Skip to comments.Inside the Ring
Posted on 02/08/2005 2:09:47 PM PST by Bald Eagle777
Code word compromise The Joint Staff at the Pentagon last week ordered an investigation into the compromise of several programs that were revealed in a book by author William Arkin. According to a Jan. 25 cable from the Joint Staff to 14 military units, most of them involved in special operations, Air Force Gen. Richard B. Myers, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, has asked for an "opsec" or operational security assessment of possible national security damage to special access programs and other "operational compromises" in the book, "Code Names." The U.S. Special Operations Command will be the lead agency in reviewing the compromise of special access programs called Power Geyser and Footprint, along with other secret programs and activities... At least one Pentagon security official was outraged that nothing was done for months to try to identify the source of the compromises. The official said Mr. Arkin was linked to a senior Pentagon official but that the Office of the Secretary of Defense protected the official. "So just let the secrets hemorrhage," the official said. "God bless America." Mr. Arkin, a liberal Greenpeace political activist turned columnist, was investigated by the Air Force Office of Special Investigations in 2002 after he disclosed the code-named program Polo Step, on the war planning for Iraq. Several suspects in the leak, including a three-star officer, were allowed to retire rather than face questioning over the leak...
Mr. Arkin was an Army intelligence analyst in the 1970s...
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...
He has no current security clearance to update (or pull) thank GOD. It's the leak at the Pentagon I'm concerned about.
"It's the leak at the Pentagon I'm concerned about"
Me too! And the following statement bothers me as well:
"The official said Mr. Arkin was linked to a senior Pentagon official but that the Office of the Secretary of Defense protected the official." Is this the person who was allowed to resign instead of face being questioned ..?? as was stated later in the article ..??
Mr. Arkin, in the online supplement to his book ( www.codenames.org/documents.html ), says the contingency plan, called JCS Conplan 0300-97, calls for "special-mission units in extra-legal missions to combat terrorism in the United States" based on top-secret orders that are managed by the military's Joint Staff and coordinated with the military's Special Operations Command and Northern Command, which is the lead military headquarters for domestic defense.
Mr. Arkin provided The New York Times with briefing slides prepared by the Northern Command, detailing the plan and outlining the military's preparations for the inauguration.
This is worse than we thought..
Since Mr. Arkin isn't in the military, I'm not sure what you mean about the need to "discipline" him. In fact, I don't think it's illegal for a journalist to disclose classified information. (There are some arguments, pro and con, about whether this kind of law would be a good idea.)
"To do so you get misleading answers," was their reponse. William Arkin, a gay activist said that this kind of survey polarizes the community. His fear was that the movement for cityhood could turn into a hate campaign between gay and straight." http://www.snorko.org/cyberwrite/eng103/students/edm.html
Well .. there is a way to stop this - make one of these "leakers" AN EXAMPLE OF TREASON. It won't stop unless people know there is a terrible price to pay.
"William Arkin, a gay activist said that this kind of survey polarizes the community. His fear was that the movement for cityhood could turn into a hate campaign between gay and straight."
Ever since WWII, it seems that the number one common link of traitors from the UK to America is the homosexual link.
Why do you spose that is? Do you spose anybody really gives a spit?
Most of them hate their parents, their families have no children to protect, and they end up hating America and blaming America for their life styles.
Plus the silly savages got teased so much it just hurt their feelers!!! Forever!!! Plus all that "dodgeball," or as my boys called it: "Smear the Queer!" (well that's better than "Tetherball!" That's way too kinky!!!)
What's with 3 stars retiring to avoid questioning? Could I ever get off so easy? Not that I would ever have needed to get off. I thought we were to take this security stuff seriously. What do I know?!
The retiring 3 stars are the leak. How does a General find it, in his great discernment, acceptable to reveal secrets to anyone outside the need to know? High rankers should be held to the highest standards. Some Spec 4 would be making gravel from boulders for much less than this.
As your tag line implies, we must stand by the Truth. Let's see where this goes.
"The retiring 3 stars are the leak. How does a General find it, in his great discernment, acceptable to reveal secrets to anyone outside the need to know? High rankers should be held to the highest standards. Some Spec 4 would be making gravel from boulders for much less than this."
Your questions and main point here are excellent.
I have two more questions:
1. "How many stars did this general receive from the Clintoons.
2. " Was this genera a homosexual and a greenpeace maggot like this author?
Good points Gramps, I dunno, but there's reason for suspicion.
It is time that this general is exposed for public disclosure.
Never gonna happen. Sad truth about our corrupt gov't.
Bottom line: media leaks are damaging our national security. A few years ago, Britain published the Official Secrets Act, which places severe limitations on the publication or broadcast of classified material. In today's media and security environment, it may be time for similar legislation in this country....
Sorry you didn't wait, now that the Chairman's office has called Gertz's assertion a lie?
Treason? How about simple slander -- on your part. The Chairman's office has stated that Gertz's was lying when he asserted that the Chairman was concerned and investigating Arkin. They are not concerned about damage to national security by what he wrote.
ROTFLOL!! Slander upon WHO ..?? I went back and read what I posted - and if you think that's slander - you don't know what you're talking about.
Arkin's book was irresponsible. The Pentagon was fully justified in conducting an operational security assessment after this book hit.
No one at the Pentagon, or in SF or anywhere else should offer any apologies at taking a careful look at this book and its writer.
No apologies whatsoever should be made for thoroughly investigating all angles and potential impacts of Arkin's book, including but not limited to: any potentially harmful effects on ongoing operations or activities; direct and indirect adverse consequences upon existing units and operatives, procedures and methods; and any other unforseen adverse consequences upon the aforementioned, whether intentional or not. Should any negative, and even unforseen, consequences arise of of publication of said, or like, books, then proceedings should proceed. If it is determined that absolutely no information useful to enemy combatants or militaries has been disclosed, and no operations, procedures or methods have been compromised, then the case can be closed.
Books of this nature should not be published without a responsible, voluntary security pre-screening. If there is reason to believe that a book could potentially cause damage, and has not been screened properly, then a comprehensive security review is prudent to say the least in each and every single case.
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.