Time to look at a civil cases against the Times

Austin Bay:

...

I've discussed the SWIFT debacle with my contacts in the U.S. intelligence and defense technology communities, and asked for an estimate of what it would cost to reconstitute a SWIFT-type intel program. Gut estimates range from $400 million to $500 million -- a hefty quantity of taxpayer cash. Complete program reconstitution probably isn't necessary. SWIFT may still be operating, but if it is it operates with reduced effectiveness -- the Times' tipped off al-Qaida. Not surprisingly, every source has stressed the qualitative damage done to the political-diplomatic side of multilateral intelligence cooperation.

The New York Times calculates it can defend itself against criminal charges involving the publication of classified material. Times editors intend to play "media martyrs" defending the First Amendment against a "government attack on a fundamental right."

But we must speak truth to media as well as government and corporate abuse of power.

Perhaps the U.S. government should file a civil lawsuit to recover the loss of a significant defense and intelligence investment. No, I'm not a lawyer, but it's fair to ask if the Times did quantifiable damage to U.S. taxpayers. If it did, how much? Two hundred million dollars? Fifty million? Or did it do zero damage?

Calame belatedly recognizes a corporate error by his employer. In most cases, an apology more than suffices. However, if the SWIFT expose hurt critical security efforts in the midst of a counter-terror war (which many people believe it did), then it went beyond legitimate political speech or reporting and became an arrogant, stupid, wanton, reckless act that wreaked qualitative and quantitative damage.

...


I have said in the past that in the lawfare approach to defeating the enemy, civil law is more productive than criminal law. One of the reasons is simple. In criminal law, only the government has to produce discovery for the other side, but in civil cases, both sides do. Another reason is that civil damages can be much more effective at controlling conduct. Civil cases against middle east banks have made it impossible for to pay the families of the human bombers. They have crippled Hamas's ability to finance its death cult. It is time to see if the NY Times will have to pay for the damage it has caused US intelligence in this war.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Should Republicans go ahead and add Supreme Court Justices to head off Democrats

Is the F-35 obsolete?

Apple's huge investment in US including Texas facility