View Full Version : The NY Times just "outed" a CIA Spy...
Averageman
06-02-17, 20:23
http://thefederalist.com/2017/06/02/new-york-times-just-outed-cia-chief-iran/
In an article published Friday, The New York Times outed the Central Intelligence Agency’s (CIA) top spy overseeing the organization’s efforts in Iran. The paper justified its outing of the undercover CIA spy and his role within the agency by saying it was necessary since the agent is “leading an important new administration initiative against Iran.”
Yes. That really happened.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/02/world/middleeast/cia-iran-dark-prince-michael-dandrea.html
He is known as the Dark Prince or Ayatollah Mike, nicknames he earned as the Central Intelligence Agency officer who oversaw the hunt for Osama bin Laden and the American drone strike campaign that killed thousands of Islamist militants and hundreds of civilians.
Now the official, Michael D’Andrea, has a new job. He is running the C.I.A.’s Iran operations, according to current and former intelligence officials, an appointment that is the first major sign that the Trump administration is invoking the hard line the president took against Iran during his campaign.
http://thefederalist.com/2017/06/02/new-york-times-just-outed-cia-chief-iran/
So the Times has apparently made it the newspaper’s mission to make the agency’s work much more difficult and far more dangerous by publicly identifying the man in charge of its covert operations in the Persian country. The paper’s rationale? The report’s authors claimed that because the newspaper already outed D’Andrea in 2015 as the official in charge of a CIA drone program, ignoring desperate pleas from the CIA at the time to keep his name secret in order to protect both the agent and overall national security, it was kosher to out him as the agency’s new Iran chief in 2017.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/02/world/middleeast/cia-iran-dark-prince-michael-dandrea.html
The C.I.A. declined to comment on Mr. D’Andrea’s role, saying it does not discuss the identities or work of clandestine officials. The officials spoke only on the condition of anonymity because Mr. D’Andrea remains undercover, as do many senior officials based at the agency’s headquarters in Langley, Va. Mr. Eatinger did not use his name. The New York Times is naming Mr. D’Andrea because his identity was previously published in news reports, and he is leading an important new administration initiative against Iran.
Anyone care to guess why the NY Times would put this guys life and the mission in Iran in jeopardy?
Because like former POTUS they're Iranian sympathizers and hate Trump.
Let's hope someone actually gets arrested.
Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk
Maybe the cia should have a drone accident somewhere near the ny times. After all accidents happen all the time.
But since they dont do that, arrest everyone involved in ousting for treason. Its almost as if they want our men to be crushed by the M.E.
Sent from my SM-G900P using Tapatalk
There comes a time when "journalism" isn't a valid excuse for treason. I hope these bastards die in a fire. :mad:
There comes a time when "journalism" isn't a valid excuse for treason. I hope these bastards die in a fire. :mad:
Well, if I see an NYT building on fire I sure as shit won't piss on it.
There has to be something illegal about that, but unlikely. The question is who leaked the info and how to best stop the leak.
SeriousStudent
06-02-17, 22:36
But let's make sure Scooter Libby does time, right?
I would at least hope that the WH and entire administrative branch, puts a moratorium on any official contact with the NYT. Cut off their access until they reveal their source!
How is this not treason? Intentional sabotage of operations designed to protect the USA and keep us all safe? Intentionally putting our operatives lives at risk?
Despicable. Bad form NYT.
Moose-Knuckle
06-03-17, 03:42
This isn't "freedom of the press" . . . it's an overt action by a Hostile Intelligence Service.
Some people in the fourth estate, oh hell A LOT of people in the fourth estate need to be disappeared.
Averageman
06-03-17, 08:59
How is this not treason? Intentional sabotage of operations designed to protect the USA and keep us all safe? Intentionally putting our operatives lives at risk?
Despicable. Bad form NYT.
It could actually undermine the Iranian capability to develop a nuclear bomb.
If you look in to who this guy is and what he has done he is a very capable and driven man. It is worth a look in to the background and understand just how deeply these guys have hurt our efforts.
