Ace of Spades HQ

December 30, 2004

Pentagon Official Ousted For Trying to Help George Bush Politically
— Ace

Wonder if Josh Marshall will begin scandalblogging this outrage?:

A Pentagon official who publicly disclosed information showing Russian involvement in moving Iraqi weapons out of that country has been dismissed.
...
Mr. Shaw said he had been asked to resign for "exceeding his authority" in disclosing the information, a charge he called "specious."

In October, Mr. Shaw told The Washington Times that he had received foreign intelligence data showing that Russian special forces units were involved in an effort to remove Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction in the weeks before the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq began in March 2003.
...
Reports of the Russian role in dispersing Iraqi arms made news during the final days of the presidential election campaign, at a time when the Bush administration was being criticized for failing to secure tons of Iraqi high explosives that could be used in developing nuclear arms.
Mr. Shaw went public to counter a political "October surprise" campaign designed to "crucify the president" over the missing explosives, he wrote to Mr. Rumsfeld.
"The Kerry media-driven October surprise attack on us and the president stopped within hours," Mr. Shaw wrote. "If I had not had the openly hostile environment in [Pentagon public affairs], I would have moved the story differently. Getting the truth out instantly was more important than process."

All right. Two big points:

Whether to help or hurt the administration, you can't just reveal classified information because you think it should be released. Liberals seem to have trouble understanding this; but the occasional conservative seems to as well.

As much as I'd like to know things like this, there may be diplomatic reasons for keeping it secret. Such information could, for example, be used as leverage to help secure Russian help, so long as it were actually kept secret. (Blackmail only works until you publicize the dirty pictures, after all.)

Second, since one administration-friendly leaker has been fired, it is now time to unapologetically go after the administration-hostile ones. If you sign on the line that is dotted, and vow to not release this information, it's a fireable offense if you do; and most of the time, you should be fired.

Let the purge begin. The Pentagon and CIA have to be made to understand that they simply are not the makers of this nation's foreign policy, no matter how smart they think they might be and how much better they'd handle things.

Posted by: Ace at 03:20 PM | Comments (9)
Post contains 423 words, total size 3 kb.

1 Brilliant strategy that. Shoot the leaker on your own team first to defuse the counter charge that you are only trying to de-liberalize the CIA.

Let the purges begin!

Posted by: Dacotti at December 30, 2004 03:44 PM (dg1cu)

2 It does seem quite prudent to countenance the sacrifice of one ally as a means of bolstering one's standing to purge a large number of enemies and to resecure the loyalty (or at least the fearfulness) of numerous powerful servants. I don't know whether saying it's prudent, as you and I have both done, is prudent, but I think so.

Posted by: Piter De Vries at December 30, 2004 03:52 PM (XFoEH)

3 Ace--

Both your points are correct, and wise.

One other thing, inside baseball that I know: Shaw was considered a bit of a dick. While by itself this was definitely a fireable offense (and *should* be), it was also a handy excuse for something a long time a comin'.

Cheers,
Dave at Garfield Ridge

Posted by: Dave at Garfield Ridge at December 30, 2004 08:17 PM (mrpxK)

4 I don't think conservatives yet appreciate just how hostile the CIA is to Republicans in general and to Bush specifically. If you wanted to move out everyone who had a political bias against Bush, you would have to fire 3/4 of the agency.

Liberals have very successfully dominated the entwined worlds of gov't agencies, journalism, and academia through a de facto system of preferential hiring and outright blacklisting. It will take at least a generation to bring a reasonable balance to any of those three, if such a change is even possible.

Posted by: TallDave at December 31, 2004 05:36 PM (SAIdQ)

5
There are many online stores having Ysl shoes on sale. Yesterday, my friend bought a Yves saint laurent shoes which is so beautiful, i am surprised by the design and style. Do you have a pair of Yves saint laurent now? if not, go to online store and have one, it is so amazing!!!

Posted by: samdy at March 25, 2011 04:51 AM (HbC6N)

6
There are many online stores having abercrombie and fitch sale on sale. Yesterday, my friend bought a Cheap Abercrombie which is so beautiful, i am surprised by the design and style. Do you have a pair of abercrombie outlet now? if not, go to online store and have one, it is so amazing!!!

Posted by: samdy at March 25, 2011 04:52 AM (HbC6N)

7 Thanks, for your efforts, i really liked it and to be shared with my friends

Posted by: شات الخليج at December 19, 2011 03:35 PM (b6Qrz)

8 Extremely regularly I go to this website. It very a great deal is pleasant to me. Thanks the author!

Posted by: Coach Handbags at May 12, 2012 04:26 AM (J9Htk)

9 Yes! I agree what you say!

Posted by: Loewe Handbags at May 23, 2012 05:27 AM (fAPyb)

Hide Comments | Add Comment