Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Hello!? Whoever leaked the warrantless searches is a whistleblower, not

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU
 
Phoebe Loosinhouse Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-30-05 08:39 PM
Original message
Hello!? Whoever leaked the warrantless searches is a whistleblower, not
a criminal.

Let's say that : You work for a company that makes you sign a confidentiality agreement about their practices. They knowingly dump so many toxic chemicals into your town's reservoir that you see a third leg growing on your infant and notice that your eyes are now on stalks. You feel compelled to call the local newspaper and the EPA. You call the EPA because you know they are the governmental agency that could and should take care of this problem. You call the paper because you know the only way you can ensure that action will be taken is if you shine a light on it.

So, who is the bigger felon? The leaker or the company? Who has been more societally responsible?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Turbineguy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-30-05 08:45 PM
Response to Original message
1. The confidentiality agreement
would be in regards to revealing trade secrets to competitors, it does not bind you to hide illegal activity.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Phoebe Loosinhouse Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-30-05 08:48 PM
Response to Reply #1
3. that is exactly my point
I don't think that whoever "leaked" the NSA story is culpable if they leaked ILLEGAL ACTIVITY!!! In fact, I think they had a RESPONSIBILITY to leak it, or otherwise, they themselves would have been indictable as a co-conspirator to commit illegal acts.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ayeshahaqqiqa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-30-05 08:46 PM
Response to Original message
2. They brought out that the DOJ is doing this now
because it is the Friday before the holiday. They hope that people won't hear about it or will forget. I'm planning to call my conman on Jan. 3 (when I'm back at work) and ask him to investigate the FELONY that was perpetrated by Bush. Since my conman is a repuke, wish me luck. I figure I'm already on his list.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tx_dem41 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-30-05 08:49 PM
Response to Original message
4. There is a difference between a confidentiality agreement and ...
a security clearance. I'm not saying that I am not grateful for the leak....I am. But, there is a distinction judicially.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
liberal N proud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-30-05 08:55 PM
Response to Original message
5. Criminals trying to make the whistleblower a criminal.
NBC News tonight made me so damn mad, I did scream at the TV (something I never do HA)
Story about bu$h ordering an investigation into how the story LEAKED. But nothing absolutely f$##ng NOTHING about the criminality of the actions bu$h is taking.

:mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
swhisper1 Donating Member (33 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-30-05 08:58 PM
Response to Original message
6. This is a definite whistle blower situation
and the blower should be praised as a hero for the constitutional United States. We cannot allow PNAC to color this leak as a threat to national security. No secret was exposed except Bush's paranoia- now naked before the public. His sick mind is exposed and I kiss the man/woman who will give up his/her career to expose this blackhead
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lefty48197 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-30-05 10:02 PM
Response to Original message
7. Kill the messanger
That's the Bush M.O.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cosmicdot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-30-05 11:08 PM
Response to Original message
8. today's Paul Reveres ...
"one if by land, two if by sea"

our country, the Constitution, etc., is at stake

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 26th 2024, 01:42 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC