Our Opinion: No seal of approval for 'tell-all' maneuver

News Tribune editorial

Friday, September 7, 2012

“No Easy Day” makes us uneasy.

The book, subtitled “The Autobiography of a Navy SEAL,” promises on its cover “the firsthand account of the mission that killed Osama bin Laden.” The book was written by former Navy SEAL Matt Bissonnette, under the pseudonym Mark Owens.

Military officials have threatened legal action, contending the book contains classified information.

Rear Adm. Sean Pybus, who heads the Naval Special Warfare Command, alleges the book contains details of the mission. He said information about SEAL training and operations puts the troops and their families at risk.

Pentagon Press Secretary George Little said the author was required to submit the book for Pentagon screening before publication, an allegation the author’s attorney disputes.

Whether the book discloses classified information and jeopardizes troops is a legal matter for the courts to decide if a lawsuit is filed.

Our reaction is that an insider account of the military action is unseemly and inappropriate.

Pybus wrote in a letter to troops under his command: “For an elite force that should be humble and disciplined for life, we are certainly not appearing to be so.” He added: “We must immediately reconsider how we properly influence our people in and out of uniform NOT to seek inappropriate monetary, political, or celebrity profit from the service” with the SEALS.

We concur.

The author breached a responsibility and an allegiance to his peers and his country.

He stooped to satisfying the lurid appetite of an audience interested in the orchestrated killing of a terrorist and enemy. A clandestine military mission is not appropriate fodder for a Hollywood-style, “tell-all” book.

Whether the author violated the law will be determined.

He already has violated the law the of common decency.

More like this story

Graceful 8 months, 1 week ago

So the idea is once under the thumb of Big Brother always under the thumb? What about the right of the public to know how its government, which includes the military, operates?

Insight 8 months, 1 week ago

So, you're a strong supporter of Wiki Leaks, eh? Total transparency?

JCLifer 8 months, 1 week ago

Shine some sunshine on the situation.

Transparency in governance is a very good thing. So is "say what you will do and then do what you say".

Honesty is so hard to find these days.

spelchek 8 months, 1 week ago

Common decency? Classified military information was leaked to Hollywood over a month ago from this administration. Allegedly to garner votes before November. Perhaps if the government that employed this SEAL would practice what it's preaching they wouldn't look so hypocritical. I do not condone the release of any classified information by anyone, especially the government that hired this SEAL that he swore to protect.

tonto_goldberg 8 months, 1 week ago

I know that claim has spread like gospel out in the right-wing blogosphere, but CNN says otherwise, with an explanation of what really happened: cnn.com/2012/08/17/opinion/bergen-obama-swift-boat/index.html

tonto_goldberg 8 months, 1 week ago

Tee-hee-hee. A joke from Graceful.

The stealth helicopter that crashed was the turning point in making the information public. Politics came later.

gsbcmo 8 months, 1 week ago

Common decency would not have had our Commander in Chief making political hey from the sacrifice of the Seals. While no DIRECT evidence is available that Obama's naming of Seal Team Six lead to the retribution of shooting down their helicopter, it certainly smells like it to me. Maybe "Owen" wanted the truth to come out, not the self serving version from the white house. Of course the TRUTH means nothing to you coolade drinkers at the Snooze Bafoon.

JCLifer 8 months, 1 week ago

It isn't classified military information anymore. It is a part of history and the record of what happened.

BTW: I keep hearing that Obama is dead and GM is alive. Not sure what that means. Terrorists are still terrorizing and GM is on taxpayer-funded life support. Democrats probably shouldn't be taking credit for either one of these things- more like taking responsibility might be better.

3336 8 months, 1 week ago

What difference does it make!!! Bin Laden is gone. Are you people adults or kids. Choose who you want to vote for and move on, You will never know the answers to anything unless you are there. Now, go vote and have a good life!!!!

