Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

bluedye33139

(1,474 posts)
3. What would the proper way for Sterling to have alerted the press to the Iranian nuclear operation?
Sat Aug 20, 2016, 11:43 AM
Aug 2016

He went to the press and revealed details which, when transmitted to Iranian authorities, put people's lives at risk. I can't imagine what positive outcome he intended from this, or what "wrongdoing" he was exposing, or what ethical principle he was following, except that he put people's lives at risk by breaking his oath of confidentiality.

Ultimately, I've been pretty happy with the Obama administration's attempts to contain Iran's nuclear weapons program while also working to support Iran's right to nuclear power, which began decades ago under the Shah. It's a muddy and nuanced approach, but it would be impossible if all CIA employees were given carte blanche to reveal every single detail of their jobs every single day with no penalty whatsoever.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

It does seem hypocritical bluedye33139 Aug 2016 #1
We need a whistleblowing process/platform that enables real reform. Period. cali Aug 2016 #2
What would the proper way for Sterling to have alerted the press to the Iranian nuclear operation? bluedye33139 Aug 2016 #3
I didn't say to the press. cali Aug 2016 #4
I'm sorry, I was following your link to the Sterling case, which arguably isn't a reason to bluedye33139 Aug 2016 #5
I totally agree! cpamomfromtexas Aug 2016 #6
thanks. cali Aug 2016 #7
people who murder indiscriminately using drones are not concerned about this guy nt msongs Aug 2016 #8
Characterizing as "hate?" I totally DISAGREE. Hortensis Aug 2016 #9
Fear! Fear! Fear! Fear! Fear! Fear! wildbilln864 Aug 2016 #10
Wasn't trying to trigger your fight or flight response. Hortensis Aug 2016 #11
you are mistaken. I am not running. wildbilln864 Aug 2016 #12
Who said they haven't also performed positive and Hortensis Aug 2016 #13
ok. n/t wildbilln864 Aug 2016 #14
Excellent post and documentation. The point needs to be made that AikidoSoul Aug 2016 #15
Kick and rec -- NT AikidoSoul Aug 2016 #16
If the jury was right, Sterling is no "whistle-blower." The jury found that he leaked details struggle4progress Aug 2016 #17
I just served on a jury for this even though I had recommended it. Ron Obvious Aug 2016 #18
perhaps they thought that would make you a perfect whistleblower nashville_brook Aug 2016 #19
Self righteous assholes who call themselves whistle blowers... uponit7771 Aug 2016 #20
BIG kick and rec Arazi Aug 2016 #21
The gullibility of some to fall for a professional liar is disturbing. msanthrope Aug 2016 #22
Agree with you! bobGandolf Aug 2016 #23
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»The hate for whistleblowe...»Reply #3