Actually, it could be argued that “outing” a CIA agent is, relatively, a meritorious act: the outed agent is no longer able to work in the field and perpetrate all sorts of nefarious (and generally illegal and unethical) acts. But even if you don’t accept this reasoning, still the Bush Administration has done far more heinous things on an almost daily basis (like all the lies about the Iraq war, and the suspensions of civil liberties at home) than giving out the name of one former agent.
Still, since the agent’s outing does seem to be the issue du jour,I’d like to make a “modest proposal” (in the spirit of Jonathan Swift). I hereby propose that Bob Novak (who revealed the agent’s identity to the public) be arrested under the Patriot Act (which would mean that habeas corpus and other civil liberties guaranteed under the Bill of Rights would be denied him), tortured until he reveals the name of the White House official who leaked the information to him (again, the Patriot Act would allow us to suspend the usual rule of law according to which information so obtained would not be admissible in court), and then, together with the person who so informed him, put to death for treason. How could John Ashcroft object to such a process, even if Carl Rove, or Ashcroft himself, turned out to be the other guilty party?
A Modest Proposal
Actually, it could be argued that “outing” a CIA agent is, relatively, a meritorious act: the outed agent is no longer able to work in the field and perpetrate all sorts of nefarious (and generally illegal and unethical) acts. But even if you don’t accept this reasoning, still the Bush Administration has done far more heinous things on an almost daily basis (like all the lies about the Iraq war, and the suspensions of civil liberties at home) than giving out the name of one former agent.
Still, since the agent’s outing does seem to be the issue du jour,I’d like to make a “modest proposal” (in the spirit of Jonathan Swift). I hereby propose that Bob Novak (who revealed the agent’s identity to the public) be arrested under the Patriot Act (which would mean that habeas corpus and other civil liberties guaranteed under the Bill of Rights would be denied him), tortured until he reveals the name of the White House official who leaked the information to him (again, the Patriot Act would allow us to suspend the usual rule of law according to which information so obtained would not be admissible in court), and then, together with the person who so informed him, put to death for treason. How could John Ashcroft object to such a process, even if Carl Rove, or Ashcroft himself, turned out to be the other guilty party?