Where is the balance as far as hiding secrets of government?

[DonCoquixote]

On the one hand, I despise the fact that many Bush era civil liberty wounds have not been healed by Obama. I think he owes Bradley Manning a pardon, and Julian Assange an apology. I think that there needs to be an outright overhaul of the intelligence agencies of this country, from the NYPD to the CIA. The CIA in particular has gotten way too big for it's britches, way less accountable than it should be, and indeed, may need a complete disbandment and reboot. It says a lot where we spend so much on an agency that has become known for it's blunders, while smaller intelligence agencies across the world laugh.

However, there is the other hand. As much as we may think we are exceptions to History, we are not. There will always be a need for spies and covert operations, because psychopaths of all stripes, creeds, and nations are going to hide what they do, and unless we have people who can out sneak them, they will do their damage long before the standard cops can show up. There is a need for covert ops to stay covert, as Valerie Plame showed. Ms Plame that makes the talk shows could have very easily been Ms Plame shot by a North Korean firing squad. The people that try to save lives can be exposed, then killed, all because some internet twit wants to become a celebrity. We need a blanace here, the question is, where to draw the line?

[beevul]

1. True, there will always be a need...

And also true, there will always be psychopaths of all stripes, creeds, and nations.

One of the biggest needs I see though, is finding a way to filter out our own psychopaths, whether it be from NYPD, LAPD, Omaha PD, the CIA, FBI, or whatever organization, wherever and whomever they may be.

I don't mean to hijack your thread...its just...stories like the one in Omaha and the ""You want to film something bitch? Film this!" incident...you struck a chord with me when you used the word "psychopaths", and those events immediately came to mind.

[DCKit]

2. +1

The escalation has been pretty dramatic.

[DonCoquixote]

3. NP

I want to make discussion

[kentuck]

4. We accept the violence that comes with the 2nd Amendment.

Why can't we accept the violence that might come with the 1st Amendment??

[DonCoquixote]

5. In the case of spying

Because frankly, lives are risked that are innocent, not even that of Americans.

Example, Valerie Plame gets outed as a CIA agent working in North Korea. Of course, the logical thing NK would do is not only try to kill her, but deal with everyone else around her. That means the cabdriver she used could get killed, any neighbor, and frankly, anyone she so much as bummed a smoke of off. Not to mention that when you say "violence of the 1st amendment" , that can include anything from someone getting embarrassed to someone getting killed because some psychopath wants to protect their plan.

It is NOT cut and dry, and as much as I would love to say we will never need spies, history will tell us otherwise.

[Ash_F]

6. Valerie Plame wasn't doing anything hideously objectionable

Had she been committing crimes against humanity and subverting justice, then yes she would not deserve anonymity. But she wasn't, from what we know. You can't compare that to the things Manning outed, such as child sex slavery by Virginia based military contractors, or the collusion with the IMF and corporations to wreck small country economies. Manning did not out anyone like Plame. The information was not that high a level of classification.

Yes there needs to be balance with secrecy. But the line between right and wrong is not really THAT grey. I think people just like to use that excuse so they don't have to do anything. The government needs it citizen's to keep a watchful eye over its actions. You can not just assume they will do the right thing.

[DonCoquixote]

7. to some, she was

I mean, one of the things that surprises me is the way some people defend NK, even though, unlike Iraq, they had Nukes, and have threatened to use them on us, as well as South Korea. Yet, to many, Plame may be considered a criminal against humanity because they see NK as David versus Goliath.

See how things get slippery?

[Ash_F]

8. And that is comparable to covering up child rape?

I know you don't think that, but you are inadvertently making that argument. It is not unlike the people who make the slippery slope argument regarding gay marriage and bestiality or gun registration and confiscation.

Just because people might differ on what is right and what is wrong, doesn't mean we can't ever have a discussion on right and wrong. There are laws after all.

[DonCoquixote]

9. true that, but lets take another example

Let's say we wind up investigating a religious group that is rumored to have mass marriages of children. Rest assured, if someone leaks the id of the agents spying, there will be people saying that this religion was targeted just because of bigotry, of hatred.

Never mind times where the exploitation of children turned out to be true. Whether it is the David Korresh types or the Roman Catholic church, it turns out the child rape does go on, and lo and behold, it took some cop to go in covert, sneak around, and find out that yes, this was going on.

All I am saying is that if we broadcast every bit of spy info, the psychopaths, be they kid rapists, mass murderers, corporations or garden variety sickos, will read the papers like everyone else, and HIDE.

[Ash_F]

10. That is a better arguement

In a case like that, I agree that undercover agents should not have their identities revealed. But if we are talking about the wikileaks specifically, they haven't outed anything like that. I don't know if you caught the edit in my first post, but the leaks were not that kind of info.