Quote:
|
Originally Posted by lookout123
i believe that Felt was working towards a just and proper goal - the ouster of the dirty president and his minions. i believe that there may have been other ways of going about it without privately leaking to journalists through a secretive pseudonym, etc. in the end, we'll never really know for sure so anything we say is pure speculation.
|
First, I don't know that Felt was working for the ouster of a dirty president. But he was helping to expose widespread corruption at the highest levels of government. Back then, it was not clear how much Nixon was involved in Watergate and other plumber activities even to insiders such as John Dean. But they did know, beyond a doubt, that Nixon was fully involved in the coverup. Today, with the slow release of Nixon Watergate tapes, we know Nixon was fully involved in creating and directing the plumbers.
Second point: if Felt had other options, then clearly we are prosecuting intelligence operative in Abu Ghraid prision who ordered and condoned outright torture and murder. After all, those lowly enlisted men did not bring dog collars and leashes with them to Iraq. They did not suddenly decide to torture prisoners only after Gen Miller arrived to Gitmoize Abu Ghraid. Outright torture only existed in two wings of (Abu Ghraid) operated by unnamed intelligence officers. So why are we not prosecuting those who taught Gitmo tactics in Iraq and Afghanistan? Actions ordered at that highest levels of government. Clearly, whistle blowers still don't have enough protection. Blame the little people and the managers will not be prosecuted. (Enron, Arthur Andersen, Waste Management, Tyco, ...)
Often the only alternative for government officials is leaking. Too many Americans still openly adovocate prosecution of whistle blowers rather than the criminal. Back then, whistle blowers had no protection. None! If Felt really had other alternative, then those same alternatives would have American intelligence operatives from Abu Ghraid being prosecuted for torture and murder today.
Of course Lookout123 again speculates. He does not even say what options Mark Felt had. Clearly Mark Felt could have gone to his superiors - done everything right and legal - when all his superiors were part of the conspiracy. No wonder Lookout123 forgets to say what Mark Felt could have done. Lookout123 forgets to include that one tiny little detail. What could Mark Felt have done when even today whistle blowers cannot expose those who Gitmoized Abu Ghraid and Afghanistan prisons.
We still don't yet protect whistle blowers. Mark Felt, back when whistle blowers had no legal protection, did the only thing he could do. Because of Mark Felt, et al, then America created its first protections for whistle blowers. But Mark Felt, who Lookout123 says could have done something different, had no such laws to protect him. Just another detail that Lookout123 forgets to mention when he accused the most innocent man in Watergate of being immoral or unethical. That other little detail forgotten - what then was Mark Felt suppose to do. Pray to god for a solution? What was his only other choice in a country whose laws prosecuted whistle blowers?