reply to post by bluemirage5
don't be so damn gulliable people
"The Pentagon sees to it that I know more than you."
I'll put it to you that way.
However, I'll play the game as a civilian, as well.
You tell me not to be gullible, but want me to accept at face value that Osama died in 2001.
Now, I'm sure you'll come back with a couple links and some "come on, you have to do some of your own research, your own digging, and connecting
the dots" - but it's really a cop-out.
The fact of the matter is that you have more personal, intimate experience with the surface of the moon than you have with Afghanistan cultures,
sub-cultures, and AQ leadership structure/personnel.
Go find a girlfriend/boyfriend or adopt a cat/dog - let them make you feel special.
reply to post by Cuervo
You still think this is about his book. It's not. This is about FOX news revealing a soldier's name and location. Forget his book and focus
on that. This thread is about FOX, not his book.
This is a valid point. It's easy to let this kind of fall through the cracks of the discussion.
Honestly, this is a concerning development on the part of Fox. - However, while these boards like to rag on Fox... I'm not so certain the trend is
unique to them. I will be honest and say that I do not have any examples on hand, and am not currently looking for any - but I would imagine that you
would find similar, lower-profile instances in other networks.
It is irresponsible journalism either way.
I'm sure the three letter alphabet soup agencies would not appreciate the comparison - but I look at journalism the same way I look at a spy network.
You have your sources that feed you information - sometimes as a one-off, other times on a regular basis. It is your duty and responsibility to
protect their identity (particularly in high profile, high-risk/impact reports) and, if possible, to even be able to offer them some level of
protection using media coverage if they are compromised - and/or to provide legal support.
The trend I see is that some journalists seem to think they are some kind of comic book hero, or something. "I'm going to expose people who do bad
things!" - and I would imagine the Fox journalist responsible for this was looking to unearth who it was who had attempted to publish a book
potentially containing OPSEC information regarding Naval Special Warfare Operations.
The problem with things like this is that it opens up a can of worms beyond the perspective of the journalist.
Units that mobilize to operate in Guantanamo Bay for detainee ops do not wear name-tapes on their uniforms. Why? Because the people imprisoned there
-have- hunted down the families of people who work at those facilities, using their contacts on the outside and position within various organizations.
No need to make it easier for them.
When you positively identify one individual as being part of an operation - you can, with the right intelligence assets, unravel the identities of a
large number of people involved in any given operation - even subsequent operations.
There's a few dozen people, right now, experiencing some pucker-factor and probably considering a move with a covert name change for their entire