Sorry to have to keep telling the Tsar to stow the stuff about me regurgitating them talking points.
I’ve never read Sullivan. I’ve read a few things of Greenwald’s, none lately, and find him to be a good mind trapped in a pretty small person.

If I’ve been too brief for you about the Finder piece,sorry.
I, along with most of the people I talk with, agree with Finder that there’s some danger in prosecution and probably injustice if liability is solely placed on people working within guidelines given them by their superiors.
What is so ignorant and ill-founded in the opinion is the contention that prosecution can not fairly be brought because there was a review already conducted that resulted in only one case being brought.
When he goes to say that any further cases would be “…. a violation of the principle of estoppel.” he’s jumped the shark.

By CK MacLeod:  …that got your knickers in a twist around a bleeding heart mounted on a lance of infinite self-righteousness?

Colin, can you generate a visual image of that for us?

Got to say, fuster, it’s one of your least appealing characteristics, they way you pass summary judgments on people without bothering to explain your grounds. Just calling the NY Op-Ed, which I hadn’t read until just now “ridiculous,” isn’t persuasive or interesting. And who cares what association he mentioned, or who knows whether it was even his decision to mention it or not?

I thought it was a reasonable op-ed, logical and well-argued, not the final word on the subject by any means. You’re just plugging up your ears against something you don’t like apparently. Or did you just finish reading some Andrew Sullivan or Glenn Greenwald piece that got your knickers in a twist around a bleeding heart mounted on a lance of infinite self-righteousness?

@CK MacLeod – I guess you mean the Panetta article, not the ridiculous op-ed just published in the NYT.

Finder might shred his credibility less, perhaps, if he could explain why he allows his personal info to contain mention of his membership in the Association of Former Intelligence Professionals.

Could be. Small loss, no harm if so. At least he had the good grace to link josephfinder.com at his web-site.

Now, Joseph Finder the author wrote a useful and interesting article. Joseph Finder the ZC commenter mentioned something I haven’t heard of – the CIA supposedly attacking said author. At this point I remain agnostic and skeptical.

What oh what would James Jesus Angleton say? (not that we could trust it at face value)

@CK MacLeod – Finder is a nutbag bs artist and not worth attacking.

The final words of the Daily Beast article were “probably wasn’t the best choice after all.” I suspect that Leon Panetta has had worse things said about him. Combing through the rest of the article, I was unable to find a quotable contention.

CIA attack? Where does one find out about this CIA attack?

@Joseph Finder – Which of your novels is best worth reading?

Pulled my punches? Gauzy? Come on, man, no one else had the balls to report what I did. And I must have made my point — why else would the CIA be attacking me as they’re doing?

Seems like they are all contentions. Maybe the winning contention of the day could be declared next day.