BillyJoeRayBob 8 months, 1 week ago

I beg to differ with some about whether this SEAL is disclosing classified information and/or violated his non-disclosure agreements after he retired. The specialized equipment being used, surveillance techniques, the methods of getting special forces in and out of countries without them ever knowing you were there, potential locations of a POW, are all still classified. It is common for those retiring with Top Secret or higher (SCI) clearances to sign non-disclosure agreements about the classified operations they participated in on active duty. You even need prior authorization to travel to certain parts of the world after you retire. I think you will see this SEAL ultimately being charged federally for disclosing classified information and breaking his agreements. However, there is still no excuse for senior government officials of any party to be disclosing equally sensitive information to the press for political gain. Recent examples like exposing the infiltration of terrorist cells, the identities of clandestine operatives, and the like are severely damaging the safety of our agents and troops at the tip of the spear and our needed relationships with the intelligence services of other countries. These aren't surprise birthday parties we're trying to keep secret, they are critical advantages that contribute to our success and protect citizens and soldiers.

John 8 months, 1 week ago

Actually, you do not sign a non-disclosure agreement. . . . you sign an ancknowledgment of the Official Secrets Act. You are prevented from disclosing anytthing that holds a clearance, confidential and upwards.

Even when retired or discharged from the service you are not absolved of your oath. No other documents are needed. Anything other than confidential data really is open season. Non-disclosure agreements have little to no bite in them, especially from a government point of view.

If they could stop him, they would have because what he writes gives the lie to what was released under the Obama administration.

BillyJoeRayBob 8 months, 1 week ago

I was using the terminology that is being used in the articles and is common to the private sector. I agree regarding not being absolved of one's oath after retirement. It may be that the documents are difficult to enforce. I was surprised DOD or DOJ did not take legal action prior to publication.

John 8 months, 1 week ago

A) The man is a retired SeAL:. You do not become a SeAL without being taught OPSEC. B) You do not become a SeAL or stay a SeAL without being trustworthy and hold a top security clearance. C) He had a Spec Ops Att'y (yes, they really exist) vet his manuscript D) He states in his book that ALL the info in his book is available from public sources. E) Methods of incursion and extraction are by vehicle, horse, donkey, or Shank's mare, none of which has a clearance. F) The gov't posturing is just that, posturing. If they were that concerned they would have prevented it from being published and sold.

I own and have read the book. I saw nothing referred to that was not public knowledge concerning Spec Ops 10 or 15 years ago. . ..

BillyJoeRayBob 8 months, 1 week ago

I have not read the book and would not pay for a copy because I wouldn't want to see the author to see a dime for his actions. I guess the real problem I'm having trouble with, in this situation and many others, is those "public sources" of information are actually military or government sources that speak to news organizations "on the condition of not being identified because they are not authorized to speak about the matter publicly". Maybe most people just aren't able to keep a secret anymore. Maybe administrations don't pursue leaks because they can't stop doing it themselves. I do feel strongly that we are compromising our technological advantages and endangering lives by not being able to keep quiet about what we are doing.

tonto_goldberg 8 months, 1 week ago

Loyalty like yours ought to be rewarded, but it has become very rare. I won't buy the book either and for the same reason as you. The saddest part of this whole story is that the American taxpayers who pay for all this stuff are the last ones to get any information about it. The United States military considers information classified even after it's common knowledge because they can. They are not required to be logical or realistic about it.

Silverado_Phil 8 months, 1 week ago

60 Minutes did a piece on the book and interviewed the author. They televised it last night. Very interesting piece. If you haven't seen it, you should see if you can find a recording of it on the web. The author stated that he did not do this for glory or fame but for getting the truth out. He said that he has the support of his SEAL mates, and did not violate any non-disclosure agreements or reveal any top-secret information. He also stated that most of the profits from the book will be going to charities.

h t t p://w w w.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=7421138n&tag=contentBody;storyMediaBox

Please review our Policies and Procedures before registering or commenting

Or login with:

OpenID

News Tribune