Skip to main content

Double standards writ large

Aah, power, fame and good connections!   Make sense of this....

"Senators, generals, ambassadors, former British Prime Minister Tony Blair and the owner of The Atlantic were in the roster of powerful voices who wrote to a federal judge to ask him to go easy on former CIA director and retired general David Petraeus, who admitted to giving classified information to his mistress and biographer.

Petraeus pleaded guilty in April to a misdemeanor charge of mishandling classified information and was sentenced to two years probation and a $100,000 fine. The punishment stands in contrast to far harsher penalties sought for whistleblowers and leakers in less prominent positions.

The letters, released by a federal court in North Carolina today, attest to Petraeus’s good character, and many ask that he not face jail time.

Among the current and former lawmakers who wrote in was former Connecticut Senator Joe Lieberman, who has pushed for strict anti-leak legislation and who said in 2010 that the individuals responsible for WikiLeaks “are going to have blood on their hands.” WikiLeaks was “not only an attack on our national security, but an offense against our democracy and the principle of transparency,” he told CBS News.

Just a few years later, he said that Petraeus’s offense, by contrast, “showed that even such an extraordinary human being can make mistakes and yield to public temptation.”

“Dave is also humanly flawed, as many are, for which he has paid a huge price both personally and professionally,” wrote Admiral Michael Mullen, former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

Lindsay Graham, R-S.C., also wrote in on Petraeus’s behalf, though he regularly blasts the Obama administration for national security leaks, but argued that his “friend” Petraeus should not see jail time. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., who has called Edward Snowden’s actions “treason,” wrote that she believes Petraeus “recognizes the error of his actions as well as the importance of protecting classified information.”

David Bradley, chairman of Atlantic Media Group, which publishes The Atlantic and The National Journal, among other publications, wrote that he had heard the argument, “layers and layers deep into the city,” that “the Justice Department exercise its discretion not to prosecute the general.”

The 34 letters were initially filed under seal in federal court in the Western District of North Carolina. In April, the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press led a group of news organizations, including The Intercept’s publisher, First Look Media, in suing to have them made public.

A sentencing memorandum by Petraeus’s lawyers was also released today."

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Reading the Chilcot Inquiry Report more closely

Most commentary on the Chilcot Inquiry Report of and associated with the Iraq War, has been "lifted" from the Executive Summary.   The Intercept has actually gone and dug into the Report, with these revelations : "THE CHILCOT REPORT, the U.K.’s official inquiry into its participation in the Iraq War, has finally been released after seven years of investigation. Its executive summary certainly makes former Prime Minister Tony Blair, who led the British push for war, look terrible. According to the report, Blair made statements about Iraq’s nonexistent chemical, biological, and nuclear programs based on “what Mr. Blair believed” rather than the intelligence he had been given. The U.K. went to war despite the fact that “diplomatic options had not been exhausted.” Blair was warned by British intelligence that terrorism would “increase in the event of war, reflecting intensified anti-US/anti-Western sentiment in the Muslim world, including among Muslim communities in the

Robert Fisk's predictions for the Middle East in 2013

There is no gain-saying that Robert Fisk, fiercely independent and feisty to boot, is the veteran journalist and author covering the Middle East. Who doesn't he know or hasn't he met over the years in reporting from Beirut - where he lives?  In his latest op-ed piece for The Independent he lays out his predictions for the Middle East for 2013. Read the piece in full, here - well worthwhile - but an extract... "Never make predictions in the Middle East. My crystal ball broke long ago. But predicting the region has an honourable pedigree. “An Arab movement, newly-risen, is looming in the distance,” a French traveller to the Gulf and Baghdad wrote in 1883, “and a race hitherto downtrodden will presently claim its due place in the destinies of Islam.” A year earlier, a British diplomat in Jeddah confided that “it is within my knowledge... that the idea of freedom does at present agitate some minds even in Mecca...” So let’s say this for 2013: the “Arab Awakening” (the t

An unpalatable truth!

Quinoa has for the last years been the "new" food on the block for foodies. Known for its health properties, foodies the world over have taken to it. Many restaurants have added it to their menu. But, as this piece " Can vegans stomach the unpalatable truth about quinoa? " from The Guardian so clearly details, the cost to Bolivians and Peruvians - from where quinoa hails - has been substantial. "Not long ago, quinoa was just an obscure Peruvian grain you could only buy in wholefood shops. We struggled to pronounce it (it's keen-wa, not qui-no-a), yet it was feted by food lovers as a novel addition to the familiar ranks of couscous and rice. Dieticians clucked over quinoa approvingly because it ticked the low-fat box and fitted in with government healthy eating advice to "base your meals on starchy foods". Adventurous eaters liked its slightly bitter taste and the little white curls that formed around the grains. Vegans embraced quinoa as