Who Cares?

I care.

There used to be a media frenzy whenever classified information was leaked by government officials.  Things are especially sensitive when Top Secret/Sensitive Comparmented Information (TS/SCI) material is mishandled.  I am just now learning more details of the incident even though I have been watching more news now that my research project is complete.  (Surely the sensationalism surrounding Paula Abdul is more newsworthy)

Have we gotten so complacent about the effects of such leaks due to the numerous scandals over the last decade? 

Or are we getting used to the cavalier attitude our top government officials seem to have in leaking information to the press?  See this recent NYT story (emphasis added):

A half dozen Pentagon civilian and military officials were discussing the outlines of [JCS Chairman General Myers' report to Congress] on Monday as it was being officially delivered to Congress; one government official provided a copy to The New York Times. The officials who discussed the assessment demanded anonymity because it is a classified document.

The New York Sun has this to say:

Will the FBI investigate who gave the New York Times this week a classified assessment of American war fighting capabilities? When reporters, lobbyists, and foreign officials are leaked tidbits that advance the CIA or Foreign Service's agenda, nothing is said. But when the leaking is done by the bureaucracy's foes, reputations are ruined with whispers of treason. It's a moment to remember that those who petition the government, as Aipac and scores of other American organizations do, are protected by the exact same First Amendment prohibitions on the Congress that protect the press.

Will the FBI investigate?  It is difficult to know for sure...though I doubt it.  Why? Because I hate to assume anything and it is the government we are talking about here.

Which brings me to Michelle Malkin who has been following the treason charges of USAFR Col (ret) Larry Franklin in a story that is slowly gaining "legs."  In the mean time, the spin is already taking place.

Timothy M. Phelps and Knut Royce of Newsday.com have part of the story.  Here is an excerpt:

An analyst in a controversial Pentagon intelligence office was charged yesterday with passing top-secret information to two staff members of a pro-Israeli lobbying group here.

Charged was Larry Franklin, an Iran specialist who worked in the Office of Special Plans, established by Pentagon Undersecretary Douglas Feith in order to give Pentagon civilians an independent source of intelligence that could bolster the case for war with Iraq.

He was charged with passing highly classified information about potential attacks on U.S. forces in Iraq to two individuals identified by sources as staff members of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee in June 2003, shortly after the U.S. invasion of Iraq.

Also, David Horovits of the Jerusalem Post offers these details:

...AIPAC had deliberated long and hard in recent months about how to handle the developing story, which broke last summer in sensational fashion: CBS led its August 27 Nightly News with the claim of a "full-fledged espionage investigation under way," in which the FBI was about to "roll up" a suspected Israeli "mole" in the office of the secretary of defense in the Pentagon.

Then last December, The Jerusalem Post's Janine Zacharia detailed the dimensions of the affair, describing how the FBI "set up AIPAC." It used Franklin, she reported, to draw two senior AIPAC officials – Steve Rosen, the director of research, and Keith Weissman, deputy director of foreign policy issues – who already knew him into a lunch meeting with him in July 2004 and into accepting what he described to them as classified information...

Hmm, the FBI allowed TS/SCI information to be leaked in a sting operation.  If so, then Col Franklin is the ultimate fall guy. 

Also,

...Some in AIPAC have long urged that the lobby group make its officials available to the media in a concerted effort to demonstrate innocence, while others have counseled maximal discretion, arguing that the affair would play itself out without causing real damage.

The "keep quiet" advocates have prevailed thus far. But the notion that AIPAC can afford to confidently believe that it is off the hook does not square with the fact that it dramatically parted ways with Rosen and Weissman, the longtime officials to whom Franklin allegedly passed his classified information.

The more I read, the more questions I have.  I expect more details and commentary will emerge.  In the mean time, there are two points to consider:

First, I agree with Lucianne.com commenter "uffda" (emphasis added):

Remember folks, the document that Franklin allegedly passed was classified Top Secret/SCI-- meaning compartmented classified information. While "classified" information is leaked often in Washington, TS-compartmented information is a different story. The additional SCI classification puts documents so classified into another realm - as anyone who has ever been given an SCI clearance knows. The indictment also states that Franklin admitted to the FBI that, in addition to passing the TS/SCI document to two unidentified U.S. persons, he also, without authorization, disclosed classified U.S. information to a foreign official and media members. That is more in line with what other posters have alluded to--but is not what is the basis for the charge against Franklin. People have lost jobs for mishandling TS/SCI material just within their office spaces- the unauthorized disclosure of TS/SCI information is serious business and shouldn't be trivialized by apologists.

Second, silence is never a good option.  Soon enough the cyberwaves will be filled with analysis and spin...can AIPAC or the Pentagon afford to remain quiet?

Stay tuned for more details. 

Comments

[Major Mike]

Look if Sandy Berger can get caught red-handed stuffing classified documents down his pants, and ZERO happens to him, where is the incentive to guard any of our secrets? Stiff penalties for ALL who leak docs. The only schmucks who really care are the lowly staff officers whose careers are dependent on zero defects when handling classified materials. The pols and Gens let this stuff out all the time...always to fulfill some agenda that is usually too clever to understand.

[Mike]

"always to fulfill some agenda that is usually too clever to understand."

That agenda usually seems to be linked to the CYA theory of operations.