| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Should the New York Times be charged? |
| Yes |
|
16% |
[ 4 ] |
| No |
|
68% |
[ 17 ] |
| No, but go after the leakers..reveal the sources |
|
8% |
[ 2 ] |
| No, but take away their white house press privileges |
|
4% |
[ 1 ] |
| Both c and d |
|
4% |
[ 1 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 25 |
|
| Author |
Message |
fiveeagles
Joined: 19 May 2005
Location: Vancouver
|
 Posted: Thu Jun 29, 2006 6:33 am Post subject: Should the New York Times be charged with Treason? |
 |
|
| Quote: |
New York representative Peter King, who is also the chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, is urging the Bush administration to seek criminal charges against the newspaper for reporting last week about a secret financial-monitoring program used to trace alleged terrorists.
"We're at war, and for the Times to release information about secret operations and methods is treasonous," King told the Associated Press. |
Congressman goes after the Times |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
TheFonz
Joined: 01 Dec 2005
Location: North Georgia
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 29, 2006 7:23 am Post subject: Re: Should the New York Times be charged with Treason? |
|
|
| fiveeagles wrote: |
| Quote: |
New York representative Peter King, who is also the chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, is urging the Bush administration to seek criminal charges against the newspaper for reporting last week about a secret financial-monitoring program used to trace alleged terrorists.
"We're at war, and for the Times to release information about secret operations and methods is treasonous," King told the Associated Press. |
Congressman goes after the Times |
I wonder if they wanted this leaked. Similar to that movie wag the dog. "I repeat there is no B-3 Bomber." Terrible movie but it illustrated a decent point. Making a big deal about it "being leaked" would heighten its importance in the news.
Edit: Then again I just read the article. The congressman sounds like a bag of hot air.
Last edited by TheFonz on Thu Jun 29, 2006 7:24 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
canuckistan
Mod Team
Joined: 17 Jun 2003
Location: Training future GS competitors.....
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 29, 2006 7:23 am Post subject: |
|
|
| The media have a job to protect the public interest against unchecked government power, something this administration has become well-versed in exercising. Treason? That's how ridiculous the political debate has become in this country. But King's outrage is undoubtedly shared by many Americans who simply hate the Times for its perceived elitist, left-leaning coverage of the war and other issues. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bucheon bum
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 29, 2006 2:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| another congressman wasting time when there are more pressing matters. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ddeubel
Joined: 20 Jul 2005
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 29, 2006 2:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
There is no treason only great patriotism -- this has always been the most American thing -- To stand up no matter where/when, no matter who says you shouldn't, To stand up and tell it like you see it. A plague on GB's house for trying so hard to corral this great virtue, a founding virtue of the constitution. So much worse seeing he is Texan and where speaking plainly and from the gut is seen as being a "frontier spirit".
If anything Bush should be tried for treason. It is against the country's constitution to side step Congress and set up "secret" programs. It is against all American's rights , this program. Why was America created? Why was their blood spilt so long ago? For freedom! Not this bullshit.
Here are two well reasoned paragraphs from the editorial response of The Times to the "unpatriotic" allegations.
Also, I just read a very insightful article by Kevin Baker in Harper's about this same type of thing -- how the Administration, seeing it is doomed in Iraq, will begin to take out the knife and look for traitors. As an excuse, to say -- "hey, they made us lose the war." The stab in the back defense. You wait, they will be doing a lot of this in the near term......
Soon it will be unpatriotic and treasonous to even IMAGINE a peaceful world....
DD
| Quote: |
To us, the Swift story looks like part of an alarming pattern. Ever since Sept. 11, the Bush administration has taken the necessity of heightened vigilance against terrorism and turned it into a rationale for an extraordinarily powerful executive branch, exempt from the normal checks and balances of our system of government. It has created powerful new tools of surveillance and refused, almost as a matter of principle, to use normal procedures that would acknowledge that either Congress or the courts have an oversight role.
The Swift program, like the wiretapping program, has been under way for years with no restrictions except those that the executive branch chooses to impose on itself - or, in the case of Swift, that the banks themselves are able to demand. This seems to us very much the sort of thing the other branches of government, and the public, should be nervously aware of.
The United States will soon be marking the fifth anniversary of the war on terror. The country is in this for the long haul, and the fight has to be coupled with a commitment to individual liberties that define America's side in the battle. A half-century ago, America endured a long period of amorphous, global vigilance against an enemy who was suspected of boring from within, and history suggests that under those conditions, it is easy to err on the side of security and secrecy. The free press has a central place in the Constitution because it can provide information the public needs to make things right again. Even if it runs the risk of being labeled unpatriotic in the process. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
fiveeagles
Joined: 19 May 2005
Location: Vancouver
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 30, 2006 6:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
| canuckistan wrote: |
| The media have a job to protect the public interest against unchecked government power, something this administration has become well-versed in exercising. Treason? That's how ridiculous the political debate has become in this country. But King's outrage is undoubtedly shared by many Americans who simply hate the Times for its perceived elitist, left-leaning coverage of the war and other issues. |
The media does have a job to protect the public interest between government powers and the threat of terrorists and terrorism. However, wasn't it the Times that recommended that Bush administration should track terrorist monies? So what happened since that time?
Now the news went after the leakers with Valerie Plame, why isn't the same thing happening now? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mitch Comestein
Joined: 13 Jun 2006
Location: South
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 30, 2006 8:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
| ddeubel wrote: |
| There is no treason only great patriotism... |
I'll accept that. Yet, does that make it OK for CNN to break in and say "Osama, they're coming into your cave tomorrow at 6" if a person who violates their security clearance agreement spills the beans?
The line has to be drawn somewhere, doesn't it? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
EFLtrainer
Joined: 04 May 2005
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 30, 2006 8:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
I have to vote for this as the single least useful thread ever. Or, rather, the single least usefully posted thread ever.
Is this even a question???? That ANY congressman would attempt to go after the news media in a republic/democracy is just sick. The ONLY justification for that would be if they were known to be giving aid and comfort. If their motive is to protect American rights, even if misguided - which this absolutely was NOT - then the congressman needs to get the frick out of the capitol and go sell vacuum cleaners. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
EFLtrainer
Joined: 04 May 2005
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 30, 2006 8:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Mitch Comestein wrote: |
| ddeubel wrote: |
| There is no treason only great patriotism... |
I'll accept that. Yet, does that make it OK for CNN to break in and say "Osama, they're coming into your cave tomorrow at 6" if a person who violates their security clearance agreement spills the beans?
The line has to be drawn somewhere, doesn't it? |
That would, actually, be treason. But a newspaper breaking a story about the invasion of the rights of Americans is not treason in any way, shape, or form. The nature of the Republic is far more important than the strategy of its wars. If a republic ceases to be a republic, what does it matter if it survives? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bucheon bum
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 30, 2006 11:03 am Post subject: |
|
|
| fiveeagles wrote: |
The media does have a job to protect the public interest between government powers and the threat of terrorists and terrorism. However, wasn't it the Times that recommended that Bush administration should track terrorist monies? So what happened since that time?
Now the news went after the leakers with Valerie Plame, why isn't the same thing happening now? |
1. What has happened? Where does it say the Times is against the Bush administration taking that action? reporting=dissenting?? since when??
2. Plume (not plame) was a covert CIA officer. Reveling her identity not only puts her at risk but also every source she received top secret information from. In this case the Times reported on a "tactic" our gov't is presently using. It puts no one at risk directly. Just a SLIGHT difference. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ddeubel
Joined: 20 Jul 2005
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 30, 2006 4:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
What I find particularly poignant here is how "hard" words like this against the press, such overt criticism by senior officials will send a signal to all other journalists.
With us or against us is the message. It will temper journalists who might have info. critical of the "regime". It is the same tactic many tyrants use though in a much "softer" way. But still in the same vein. Trying to shut people up.
What also is incredible is how quiet the American public is , on this issue. Damn quiet and they have just accepted that government can do all these things with their public info. They have given in to having no privacy -- a privacy, a get off my property, American creed that should be upheld vigorously. This too is scary. How Americans have accepted all this , under the quaint notion of "war" , a war with no enemy other than that the leadership points at wwwwwwwaaaaay in the distance. UGH....
DD |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Hater Depot
Joined: 29 Mar 2005
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 30, 2006 6:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I wonder why the congressman isn't upset about the fact that the Wall Street Journal printed an article about the same story, on the same day. Surely he should be going after them as well?
Besides, how does this help al Qaeda? Were they previously unaware that their bank accounts might be targeted? Like, ok, Bush wants to kill us but he won't touch our money.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 30, 2006 7:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ddeubel wrote: |
What also is incredible is how quiet the American public is , on this issue. Damn quiet and they have just accepted that government can do all these things with their public info. They have given in to having no privacy -- a privacy, a get off my property, American creed that should be upheld vigorously. This too is scary. How Americans have accepted all this , under the quaint notion of "war" , a war with no enemy other than that the leadership points at wwwwwwwaaaaay in the distance. UGH....
DD |
Source? Link? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ddeubel
Joined: 20 Jul 2005
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 30, 2006 10:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
ddeubel wrote:
What also is incredible is how quiet the American public is , on this issue. Damn quiet and they have just accepted that government can do all these things with their public info. They have given in to having no privacy -- a privacy, a get off my property, American creed that should be upheld vigorously. This too is scary. How Americans have accepted all this , under the quaint notion of "war" , a war with no enemy other than that the leadership points at wwwwwwwaaaaay in the distance. UGH....
DD
Source? Link? |
My own thoughts and observations coupled with what I just heard on CNN's meet the press and also several editorials. I will dig them up but hell, Americans should be outraged but we hear nothing about petitions, marches, calls for resignation, local newspapers bursting at the seams with letter writing campaigns. No, business as usual and this is purely seen as Congressional wrestling and not the very important and 1st amendment constitutional issue it is. Freedom of the press.
Here is a good link and read/review of why the 1st amendment prohibits govt from "swaying the press" from doing their job and also why it is the most precious of American beliefs. From an UNBIASED source .....
http://usinfo.state.gov/journals/itdhr/0297/ijde/goodale.htm
DD
DD |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
endo
Joined: 14 Mar 2004
Location: Seoul...my home
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 01, 2006 4:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
I voted no because I don't trust the intentions of this administration one bit.
They've already taken the idea of Presidental power too far - i.e. enemy combatents and wire taps without a warrant - and have shown a willingness to work outside the Constitution.
Checks and balances is how democracy works, but the Bush administration is using the War on Terrorism as a means to skirt around this.
America needs the media more than ever to keep those cronies in check. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
