Members of the intel community uniting to stop leaks:

[BaiHu]

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/new-video-shows-former-military-members-of-the-intel-community-uniting-to-stop-leaks/

I'm an amateur regarding this type of stuff, but IMO, since Obama's been in office, he seems to have been a liability-has he changed for the better/worse lately??

[MechEng]

This is what you get when a POTUS brings all his left wing, moonbat, ideolog friends into his cabinet.

[rsa-otc]

What I always hate and it happens in more places than just the government, anything that starts ”speaking on the condition of anonymity because the person has not been authorized to release the info”. If you are not authorized to speak about it shut the “F” up. And I’m not talking about whistle blowers. It seems to have become the way of the world.

[Noleshooter]

Another article that details the background of the group a bit more.


The president of Special Operations OPSEC Education Fund Inc, Scott Taylor, is a former Navy SEAL who in 2010 ran unsuccessfully for the Republican nomination for a congressional seat in Virginia.

Calling itself "OPSEC" for short - which in spy jargon means "operational security" - the anti-leak group incorporated last June in Delaware, a state that has the most secretive corporate registration rules in the U.S.

It also set itself up as a nonprofit organization under section 501(c)4 of the U.S. Tax Code, allowing it to keep donors' identities secret. Spokesmen for the group declined to discuss its sources of financing.



Following the film's release, OPSEC's spokesmen said, the group expects to produce TV spots on the anti-leak theme that will air in a number of states, including Virginia, Florida, Ohio, Colorado, North Carolina and Nevada - key battleground states.



Chad Kolton, a former spokesman for the office of Director of National Intelligence during the George W. Bush administration who now represents OPSEC, also said the group's message and make-up are nonpolitical.



I'm weary of any grassroots style organization that pops up during an election, aims it's message at swing states and hides it's funding sources.

[BaiHu]

Another article that details the background of the group a bit more.











I'm weary of any grassroots style organization that pops up during an election, aims it's message at swing states and hides it's funding sources.

Nice find and you're right. Ideally it should be a fair and clean fight from both sides, but I think we lost that sentiment back in....hmmm, let's see here, Rome? Or was it earlier :rolleyes:

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I727 using Tapatalk 2

[RoyGBiv]

I watched/listened to much of that video yesterday (slow day waiting for the phone to ring).
I didn't need another reason to get spun up at the lack of honor and integrity of the executive branch, but, there it was. :D

[SGT_Calle]

I watched/listened to much of that video yesterday (slow day waiting for the phone to ring).
I didn't need another reason to get spun up at the lack of honor and integrity of the executive branch, but, there it was. :D

I watched all of it and feel the same way. I don't recall seeing a video recently that got me as mad as this one did.

[TCinVA]

I'm weary of any grassroots style organization that pops up during an election, aims it's message at swing states and hides it's funding sources.

...when they're telling the same story that has been widely acknowledged as the truth by important figures on the left and the right, I'm not too suspicious.

The Obama camp has been leaking information like crazy in an effort to make Obama appear muscular and like he actually accomplished something. It's also been an effort to direct the public narrative away from the more unplesant truth which seems to be that people in his administration who take counterterrorism seriously maneuvered him into a corner in which he was essentially forced to say "yes". When it went well and we had OBL's leaking corpse with no dead servicemen, suddenly it was a political opportunity and he wasted no time trying to give himself credit for the whole thing.

Washington DC is a political town from top to bottom. Politics is everything. By gentleman's agreement the national security stuff is supposed to be kept out of politics, but when somebody breeches that wall and stands on the faces of people who matter just so they can look taller, even the national security apparatus can play some politics.

Ultimately I don't think this push will matter much in the long run. I doubt many who are inclined to view Obama's first term charitably will have their mind changed by some former secret squirrels telling them how damaging Obama's leaks are to national security.

[NETim]

Ultimately I don't think this push will matter much in the long run. I doubt many who are inclined to view Obama's first term charitably will have their mind changed by some former secret squirrels telling them how damaging Obama's leaks are to national security.

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_L5EFG-vZEHo/SioFvqq5CFI/AAAAAAAABB4/cJoXMv8lmy8/s400/OTatt10.bmp

[Sparks2112]

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_L5EFG-vZEHo/SioFvqq5CFI/AAAAAAAABB4/cJoXMv8lmy8/s400/OTatt10.bmp

I've got a tattoo I regret that seemed like a great idea at the time, nice to see other people joining the club.

