Allen wrote:
"riverman" wrote:
Saw this today: http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060422/...urity_cia_dc_6

My question: how can the same country/people/nation award a journalist the
Pulitzer Prize for exposing a story, and at the same time file charges
against the CIA operative who exposed it? Aren't we on the same side here?
Either the journalist recieved a prize for doing something wrong, or the
operative is getting charged for doing something right. There seem to be two
rules at play here, and no one seems to mind.

The Pulitzers are not decided by the country/people/nation. They are
decided by a committee. The people charging her are doing so because she
took an oath not to divulge classified information and then allegedly
did so. The oath is not optional. If you do not like the oath and the
lifelong commitment it entails you are in the wrong business and should
leave. If this woman is found guilty she will be subject to penalties
that she was made fully aware of when she signed the oath. She went into
it with her eyes open and now there's a clear message for the rest of us
that raised our right hands.

Sometimes, such as in this case, the honorable thing to do
is to violate your oath. The trouble with a lot of military
types is they get real confused about things like honor and
responsibility, preferring instead to wrap themselves in oaths
and flags and turn a blind eye to torture, war crimes and murder.

Mary O. McCarthy is a hero, she violated her oath and thank God
she did. She realized that she has a higher responsibility to
truth and humanity than to a CIA oath. We should have more like
her. She'll be charged with a crime, and rightly so, but if I
were on her jury she'd never be found guilty.

--
Ken Fortenberry