Skip to comments.Secret Service Scandal No Security Breach?
Posted on 04/29/2012 9:38:51 AM PDT by evilrooster
Leave it to this administration to add a whole new meaning to the word spin!
"The White House's top counter-terrorism adviser [John Brennan] says the Secret Service prostitution scandal did not expose weak spots in the president's security" - USA Today
Despite the administration’s statement to the contrary, this incident did, in fact, expose weak spots in the President’s security. Simply stated, members of the security detail were enticed away from their assigned duties by several ample bosomed females willing to provide sexual favors. That in itself constitutes a breach in security, whether the women were agents of a foreign government or not.
It’s a known fact that seduction has been used as a means to extract information since the beginning of time. From Delilah enticing Sampson to divulge the source of his strength, to Mata-Hari (code named H-21) who passed along enemy war plans to the Germans in the early 1900’s, History is laden with examples of sex for secrets.
And, for those looking for a more recent example, let’s not forget the “honey pot” scandal of the 1980’s.
Liberals would like this incident to simply disappear. Hence the statement of “all is well”. They will be quick to accuse conservatives of overreacting in this matter, and will likely find a way to blame George Bush. But, the fact remains the security of the United States was compromised and the issue must be investigated. If the Bush administration is ultimately tainted by this incident, so be it.
We’re now told that the agency has issued new rules of conduct for its officers, including prohibiting entertaining foreigners in officers' hotel rooms. That’s all well and good but isn’t that already taught in “Protect the President 101”? Along with not to let a glimpse of “side-boob” distract you from the mission?
Senator Susan Collins (R-Maine) puts it best:
“Who were these Women? Could they have been members of groups hostile to the United States? Could they have planted bugs, disabled weapons or in any other way jeopardized the security of the President or our country?”
And these questions must be addressed despite the “fixes” promised by the current administration. For once we should leave politics aside and just do the right thing. The stakes are too high on this one.
Brennan's comments can be heard here: http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/bestoftv/2012/04/29/exp-sotu-brennan-part-2-secret-service.cnn
If you ask me....the KGB missed the greatest opportunity of the past one hundred years. Course, maybe their KGB guys were at the brothels in Columbia too.
A good KGB team would have photographed the Secret Service guy in bed with the hooker. They would wait patiently ten years for the guy to move up to manager. They’d pull out the photos on him, and then start pulling great five-star intelligence.
"Impeach Obama Says Sister of Cole Sailor Killed in Terror Attacks
"The sister of Seaman James McDaniels, a sailor killed in the terror attack on the U.S.S. Cole wants President Barack Hussein Obama impeached
over his decision to withdraw charges against the al Qaeda mastermind of the attack."
"Mother of USS Cole Sailor Declines Obama-meet, Says "I Voted for the Wrong Person"
"After Obama dropped the charges against the suspect in the bombing of the USS Cole,
he asked the families of the victims in that tragedy to meet with him.
One mother refused, and now says,"I voted for the wrong person."
An overy simplistic article.
The simply fact that one or more Secret Service Agents were entertained by prostitutes, regardless of nationality, is NOT, in and of itself a “breech” of security.
Depending on how much information was provided to the prostitutes - the fact that they were SecServ, what there duties were, details of the visit, etc - THAT could be a breech.
Keeping such activities a secret, and thus a potential reason for blackmail, is also a breech.
But the simple act of paying for sex is not a security breech.
And no, I’m not saying it is right to do it!
No, it did not expose weak spots... Hookers have some great intel on the local scene. These SS agents were obviously just gathering intel and trying to protect the dog eating chumpmander in chief. These agents were brave in protecting Ubama.
They and the military are trained specifically not to place themselves in such situations - that I know from experience.
Whether or not operational information was divulged does not take away from the fact they were engaged in an activity that is specifically prohibited. Just engaging in such activity constitutes a breach in security simply because the matter must be investigated.
Create the Secretly Serviced...a spy master’s dream situation.
They were democrats?
True, because it has "potential".
Just engaging in such activity constitutes a breach in security simply because the matter must be investigated.
Not really. Or do you really think that every off duty SecServ Agent / Military Officer is an absolutely clean person? Everyone has thier vices. As long as those vices can not be used against a person - they can and do get and retain high level security clearances.
This case is only special because it became public.
Why do you think they missed it? Reports indicate that this cavorting was the norm for many, many years. It would be insane to presume that KGB never bothered to look at the Secret Service.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.