I don't see how this affects whistle blowers? In this case the source needs to be revealed because the source committed a crime or was party to the crime. If a whistler blower is not committing a crime why would they need to be named? If there is no crime on the part of the source then there should be no reason to reveal a source.
I do believe it would have an impact on government leaks. When an unnamed source provides classified information that is a crime, therefore we will see fewer leaks of classified information. We will likely then see the Bush administration classify everything in order to protect themselves from leaks. What would you like for lunch Mr. President? Tuna on rye, by the way that's classified as secret. For dinner I would like Quiche, that is Top Secret can't let that leak out, they'll never let me back in Texas. Confidentiality Notice: This message including any attachments is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender and delete any copies of this message. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Discover CFTicket - The leading ColdFusion Help Desk and Trouble Ticket application http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=48 Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:162504 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.5 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
