More Calls For Prosecuting the NY Times and Ilk

[musicman]

You're just flailing now. Why don't you take off the "damage control" helmet and just admit that the NYT have finally, irrevocably stepped on their dicks? Come to the light, Dr Grump...there's truth and peace in the light...

STRAWMEN TO THE BRIDGE - DILUTE, DEFLECT, MISDIRECT - DIVE! DIVE! DIVE!

That doesn't seem to work so well here, Dr Grump. It's missing that little something...let's see - what is it? Oh, yeah - CONTEXT. My assertion that the NYT have stepped on their dicks is squarely and directly to the point, as is my observation that the "damage control" helmet seems to have fallen down over your eyes - leaving you stumbling around in the dark. So, the use of that line here makes about as much sense as...

Q: Knock, knock.

A: Who's on first?

There's peace and comfort in the light, Dr Grump. Walk toward the light.

 

[musicman]

And the Secy of the Treasury was appointed by??? LOL!

The man that was elected to appoint him? And Keller has the right to undermine national security? By what power?

Exactly. How do we go about impeaching Bill Keller? This is why our founding fathers set it up so that judges and newspaper editors can't write law. There's an ingeniously-designed consequence to the making of these kinds of sweeping, far-reaching decisions: it's called "accountability to the voters". When you see the action taking place, and it is not walking hand-in-hand with the consequence, you can know that something is severerly out of whack. Bill Keller is making national security decisions. Something is out of whack.

 

[Bullypulpit]

Not always. I suppose you are in favor of revealing every bit of classified info...I am not. I could go into this big long exaggeration about how you want to let the terrorists know every weakness in our security, but I doubt that is what you mean or want.

I suspect that you are well aware there are good reasons for some classified data being kept secret (radio encryption codes, for example, or operational plans for an Army maneuver and deploymnent schedules for ships and planes). I don't want those published by anyone even if they are to be examined to ensure "there are no offensive words in them" etc.

A subject for debate is why we need such secrecy in the first place but I suspect that would soon degenerate into an argument between idealism and realism.

Oh damn...! I forgot. My proposition presupposes a rational society with an educated and involved electorate. Which we lack, and than makes the right-wing of the GOP perfectly happy.

 

[Hobbit]

Oh damn...! I forgot. My proposition presupposes a rational society with an educated and involved electorate. Which we lack, and than makes the right-wing of the GOP perfectly happy.

A rational society would probably prefer not knowing about a perfectly legal bank watch program to being blown up.

 

[Redhots]

Exposing a secret program worthy of treason?

Countdown helps put things in perspective.

http://video.msn.com/v/us/msnbc.htm?g=311A48A0-8CA8-4AD0-BC52-709084CFBB18&f=00&fg=copy

 

[jillian]

Oh pleeeeeeeeeeease. The admin bragged about following the banking records and no one complained when the WSJ published it.

You just have a bug up your butt about the NYT.

 

[Redhots]

A rational society would probably prefer not knowing about a perfectly legal bank watch program to being blown up.

Except its not "perfectly legal"... do some reading up on it. Its all very murky.

SWIFT wanted to pull out of it back in 2003... because it was so, "perfectly legal".

BTW, is there any chance of merging this with the other thread?

http://www.usmessageboard.com/forums/showthread.php?t=33253&page=4

 

[KarlMarx]

All this talk about a free press is irrelevant.... revealing classified information to unauthorized persons who do not have a need to know is A FEDERAL CRIME. Arguments concerning the First Amendment in this situation are a non sequitur.

I'm surprised that this isn't obvious to some people.

Obviously, the NYT needs to be educated on what is and isn't a constitutionally protected right. The right to a free press does not give the NYT or any other newspaper carte blanche to break the law.

Similarly, we have the right to free speech, too, but that right does not extend to disclosing classified information. The Rosenbergs, if they were still alive, could tell you that.

Title 18 of the Federal Code, Part I Chapter 37

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode18/usc_sup_01_18_10_I_20_37.html

 

[CSM]

Oh damn...! I forgot. My proposition presupposes a rational society with an educated and involved electorate. Which we lack, and than makes the right-wing of the GOP perfectly happy.

I was going to post a witty yet scathing reply and then I realized a few things.

