Leaks & Loyalty

Discussion in 'Military' started by Flanders, Aug 26, 2012.

  1. Flanders
    Offline

    Flanders ARCHCONSERVATIVE

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2010
    Messages:
    7,576
    Thanks Received:
    735
    Trophy Points:
    205
    Ratings:
    +2,003
    I get the impression that General Dempsey is ticked off because retired military personnel no longer have to obey his orders:

    Please view the two videos to put Dempsey in perspective. The videos are primarily about Senator Sessions trying to get to the bottom of Leon Panetta implementing the administration’s position on defending this country. However, notice in the first video that Dempsey is Panetta’s guy:

    In the second video John Bolton clarifies what Panetta said. Ambassador Bolton does not cite General Dempsey, but, once again, I urge you to remember that Dempsey is Panetta’s guy:

    Dempsey is critical of former military personnel complaining about leaked intelligence secrets. My first problem:

    General Dempsey should retire so he, too, can say anything he wants to say. As a retired officer he can preach surrendering America’s sovereignty to the United Nations to his heart’s content. In fact, James R. Stewart uses less polite terms than I use to suggest that Dempsey retire:


    August 26, 2012
    The General and Political Speech
    By James R. Stewart

    Articles: The General and Political Speech

    Here’s my take on the issues involved: Civilians leaking intelligence secrets and methods is definitely traitorousness, while every active military officer who places the United Nations above the United States in anything is guilty of punishable treason.

    Surely, the damage done by Dempsey in that one appearance before Senator Sessions dwarfs the harm done by all of the intelligence leaks coming out of the White House. I say that because leaks will stop when Hussein & Company are gone, while getting permission from the United Nations to defend this country will live in Democrat circles far into the future.

    Just so no one thinks I am downplaying the importance of exposing leaked intelligence data, let me point out that it’s a major catastrophe with profound consequences when leaking intelligence secrets is less damaging to the country than the things A FEW of our military leaders advocate while still in uniform.

    I’ll close with a video about leaking intelligence secrets that I’m sure General Dempsey, et al. find objectionable:


     
    Last edited: Aug 26, 2012
  2. waltky
    Offline

    waltky Wise ol' monkey Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2011
    Messages:
    22,922
    Thanks Received:
    2,029
    Trophy Points:
    215
    Location:
    Okolona, KY
    Ratings:
    +4,790
    Granny says, "Dat's right - hang him from the nearest yardarm...
    [​IMG]
    Source of National Security Breach Identified – Leaker is David Laufman of DOJ
    February 28, 2017 Obama holdover David Laufman is the source of the national security leaks, Cernovich Media can exclusively report. David Laufman, Chief of Counterintelligence, has all classified information regarding espionage pass by his desk.
     
  3. whitehall
    Offline

    whitehall Platinum Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2010
    Messages:
    30,693
    Thanks Received:
    5,007
    Trophy Points:
    1,140
    Location:
    Western Va.
    Ratings:
    +14,325
    How far in American history do you want to go back with the concept of "leaks and loyalty? Apparently FDR talked old Soldier Doug MacArthur who had done his duty in WW1 and retired as COS to stay on in 1941 and become the commanding general of the post most likely to be the target of the Japanese impending aggression. What was FDR thinking? By April of 1942 MacArthur had abandoned his army and his staff was the only survivors of the Battan surrender.
     

Share This Page