Liveblogging Whistleblower Protection Hearing (Tony Shaffer/Curt Weldon testify)

QT Monster ^ | 2/14/2006 | vadkins

[vadkins]

I am now liveblogging the US House Subcommittee hearing on national security whistle blowers. Lt. Col. Shaffer just finished his opening statement. He will be questioned during this hearing. You can listen now on C-Span Radio. The permalink to this post is here.

[spintreebob]

So what is the difference between someone who is a "whistleblower" and someone who is a "leaker" or "violating a person's privacy", etc?

Positive adjectives for those who agree with one side and negatives for those who disagree.

Now try a "sunshine" law for campaign donations....including those from unions, trial lawyers, MSM, etc who hide behind shams.

[Peach]

Keep us informed!

[P-40]

So what is the difference between someone who is a "whistleblower" and someone who is a "leaker" or "violating a person's privacy", etc?


I'd say the difference would be mainly in the area of the reason for releasing the information and what sort of gain or loss is expected for doing so.

C-SPAN radio is covering this hearing but I don't know if it will be archived yet.

[Arizona Carolyn]

Reading this comment from Weldon, I hope Shaffer has good security on him this week:

Rep. Curt Weldon, PA opening statement: states that Lt. Col. Shaffer came to within 2 days of losing his pay and healthcare for his kids. Shaffer will testify at the Able Danger hearing tomorrow and that hearing will change the nature of life in DC. Gives a list of officers and government officials who had their careers destroyed when they told the truth. Shaffer was approached today by a DIA official asking him what he intended to say in the hearings.

[MNJohnnie]

There is a established procedure for raising legal concerns about an NSA or other intelligence program. Going to the News Media is NOT authorized under the "Whistle blower" laws for National Security issues. The Lt Col followed that procedure, HE is a whistle blower. The persons who talked to the NY Times about the NSA Terrorist Surveillance Program are NOT "Whistelblowers" but criminals and traitors.

[P-40]

The Lt Col followed that procedure


It sounds to me like he continues to keep pretty mum for the most part. He took his case to Weldon but it is not like Weldon is unauthorised to hear what he had to say. Even the September 2005 hearings were light on the details with just enough thrown out to show that there needs to be some serious investigation into Shaffer's story.

[MNJohnnie]

Actually based on all that I read. The Lt Col did EXACTLY what he is suppose to do. He discussed it with a member of Congress who has the appropriate clearance. That is HOW the Whistle blower rules work. That is why the angst and hysteria by the Junk Journalists about the NSA Leaker being a "Whistelblower" is so criminal. NO, the NSA Leaker was NOT authorized to talk to the press about their "Concerns". They KNEW the rules and went to the DNC NY Times for partisan POLTICAL reasons, not based on ANY notion of their Duty.

[P-40]

The Lt Col did EXACTLY what he is suppose to do.


It sounds like Weldon is taking his case to the public the right way also...not that they care to hear...or the press care to tell them anyway.

I really don't care all that much about going after any of the parties at fault but I do care about dealing with the issues raised by the Able Danger program so that going forward we don't have to face another terrorist attack without at least a fighting chance of having prevented it in the first place.

[p23185]

There is a established procedure for raising legal concerns about an NSA or other intelligence program. Going to the News Media is NOT authorized under the "Whistle blower" laws for National Security issues. The Lt Col followed that procedure, HE is a whistle blower. The persons who talked to the NY Times about the NSA Terrorist Surveillance Program are NOT "Whistelblowers" but criminals and traitors.

Well said - probably the most concise statement on this issue seen here on FR since the leaks stated occurring regularly from the NYT and WaPo.