[jslaker]

This is what you get when a POTUS brings all his left wing, moonbat, ideolog friends into his cabinet.

Then how does that explain the notoriously leaky Cheney wing of the Bush administation?

Both sides pull this crap, no need to act like it's limited to a particular ideology.

[Nik the Greek]

Politics is everything. By gentleman's agreement the national security stuff is supposed to be kept out of politics

It pretty much never is, regardless of who's in office. Hasn't since, what? Almost immediately after the cold war ended? In this particular case, I'm having a hard time believing that if the leaks were truly significantly damaging that a much bigger deal wouldn't be made. Politics as usual, on both sides of the street. Administration downplaying any leaks, another organization playing them up. What are the verifiable facts on the ground? Probably somewhere in the middle. Information is political strategy.

As far as Obama getting 'backed into a corner by the anti-terrorists on his staff', I doubt that description reflect the realities of what goes on inside the oval office. What we had was a potentially politically volatile and disastrous scenario: a unauthorized commando raid on the soil of an ostensible "ally", (though I'd be reluctant to call Pakistan that at the best of times, but I digress). It was a potential fiasco if it went wrong, with potentially serious implications. I'll hazard a conjecture that it was a situation where they had ridiculously solid, actionable intel and the operation was viewed as an almost sure thing and a political win. Whatever the motives, at least the man listened to the right people. There were a lot of ways that even the successful operation could have gone wrong, that didn't pan out. The media circus after the event was still more restrained than it could have been - it's not like any white house was going to clam up after a major 'goal' like OBL going down is achieved. I'm not pardoning the mistakes made by the administration, merely pointing out that it simply wasn't the "unmitigated intelligence disaster" claimed in the video.

I mean, c'mon now, the retired general in the video isn't just an interested party, he's the founder of a conservative political organization. One of the ex-SEALs ran for congress as a Republican. Is there some truth in what's expressed in the video? No doubt. Is it almost certainly being overblown and dramatized to generate an (obviously effective) emotional appeal? I'd put a lot of money on it.

It's not like they bothered covering leaks that occurred during past administrations, or made it an American problem. They made it an Obama problem, and that's just disingenuous.

[Odin Bravo One]

It's all overblown and emotional when you are the one who gets to worry about your family and their safety as the CINC discloses Secret and Top Secret information to beat his chest about being a badass for something someone else did.

And then there are the admissions of troops on the ground in certain places because some journalist heard rumors. Confirm it, and blast it all over the news (very helpful for guys on the ground). Then turning around and declaring major successes without any troops involved.

Thank you for your loyalty.

[LittleLebowski]

It's all overblown and emotional when you are the one who gets to worry about your family and their safety as the CINC discloses Secret and Top Secret information to beat his chest about being a badass for something someone else did.

And then there are the admissions of troops on the ground in certain places because some journalist heard rumors. Confirm it, and blast it all over the news (very helpful for guys on the ground). Then turning around and declaring major successes without any troops involved.

Thank you for your loyalty.

Sobering but thank you for posting. Stay safe.

[RoyGBiv]

http://img822.imageshack.us/img822/6185/opsechollywoodstyle.jpg

The one moment in that video that made me catch my breath was this one.

The narration over this image attempts to explain that some time soon after UBL's death, BHO invited this group of Hollywood heavies to the WH for a detailed briefing on the operation. I am not so naive to believe that the narration and the photo are of the same event at the time inferred, but, I must admit that such a suggestion was effective.

I have to believe it's not a correct representation. Just an effective bit of media intended to solicit a particular response.
If true, would this act be attributable to hubris or criminal stupidity?

[NickA]

As Sean M very rightly pointed out, there's just NO good reason to be talking about some of this stuff. At best it's grandstanding for political gain, at worst it gets good men killed. Aside from that I always thought we should have STFU for a week or two after the UBL raid, maintained a "who, us? " front, and watched what the rest of the cockroaches did when UBL went off the map.

Sent from my PC36100 using Tapatalk 2

[BaiHu]

It's all overblown and emotional when you are the one who gets to worry about your family and their safety as the CINC discloses Secret and Top Secret information to beat his chest about being a badass for something someone else did.