Remember the reporter who got "choke slammed" by the politician? This is the kind of stuff that makes that kind of stuff happen and I wouldn't shed a tear if the appropriate people got some pay back.
How is this not treason?
Because the Constitution.
Since the founders were themselves "traitors," they were careful to define "treason" very strictly in the Constitution. It's the only criminal act to receive such treatment.
Because the Constitution.
Since the founders were themselves "traitors," they were careful to define "treason" very strictly in the Constitution. It's the only criminal act to receive such treatment.
Just for clarification, my opinion on treason is an intentional act which can reasonably be assumed to cause significant harm to the country, not necessarily the government. Even our Constitutional Republic with democratic elections is subject to regimes, which change frequently, so I get the press putting the squeeze on those regimes they disagree with. The MSM hated Bush and now they hate Trump. The non-MSM hated Clinton and then Obama.
But outing covert intelligence operatives working against some of our worst enemies, such as the current regime controlling Iran, serves neither a political nor public interest need. In doing so they cross the line from journalism to domestic enemy. The NYT can claim they're not harming the country all they want, but in their arrogance they ignore their ignorance. They have no possible way to know how publicly exposing the specific mission of a specific intelligence asset might degrade that mission.
So if the offices of the NYT went up in flames tonight, I'd slow clap that an enemy of the United States took a hit.
They don't even try to hide their hate for America.
Anyone care to guess why the NY Times would put this guys life and the mission in Iran in jeopardy?
No need to guess. It is common knowledge these things get leaked by folks who disagree with policy. Leak the info, kill the policy.
In the 80s a person was passed over for a Chief of Station job. So he leaked the name of the person who was named to the Post, who reported it. The COS was recalled and guess who was then named the new COS? The media are such tools.
Just for clarification, my opinion on treason is an intentional act which can reasonably be assumed to cause significant harm to the country, not necessarily the government. Even our Constitutional Republic with democratic elections is subject to regimes, which change frequently, so I get the press putting the squeeze on those regimes they disagree with. The MSM hated Bush and now they hate Trump. The non-MSM hated Clinton and then Obama.
But outing covert intelligence operatives working against some of our worst enemies, such as the current regime controlling Iran, serves neither a political nor public interest need. In doing so they cross the line from journalism to domestic enemy. The NYT can claim they're not harming the country all they want, but in their arrogance they ignore their ignorance. They have no possible way to know how publicly exposing the specific mission of a specific intelligence asset might degrade that mission.
So if the offices of the NYT went up in flames tonight, I'd slow clap that an enemy of the United States took a hit.
For the record, I'm not saying they actions weren't criminal.
But I despise the "t-words"--terrorism and treason--that are overused in public discourse.
The NYT will get away with this simply cause this guy isn't a covert operative aka he isn't in the field doing undercover work but a desk jockey at Langley. At least that is what their argument will be.
The question is going to be: are the names of people riding desks formally classified or is it just policy to not name them for obvious reasons? If it's formally classified data the reporter needs to be arrested the same as someone receiving stolen property. He can go ahead and claim he didn't know it was classified, but should be compelled to give up his source or go down with the ship. The NYT should have their press credentials revoked and be punted from any official government communications.
The NYT will get away with this simply cause this guy isn't a covert operative aka he isn't in the field doing undercover work but a desk jockey at Langley. At least that is what their argument will be.
The question is going to be: are the names of people riding desks formally classified or is it just policy to not name them for obvious reasons? If it's formally classified data the reporter needs to be arrested the same as someone receiving stolen property. He can go ahead and claim he didn't know it was classified, but should be compelled to give up his source or go down with the ship. The NYT should have their press credentials revoked and be punted from any official government communications.
This guy is well known, was even depicted in Zero Dark Thirty. His identity was not a secret. His current assignment was.
He is controversial, married a foreign national, oversaw a few screw-ups, etc.
Averageman
06-03-17, 19:55
This guy is well known, was even depicted in Zero Dark Thirty. His identity was not a secret. His current assignment was.
He is controversial, married a foreign national, oversaw a few screw-ups, etc.
And he converted to Islam.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.