[IP] more on CIA fires leaker; shades of confidentiality/privacy
Begin forwarded message:
From: L Victor Marks <victor@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: April 21, 2006 10:19:24 PM EDT
To: dave@xxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [IP] CIA fires leaker; shades of confidentiality/privacy
http://www.boston.com/news/world/europe/articles/2006/04/21/
eu_official_no_evidence_of_illegal_cia_action/
The EU has found no evidence of illegal CIA action.
Secret renditions? None found. Violations of human rights? None
found. Final findings will be released in June.
So, if the final findings confirm what the EU antiterrorism
coordinator has said publicly, what we have is a leaker who leaked a
falsehood that caused embarrassment, made a serious allegation, and
wasn't even factual.
I imagine if I embarrassed my employer with a false accusation that I
too would be fired. But state and federal employees get a different
standard, whistleblower protection. From what little I know of
whistleblower protection, I understand that the whistleblower has to
report the alleged illegal act to the proper authority, not the press.
On Apr 21, 2006, at 6:51 PM, David Farber wrote:
Begin forwarded message:
From: Ross Stapleton-Gray <ross@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: April 21, 2006 6:40:15 PM EDT
To: Dave <dave@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: CIA fires leaker; shades of confidentiality/privacy
The CIA has apparently fired the source of leaks to the media
regarding secret prisons in Eastern Europe:
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/news/archive/
2006/04/21/national/w122516D53.DTL
(and appended)
There're some meta-issues here... NB, "Citing the Privacy Act, the
CIA would not disclose any details about the officer's identity or
what that person might have told the news media;" of course, said
firee may very well like to have his/her case taken up publicly...
presumably they felt that the information leaked was important to
be heard by the public in the first place. Also, later in the
piece, the rather hypocritial, "On Friday, another government
official, also speaking on condition of anonymity because of the
sensitivity of the information, said the fired officer had failed a
polygraph test,"... so, a leak ABOUT the leak!
**********
CIA Fires Employee for Alleged Leak
- By KATHERINE SHRADER, Associated Press Writer
Friday, April 21, 2006
(04-21) 15:25 PDT WASHINGTON (AP) --
In a highly unusual move, the CIA has fired an employee for leaking
classified information to the news media, including details about
secret CIA prisons in Eastern Europe that resulted in a Pultizer
Prize-winning story, officials said Friday.
A federal criminal investigation has also been opened.
CIA Director Porter Goss announced the firing in a short message to
agency employees circulated Thursday. It is the first time since he
took over in August 2004, vowing to clamp down on leaks, that he
has dismissed an intelligence officer for speaking with reporters.
Agency spokesman Paul Gimigliano confirmed an officer had been
fired for having unauthorized contacts with the media and
disclosing classified information to reporters, including details
about intelligence operations.
"The officer has acknowledged unauthorized discussions with the
media and the unauthorized sharing of classified information,"
Gimigliano said. "That is a violation of the secrecy agreement that
everyone signs as a condition of employment with the CIA."
Citing the Privacy Act, the CIA would not disclose any details
about the officer's identity or what that person might have told
the news media.
However, a law enforcement official confirmed there was a criminal
investigation under way and said the CIA officer had provided
information that contributed to a Washington Post story last year
saying there were secret U.S. prisons in Eastern Europe. The law
enforcement official spoke only on condition of anonymity, citing
the sensitivity of the matter.
The Post reported that the CIA had set up a covert prison system
after Sept. 11, 2001, that at various times included sites in eight
countries. The story caused an international uproar, and government
officials have said it did significant damage to relationships
between the U.S. and allied intelligence agencies.
Goss has pressed for aggressive investigations of leaked information.
"The damage has been very severe to our capabilities to carry out
our mission," Goss told Congress in February, adding that a federal
grand jury should be impaneled to determine "who is leaking this
information."
On Friday, another government official, also speaking on condition
of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the information, said
the fired officer had failed a polygraph test.
It was not clear if the person was taking a routine polygraph
examination, as is required periodically of employees with access
to classified information, or if the polygraph was among those
ordered by Goss to find leakers inside the agency.
Justice Department officials declined to comment publicly on the
firing and whether the matter had been referred to federal
prosecutors for possible criminal charges. One law enforcement
official said there were dozens of leak investigations under way.
The Washington Post's Dana Priest won a Pulitzer Prize this week
for her reporting on the secret prisons story.
"No Post reporter has been subpoenaed or talked to investigators in
connection with this matter," Post spokesman Eric Grant said Friday.
___
Associated Press Writer Mark Sherman contributed to this report.
-------------------------------------
You are subscribed as victor@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To manage your subscription, go to
http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip
Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-
people/
-------------------------------------
You are subscribed as roessler@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To manage your subscription, go to
http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip
Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/