Terrorism Supporter Peter King Is Right

Peter King IRA

 

Even enthusiastic terrorism supporter Congressman Peter King (R-NY) thinks that the Obama administration is leaking sensitive classified information for political gain.

Peter King is, of course, a bitter partisan, but for once this terrorism-supporting hack is right, calling out President Obama for allowing news to leak that his administration is providing non-direct military support to the Syrian rebels.

Politico reports:

Reports surfaced Thursday that Obama had authorized nonlethal aid, such as communications equipment, to the Syrian rebels. In response, King sent a letter to FBI Director Robert Mueller, asking that the agency add these reports to an investigation he had requested into national security leaks.

“These reported disclosures represent additional disturbing and irresponsible leaks of potentially classified information from this Administration,” he wrote [pdf]. “Obviously, the ongoing investigations have failed to deter further leaks.

The Obama administration needs to stop with the the targetted leakings of information designed to make President Obama look good, while coming down like a ton of bricks on whistleblowers who leak information that makes him look weak. Particularly if he really does want to shed his image as a grudge-holding Chicago machine politician.

Much as I disagree with Peter King about many things, and hold him in total contempt for his previous support for the IRA yet now worrying about radical Islamist terrorism in America, he is right to say:

“The only thing I can think of this is an attempt to rehabilitate the president going into an election year to show that he’s a tough guy,” he said on Fox. “The president deserves credit for killing Osama bin Laden, but at that time they went beyond anything that had to be disclosed. I think it’s to enhance his reputation and it’s done in an irresponsible way.”

Obama needs to stop this nonsense. Now.

Stop circumventing the constitution by involving the US in foreign conflicts without getting the expressed permission of Congress first. And stop selectively leaking classified information when it suits his purposes, yet clamming up and withholding it when it does not.

This is not hope and change.

Advertisements

3 thoughts on “Terrorism Supporter Peter King Is Right

  1. fieara August 5, 2012 / 8:38 PM

    Don’t Americans have a right to know their gov is helping the Syrian rebels, though? If info is classified that doesn’t need to be classified for really good reasons (to protect people’s lives) then it shouldn’t be classified otherwise it’s not democratic. That info – that America’s giving communications equipment – doesn’t have to be kept secret from Americans as their lives/national security wouldn’t be directly/obviously endangered by not classifying it. Also, the Syrian rebels could tell the media, couldn’t they? Or Assad’s regime, if they find out, which one day they will. I get the points you make about circumventing Congress and ‘coming down hard’ on people who leak classified info that makes him look bad, though. I don’t think there should be any punishment for leaking any info, unless obv if it was with malicious intent/the leaker knew people would likely get killed/sold info for monetary gain/sold info to a regime dangerous to America. I really wish almost nothing was classified.

    Like

    • belindasgallery August 6, 2012 / 8:42 AM

      No, I quite agree! I suppose my point is that crucial information like this – which armed uprisings the US has decided to support – should be declared openly by the President and approved by Congress, and not leaked by some anonymous junior administration official, with the tacit blessing of the president, to help him look manly and tough. I completely believe in the need for transparency, but just as whistleblowers shouldn’t be punished or imprisoned for revealing information for the public good, nor should any administration (Obama’s or anyone else’s) leak the information in this sneaky way. Drone strikes, kill lists, providing “non-direct military aid” to one side of a conflict – there may be compelling reasons for these actions, but the case needs to be made to the American people, and their approval sought through a Congressional vote, rather than having the fact leaked to the media after-the-fact.

      Like

      • fieara August 6, 2012 / 5:55 PM

        Wow, that was very well said! And it’d definietly be much more ethical/democratic/transpatrent that way, of course; knowing what your gov is doing after the fact doesn’t really help citizen participation in such important decisions, nor public understanding of the issues. It might even cause fear/paranoia and unsympathetic attitudes towards a government percieved as secretive. Government should always give reasons for its decisions, as you say.

        Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s