« Morning Smoke: SEC Responds to Concern about FinReg FOIA Loophole | Main | Morning Smoke: The Debate over the Nominee for the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection »

Aug 02, 2010



I sit here and wonder how we must look to the World. We have all of this material "Leaking" and threats of more of it and I wonder why the leaker is not arrested for treason. I live and wonder who would protect us if a foreign power decided to declare war on this nation, when all of our soldiers are dying in a war that is not even about our soil. We barely have armed forces to handle natural disasters and to me, the federal government is a place in Washington, where my hope has died for anything to change. The only way that we could really get a nation like the one the founders had in mind is to replace all of the "Old boys club" with fresh blood and brighter minds. We can blog and they will fog up all that they keep on doing to hurt this nation and its citizens.

Laser Haas

One thing for sure; the military & Gov muscle will crucify this man.

What we must do is not let his sacrifice be in vain.

Outside of the US - the world banter on this subject rages the gamut vastly.

The fact of the matter is - what is the meat - within the documents; where we can assure ourselves that we must Unite against the bad faith documented within!

Captain Dan Hanley

Given the massive number of federal whistleblowers who have unsuccessfully stepped forward intending to expose corruption within business and our government with only a 2% probability of success, is it any wonder why our country finds itself in the mess we are in right now?

Why would anyone dare to speak out given those odds of success under current federal laws? Better yet, what does Kit Bond have to hide that he is currently blocking this important legislation?

Why doesn't the Congress hold hearing to inquire as to why Bond is blocking this tax-saving legislation? Are there too many skeletons being hidden in far too many congressional closets?

Demand hearings to be held in search of the truth! Allow past and current whistleblowers voices to be heard vice the voices of congress who wish to bury this important legislation.

It's our government and not Bond's and the other 534 members of congress. It is Leona Helmsley's "We the Little People" who pay the taxes and not those who wish to shelter their tax-free 'income' at Bradley Birkenfeld's UBS. Speak out people!

Captain Dan Hanley
National Public Spokesperson
Whistleblowing Airline Employees Association

A Nonnie Mouse

I am not sure that this statement is fair:

"And if it is, is the whistleblower willing to take the personal risk by going public?...It appears that Wikileaks went straight to that nuclear option with some consideration for the first question, but little consideration for the second."

I really don't think we know how Wikileaks counseled the leaker. They might have counseled him to tell no one...and he did not do that. The whistleblower outed himself. We do know that the head of Wikileaks is obsessive about secrecy...so I would be surprised if the whistleblower had not been counseled.

That said, part of the analysis POGO would do is and analysis of the whistleblower: what is their motive and emotional state?

What this whistleblower wanted was attention...there are varying reasons about why, but this has not been fully explored.

Robert MacLean

Until federal whistleblowers are given genuine protections and incentives, they will less likely go to Wikileaks or the media, like I had to.

Please go to this webpage to send a pre-can letter to your two U.S. Senators. It tells them the importance of passing the Whistleblower Protection Enhancement Act of 2009 (S. 372) before it dies AGAIN before January:


John Smith

One thing you'd tell the leaker is that leaking is, or at least can be illegal. Wow, what a revelation. You say that this approach is different than Wikileaks' approach. How so? I mean, how do you know that wikileaks did not inform the informant about this fact /and/ that the informant did not already know that leaking is illegal? There are a lot of presumptions in the start of your article, and this is a carrying trend throughout the article. I'd say, do your research from scratch because you're not really making sense.


The biggest concern I believe is that the leaks include names of Afghanistan citizens who secretly provided intelligence information to NATO/American forces.

This puts their lives in jeopardy. It is similar to revealing the names of informants to the DEA or local police.

Has Wikileaks gone through these documents to ensure that the names of informants are not shown online? I would safely conclude they could not care less about the lives of the informants' families.

The comments to this entry are closed.