Skip to comments.
Liveblogging Whistleblower Protection Hearing (Tony Shaffer/Curt Weldon testify)
QT Monster ^
| 2/14/2006
| vadkins
Posted on 02/14/2006 10:57:38 AM PST by 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.
(Excerpt) Read more at qtmonster.com ...
TOPICS: Government; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: 109th; 911; 911commission; abledanger; anthonyshaffer; atta; clintoncoverups; coverup; curtweldon; datamining; dhpl; dia; embassiesactofterror; freeh; gamebirdstampgate; gorelick; gorelickwall; hussein; iraq; military; mohammadatta; okcityactofterror; pentagon; rumsfeld; saddamhussein; sandyburgler; shaffer; spying; twa800actofterror; usscoleactofterror; weldon; whitewash; wtc1actofterror
1
posted on
02/14/2006 10:57:42 AM PST
by
vadkins
To: vadkins
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.
To: vadkins
3
posted on
02/14/2006 11:07:00 AM PST
by
Peach
(Hillary ran over a cop and didn't even stop.)
To: 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?
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.
4
posted on
02/14/2006 11:23:49 AM PST
by
P-40
(http://www.590klbj.com/forum/index.php?referrerid=1854)
To: vadkins
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.
To: vadkins
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.
6
posted on
02/14/2006 11:45:18 AM PST
by
MNJohnnie
(Conservatives...lack sufficient cynicism to properly assess the nature of their liberal opponents)
To: MNJohnnie
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.
7
posted on
02/14/2006 12:28:13 PM PST
by
P-40
(http://www.590klbj.com/forum/index.php?referrerid=1854)
To: P-40
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.
8
posted on
02/14/2006 12:47:54 PM PST
by
MNJohnnie
(Conservatives...lack sufficient cynicism to properly assess the nature of their liberal opponents)
To: MNJohnnie
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.
9
posted on
02/14/2006 12:55:48 PM PST
by
P-40
(http://www.590klbj.com/forum/index.php?referrerid=1854)
To: 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. 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.
10
posted on
02/14/2006 7:04:46 PM PST
by
p23185
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson