This Is How A Police State Protects “Secrets” - Marcy Wheeler/Salon

[bigtree]

116. actually, the government's actions endangered lives

...and Sterling wasn't found guilty of 'outing and agent' to 'sell a book,' so that's just propaganda to discredit him.

from the article in the op:

"Sterling was accused — and ultimately convicted — of leaking two related things: First, information about the Merlin operation to deal flawed nuclear blueprints to Iran, as well as the involvement of a Russian engineer referred to as Merlin in the trial. In addition to that, the government charged Sterling separately for leaking a document (one which the FBI never found, in anyone’s possession): a letter Merlin included along with the nuclear blueprints he wrapped in a newspaper and left in the mailbox of Iran’s representative to the International Atomic Energy Agency. So the government convicted Sterling of leaking two things: information about the operation, and a letter that was used in the operation."

as to the dangerous and reckless government plot Sterling was revealing:

(There) was the testimony of former CIA official David Shedd, currently the acting director of the Defense Intelligence Agency, who pointed to many dire potential results of the Risen book’s now-aging disclosures. He called the leak “a breach of security that potentially would affect similar operations,” and warned that such a leak “could require modification” of U.S. nuclear plans – apparently because the bogus plans had good stuff in them that, warts and all, provided tips about the U.S. program. Which only underscores the craziness: If there is good stuff in the flawed plans, why would you want to peddle them to Iran or any other country you consider an adversary?
http://original.antiwar.com/john_hanrahan/2015/01/23/sterling-prosecution-long-on-rhetoric-short-on-evidence/

What the government was actually engaged in at the time was an effort to make it appear that Iraq actually had a nuclear weapons program, even though a National Intelligence Estimate in 2007 concluded that Iran did not have a nuclear weapons program and actually halted their nuclear efforts as early as 2003. In fact, the International Atomic Energy Agency believed the evidence the U.S. was presenting was fabricated. Presenting the U.S. efforts against as some heroic race to stop an atomic bomb plays into the narrative which had been used to call for strikes or an invasion of Iran. The record, however, shows a muddled, contradictory, and bungled effort to discredit the Iranians, rather than some noble and unassailable mission.

from 'CIA on Trial in Virginia for Planting Nuke Evidence in Iran'

Here’s another explanation of both Operation Merlin and of the defensiveness of the prosecution and its witnesses (in particular “Bob S.”) at the prosecution of Jeffrey Sterling which is thus far failing to prosecute Jeffrey Sterling. This was an effort to plant nuke plans on Iran, part of the pattern described in Gareth Porter’s latest book.

Marcy Wheeler reminds me of related efforts to plant English-language nuke plans around the same period of time or not long after. There was the laptop of death, later reprised for another war marketing effort. There were nuke plans and parts buried in a backyard as well.

Why give Iran flawed plans for a key part of a nuclear weapon? Why fantasize about giving Iran the thing already built (which wouldn’t delay Iran’s non-existent program much). Because then you can point out that Iran has them. And you won’t even be lying, as with forged documents claiming Iraq is buying uranium or hired subcontractors pretending aluminum tubes are for nuclear weapons. With Operation Merlin you can work some real dark magic: You can tell the truth about Iran having what you so desperately want Iran to appear to have.

What Sterling was blowing the cover on was a push to war with Iran which was being leveraged by this dangerous and dubious sting operation which actually provided Iran with a direction to a nuclear weapon. It was a cynical attempt which, by the very nature of it's bungling (not Sterling's revelation, but the sloppy and amateurish nature of the blueprints) ended up thwarting any effort to actually discover the extent of Iran's nuclear ambitions.

Here are some words of wisdom from the fellow you differentiate from Jeffery Sterling; Ellsberg, himself:

Pentagon Papers whistleblower Daniel Ellsberg has concisely summarized the context of the government’s efforts in the Sterling prosecution. “Sterling’s ordeal comes from a strategy to frighten potential whistleblowers, whether he was the source of this leak or not,” Ellsberg said in an interview for an article that journalist Marcy Wheeler and I wrote for The Nation. “The aim is to punish troublemakers with harassment, threats, indictments, years in court and likely prison -- even if they’ve only gone through official channels to register accusations about their superiors and agency. That is, by the way, a practical warning to would-be whistleblowers who would prefer to ‘follow the rules.’ But in any case, whoever were the actual sources to the press of information about criminal violations of the Fourth Amendment, in the NSA case, or of reckless incompetence, in the CIA case, they did a great public service.”
http://www.commondreams.org/views/2015/01/05/why-jeffrey-sterling-deserves-support-cia-whistleblower