Comments on: It’s Hard to Love a Leaker. Except YOUR Leaker.

By: Michael Ledeen

Michael Ledeen — Tue, 24 Nov 2009 05:30:53 +0000

I would call it normal.

By: David Thomson

David Thomson — Sun, 22 Nov 2009 22:33:44 +0000

“the next day we learn that our ambassador in Kabul thinks it’s a lousy idea”

We can take it for granted that the ambassador is directly responsible for the leak. There is simply no other reasonable explanation. Ambassadors are supposedly tight-lipped and speak of such matters only with those who are highly trustworthy and have need to know. The odds that he was betrayed is next to zilch. After all, he would be able to figure out the likely culprit—and exact severe punishment.

By: Alexis

Alexis — Sat, 21 Nov 2009 06:56:24 +0000

Dr. Ledeen:

Do you know of any administration that actually plugged leaks? Or any administration that would have been able to do so if it wanted to? If so, how would we know?

By the way, what would you call it when political operators succeed in hoodwinking future historians into reporting what happened inaccurately?

By: shiraz

shiraz — Mon, 16 Nov 2009 00:52:47 +0000

Insiders leak in order to prevent being out-leaked!
This is the same usual game of politics in Washington or I better say Government in general. Who else would leak out? Media journalists? Not likely any more since the days of Bob Woodward.
It is all about self preservation, self interest even if it comes at the cost of damage to our national security.

By: Jeff M.

Jeff M. — Sun, 15 Nov 2009 07:57:06 +0000

Regarding your last point about Gates complaining because ‘he’s being outleaked’, I would beg to differ slightly that that is his real motivation. I am somewhat skeptical only because senior officials always complain about leaks, though as you rightly point out, the ship of state is the only ship that leaks from the top. But is not the real issue here that this is just part of the Washington game? In other words, everyone in the know knows that what Gates is saying is merely the SOP in response to a leak, rather than someone who is taking on a serious commitment to track down and prosecute a leaker.

By: Ran

Ran — Sun, 15 Nov 2009 01:33:19 +0000

“Henry Kissinger once warned that the only reason to write a memo is if you want it leaked. Which is a good lesson for historians: you can’t always trust the official documents; some of them were written to deceive you and the others.” Imagine your Report shredding your carefully crafted memo… It’s the sort of thing that would make Sun Tzu grin!

So why is Sec. Gates venting? I disagree, perhaps, with the “outleaked” complaint model. I think it may be a little genuine fangs display. Gates appears to be an actual patriot – a quality at odds with the goals of one Hell of a lot of the present cluster in D.C.

By: David W. Lincoln

David W. Lincoln — Sat, 14 Nov 2009 22:13:55 +0000

“I’m all for prosecuting the Armitages of this world, but it isn’t bloody likely” – Different rules, different results.

In retrospect, Michael, there is a continuity of leaks that harm, so that they can be identified, and dealt with by more than a slap on the wrist.

Or, am I mistaken?

Mind you, Michael, the likelihood of the current collection of deformed souls, zombies
and other assorted ilk, with their paws on the levers of power, inside the Beltway, doing
this is about the same as a leopard changing its spots. So, do you figure that enough is known by intelligence agencies of countries that are officially friendly, that they could
identify people capable of running an alternative US government?