1) you are absolutely correct. As our society becomes more and more liberal, it becomes less and less rational,

2) that most people in this country fail to educate themselves on issues and take the lazy way out; they merely recite whatever the libs/Dems/MSM tell them to (regardless of content or veracity)

3) we do not have an involved electorate and have not for many many decades.

4) the right wing of the GOP has every right to be happy about point #1 in particular, because the more the Dems talk, the less rational they look and the more willing citizens are to vote for the GOP which at least SOMETIMES seems rational.

I am eagerly awaiting your usual reply about us ignorant neocons and expressions of hate for Bush, Republicans, Christians, and black jelly beans.

 

[Stephanie]

I was going to post a witty yet scathing reply and then I realized a few things.

1) you are absolutely correct. As our society becomes more and more liberal, it becomes less and less rational,

2) that most people in this country fail to educate themselves on issues and take the lazy way out; they merely recite whatever the libs/Dems/MSM tell them to (regardless of content or veracity)

3) we do not have an involved electorate and have not for many many decades.

4) the right wing of the GOP has every right to be happy about point #1 in particular, because the more the Dems talk, the less rational they look and the more willing citizens are to vote for the GOP which at least SOMETIMES seems rational.

I am eagerly awaiting your usual reply about us ignorant neocons and expressions of hate for Bush, Republicans, Christians, and black jelly beans.

I agree on ALL your points..
#3 stands out at me. Lets hope that as of late, seeing the way some are wanting to take our country. The electorate will WAKE THE HELL UP, and get more involved.. I have some hope though, look at the last two elections.

 

[Bullypulpit]

A rational society would probably prefer not knowing about a perfectly legal bank watch program to being blown up.

As someone in Chimpy's Administration did when they outed Valerie Plame which led to a nuclear non-proliferation operation, fronted by Brewster, Jennings and Associates, to be rolled up. Gosh, just think of the loose nukes a terrorist organization can get ahold of now without us knowing about it.

And let's not forget, Chimpy, and the rest of the Administration, was boasting about tracking the banking activities of terrorists organizations for months before the Times story ever came out. So don't go spouting the talking points about damage to anti-terrorist activities. This GOP outrage is little more than a really bad case of crocodile tears trying to hide an attack on a free and independent fourth estate.

 

[CSM]

As someone in Chimpy's Administration did when they outed Valerie Plame which led to a nuclear non-proliferation operation, fronted by Brewster, Jennings and Associates, to be rolled up. Gosh, just think of the loose nukes a terrorist organization can get ahold of now without us knowing about it.

And let's not forget, Chimpy, and the rest of the Administration, was boasting about tracking the banking activities of terrorists organizations for months before the Times story ever came out. So don't go spouting the talking points about damage to anti-terrorist activities. This GOP outrage is little more than a really bad case of crocodile tears trying to hide an attack on a free and independent fourth estate.

It is really strange and perversely amusing at how you keep ignoring the real issue...leaking and publishing classified information....

I know you are ex military and understand the need for secrecy in some cases. Do you not have any qualms at all that the MSM is proposing itself as the determining factor of what is classifed and what is not? There is no doubt that the person(s) who leaked the information need to be caught and tried; but does not the MSM have some ethical or moral responsibility to not publish classified information? Is your hatred for this administration so deep that you willingly accept a pyric victory in this case or future case where the classified information really could lead to serious serious damage to this country?

 

[Bullypulpit]

It is really strange and perversely amusing at how you keep ignoring the real issue...leaking and publishing classified information....

I know you are ex military and understand the need for secrecy in some cases. Do you not have any qualms at all that the MSM is proposing itself as the determining factor of what is classifed and what is not? There is no doubt that the person(s) who leaked the information need to be caught and tried; but does not the MSM have some ethical or moral responsibility to not publish classified information? Is your hatred for this administration so deep that you willingly accept a pyric victory in this case or future case where the classified information really could lead to serious serious damage to this country?

It's not illegal to publish information obtained via a leak, whether the information is classified or not. As for your question, let me turn it back upon you...Doesn't the Administration have a moral and ethical obligation not to leak classified information for their own political gain at the expense of national security? That they have the power to "declassify' intel at their whim before disseminating it is irrelevant.

But to answer it, when that information may point ot a crime or abuse of power by a government, it is the obligation and duty of a free and independent press to report it.

 

[KarlMarx]

It's not illegal to publish information obtained via a leak, whether the information is classified or not.

Yes, it is! The information does not become declassified just because it came from a leak.

