about the outing of the CIA station chief in Kabul Marc Thiessen  (Read 118 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Online mystery-ak

  • Owner
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 255,385

Here is why there is not more outrage about the outing of the CIA station chief in Kabul
Marc Thiessen | May 28, 2014, 6:03 pm   

Over at Commentary, our friend Jonathan Tobin rightly asks “Where’s the Outrage Over CIA Outing?”

It should be remembered that it was only a few years ago that the same Democratic Party that currently runs the White House was up in arms because the name of a CIA official was leaked to the press…. the outrage about [Valerie] Plame’s outing in the liberal mainstream press was universal and white-hot. An angry Washington press corps helped manufacture a crisis that forced President Bush to appoint a special prosecutor to look into an act that was proclaimed to be nothing short of treason…. [W]hat occurred this past week was far worse than anything that happened to Plame. Plame was, after all, serving in an office in Virginia and, while classified, was no secret. By contrast, the CIA station chief whose name was released is in peril every day in Kabul. He is serving on the front lines of a shooting war and the release of his name in this indiscriminate manner may well have compromised his effectiveness if not his safety.

To which I can only say, “Amen.”

But there is another reason, aside from hypocrisy, why isn’t there more outrage over the outing of the CIA station in chief in Kabul: it’s par for the course. Leaks from this administration have become so regular that no one is surprised anymore when highly classified details like this are revealed.

Consider just a partial snapshot of this administration’s record:

    Last year, they leaked fact that the Libyan prime minister had approved the US raid that captured a senior al-Qaeda leader in Tripoli — which led directly to the prime minister’s kidnapping in retaliation for authorizing the raids.
    They also leaked the fact that a second raid had been planned against one of the terrorists responsible for the Benghazi attack – tipping him off that we were planning to snatch him.
    Before that, they leaked the role of a British double agent in breaking up a new underwear bomb plot in Yemen – requiring that double agent to be extracted.
    They also leaked classified operational details of the bin Laden raid – which got a Pakistani doctor who helped us arrested.
    They also leaked classified details of a US cyber-attack on Iran’s nuclear program.
    They also leaked the US and Israeli role in creating the “Flame” virus to spy on Iran’s nuclear program.
    They also leaked the existence of a “secret kill list” of terrorists targeted with drone strikes.
    They also leaked the existence of a secret US drone base in Saudi Arabia.
    They also leaked the existence a secret Israeli agreement with Azerbaijan to use its territory in case of a raid on Iran’s nuclear program.
    They also leaked the existence of secret special operations bases in Burkina Faso that were being used against al Qaeda in Africa.
    They also leaked the presence of CIA teams in Turkey helping direct aid to anti-Assad rebels in Syria.
    They also leaked the existence of a top secret “covert action finding” authorizing US support for rebels.

Help me out, folks – am I missing anything? The leaks go on … and on … and on.

These are not leaks — they are a flood. So is anyone at all surprised that they leaked the name of the CIA station chief in Kabul? After all, it’s just another ObamaLeak.

That is why there’s not more outrage.

Support the USO

Share me

Digg  Facebook  SlashDot  Delicious  Technorati  Twitter  Google  Yahoo