And then there are the admissions of troops on the ground in certain places because some journalist heard rumors. Confirm it, and blast it all over the news (very helpful for guys on the ground). Then turning around and declaring major successes without any troops involved.

Thank you for your loyalty.


As Sean M very rightly pointed out, there's just NO good reason to be talking about some of this stuff. At best it's grandstanding for political gain, at worst it gets good men killed. Aside from that I always thought we should have STFU for a week or two after the UBL raid, maintained a "who, us? " front, and watched what the rest of the cockroaches did when UBL went off the map.

Sent from my PC36100 using Tapatalk 2

Politics is a virus of the human condition, so I understand that each side will play their part in effing the other side over. However, as you two just pointed out, there are lives/countrymen at risk when you try to be a grandstanding d-bag and real live intel that could also keep the lives of our countrymen safe and/or more effective by shutting the eff up and the DOJ, like the SEC, has spent a lot of time in recent history proving themselves to be ineffective agencies.

[TCinVA]

As far as Obama getting 'backed into a corner by the anti-terrorists on his staff', I doubt that description reflect the realities of what goes on inside the oval office.


Then I'd encourage you to read more history about the goings on inside presidential administrations.



Whatever the motives, at least the man listened to the right people.


From the rumors that have emerged, the "right" people put him into a corner by saying it's either give the Go code or have it become known that you let OBL get away. Choppers are ready for liftoff, Mr. President...



I mean, c'mon now, the retired general in the video isn't just an interested party, he's the founder of a conservative political organization. One of the ex-SEALs ran for congress as a Republican. Is there some truth in what's expressed in the video? No doubt. Is it almost certainly being overblown and dramatized to generate an (obviously effective) emotional appeal? I'd put a lot of money on it.


See Sean's comment above. During the Bush administration our forces killed lots of very bad men...and we didn't see Obama administration levels of leaks about the ops that did it.



It's not like they bothered covering leaks that occurred during past administrations, or made it an American problem. They made it an Obama problem, and that's just disingenuous.

No administration has been leak proof, that's true...but equally true is that Obama's administration has taken the "leak" to new heights.

Robert Gates reportedly told the White House in no uncertain terms to "shut the **** up." That's not exactly a common phenomenon.

The Obama administration isn't the first to play politics with the prosecution of a war effort...but they've taken it to breathtaking new heights of reckless irresponsibility. That, I think, deserves comment from some of the people from the communities who have been placed at greater jeopardy by the actions of the President and his staff. If Obama and company want to stand on the faces o the guys who we ask to go to god-forsaken places to do battle with very bad men, I don't look with suspicion upon a bit of pushback from pissed off members of that community who bore the risk and who probably have lots of friends who still bear it.

[Nik the Greek]

Robert Gates reportedly told the White House in no uncertain terms to "shut the **** up." That's not exactly a common phenomenon.

The Obama administration isn't the first to play politics with the prosecution of a war effort...but they've taken it to breathtaking new heights of reckless irresponsibility. That, I think, deserves comment from some of the people from the communities who have been placed at greater jeopardy by the actions of the President and his staff. If Obama and company want to stand on the faces o the guys who we ask to go to god-forsaken places to do battle with very bad men, I don't look with suspicion upon a bit of pushback from pissed off members of that community who bore the risk and who probably have lots of friends who still bear it.

Shit, it hasn't even been proven that the leaks originated from within the administration, though it is hugely likely since they ostensibly make the administration look good. I'm not blind to the existing problems. It's just that in my view, it's important to treat the matter with gravity and apply steady pressure to start an investigation regarding the source of the leaks. There's almost a permissive attitude in DC regarding leaks that needs to be curtailed. That would be infinitely more valuable than making a video that comes across as a cheap political stunt.

I can't imagine that we'll have anything but a divergence of opinion on this point. I just think Washington's intelligence issues are a serious matter that deserves serious treatment. The way this was presented turned me off and made me suspicious of the validity of the information provided.

This was an interesting article on the subject of leaks from Wired's danger room. The various blogs from that site reflect the 4th pillar's attitude toward the whole thing in an enlightening way, and even if you think Spencer is on the wrong side of things, his articles are worth the read: http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2012/07/how-to-stop-leaks/

[Mjolnir]

Then how does that explain the notoriously leaky Cheney wing of the Bush administation?

Both sides pull this crap, no need to act like it's limited to a particular ideology.

You noticed this, too, I see.