As for your question, let me turn it back upon you...Doesn't the Administration have a moral and ethical obligation not to leak classified information for their own political gain at the expense of national security? That they have the power to "declassify' intel at their whim before disseminating it is irrelevant.

But to answer it, when that information may point ot a crime or abuse of power by a government, it is the obligation and duty of a free and independent press to report it.

As in the Valerie Plame affair? That question has already been addressed. No wrong doing on the part of the Administration has been found.

"Free and independent press" --- I'll have to remind you how much you appreciate a "free and independent press" the next time you eviscerate Fox News... and for what? Because they give the other side of the story (and only half of the time) instead of the left wing socialist propaganda from the mainstream media.

 

[KarlMarx]

It is really strange and perversely amusing at how you keep ignoring the real issue...leaking and publishing classified information....

I know you are ex military and understand the need for secrecy in some cases. Do you not have any qualms at all that the MSM is proposing itself as the determining factor of what is classifed and what is not? There is no doubt that the person(s) who leaked the information need to be caught and tried; but does not the MSM have some ethical or moral responsibility to not publish classified information? Is your hatred for this administration so deep that you willingly accept a pyric victory in this case or future case where the classified information really could lead to serious serious damage to this country?

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to CSM again.

 

[CSM]

It's not illegal to publish information obtained via a leak, whether the information is classified or not. As for your question, let me turn it back upon you...Doesn't the Administration have a moral and ethical obligation not to leak classified information for their own political gain at the expense of national security? That they have the power to "declassify' intel at their whim before disseminating it is irrelevant.

It is EXACTLY the point that the administration in power (specifically the President) has the power to declassify "at a whim". That is not irrelevant; that is the whole point. The NYT or any other media has NO AUTHORITY to declassify anything! I for one do not want them to have the authority either.

But to answer it, when that information may point ot a crime or abuse of power by a government, it is the obligation and duty of a free and independent press to report it.

Obviously I disagree. The last time I checked, there is no mention of the press having any resposnibility or authority for government oversight in the US Constitution. It is up to the Judical branch to determine Constitutionality (legality) and up to Congress to oversee the other branches. You may not like that form of government but that is what we have.

The fact that something MAY be illegal is not enough reason any more than the fact that you MAY be anti-American is enough reason to have you executed. I use the term "you" as a generalization...not meaning Bully per say.

 

[Bullypulpit]

The fact that something MAY be illegal is not enough reason any more than the fact that you MAY be anti-American is enough reason to have you executed. I use the term "you" as a generalization...not meaning Bully per say.

It is, however the responsibility of the press to inform the electorate so it may hold the government accountable for its actions. I must say, though, that it is sad to see Chimpy's administration attempting to cow the few media outlets willing to examine his policies, in much the same manner the Chinese government is cracking down on dissenters there. How much more un-American can that be?

 

[rtwngAvngr]

It is, however the responsibility of the press to inform the electorate so it may hold the government accountable for its actions. I must say, though, that it is sad to see Chimpy's administration attempting to cow the few media outlets willing to examine his policies, in much the same manner the Chinese government is cracking down on dissenters there. How much more un-American can that be?

Bully, these people published top secret details. Do you even believe in the government having anything be top secret at all?

 

[CSM]

It is, however the responsibility of the press to inform the electorate so it may hold the government accountable for its actions. I must say, though, that it is sad to see Chimpy's administration attempting to cow the few media outlets willing to examine his policies, in much the same manner the Chinese government is cracking down on dissenters there. How much more un-American can that be?

Not much exaggeration there huh? Let me know when it gets to the same level as Tieneman Square, I'll probably be smart enough to get concerned then. Silly me thought the press and other news outlets were supposed to publish the news. Unbiased, truthful and all that stuff....

Ya know, for a Chimp, Ol' George sure is outsmarting the Dems/Libs. How do you suppose that is happening? Don't tell me it's his handlers because I hear the same terms applied to the entire administration. The fact that someone the left considers subhuman is outsmarting them at every turn makes me wonder why the hell I would want to opt for those less intelligent to lead the country.

 

[CSM]

Bully, these people published top secret details. Do you even believe in the government having anything be top secret at all?

Obviously not...he has as much as said that unless it passes media and public approval, it should not be secret. Of course, once it's public there is no point in keeping anything secret. makes me wonder why he hasn't given us all his social security number, home address and phone number...after all he MAY be doing something illegal!