Rep. King Seeks Charges Against Papers Over Terror Reporting: Foxnews.com

[Mad Mike]

Got this from another blog ,it is a very important question that needs to be answered.

If journalists can be prosecuted for publishing what their conscience tells them to be information vital to the public interest, what is to stop the government from classifying anything that it does not want to be known?

Also where do you draw the line, what is appropriate and what isn't ( to publish).

That's a reasonable argument for not supporting generalized arguments.

If however we were tracking specific targets who are lost because of a story such as this, the specific crime of helping those targets escape should be on the table.

[luckydevil]

If this is all confidential information being leaked, the real criminals here are not the newspapers. There are people in the government whose job it is to keep things secret who are NOT keeping things secret. We shouldn't be shooting the messenger here - it is the informants that should be punished.

Agreed, great post.

[Larry]

Got this from another blog ,it is a very important question that needs to be answered.

If journalists can be prosecuted for publishing what their conscience tells them to be information vital to the public interest, what is to stop the government from classifying anything that it does not want to be known?

Also where do you draw the line, what is appropriate and what isn't ( to publish).

What do you mean "what's to stop"?

It's already being done.

IMO, there's been only one leak I recall hearing in the last year, of something that, IMO, should have been classified.

We've revealed that we may have a working missile defense. People are debating whether we should, if NK test files a missile, shoot the missile down.

(My personal opinion: Shooting it down might send a message. But shooting at it and missing would send a much louder message. As much as I'd enjoy the image of the missile being shot down before it makes it to Japan, I don't think you roll those dice. I wouldn't even consider the attempt untill the interceptors have shot down their last five test targets in a row.)

(I'll also admit that I'm amused by the thought, if NK "test fires" a missile towards the US without a week's public notice, of the US sending a dozen Minutemen the other way. (Without warheads.)) (One thing that tempers my amusement at the thought, aside from the obvious insanity of doing it, is the fact that that loser Kim probably wouldn't even know the Minutemen were inbound untill China told him about it, later.)

To me, the fact that we might have a working missile defense is something that you just don't reveal. (And this is completely beside my firm opinion that if there's ever a nuclear detonation on US soil, the delivery system will be FedEx.)

But that information, which does affect National Security, was leaked without blinking.

Because that information, makes the administration look good.

[Thiebear]

Doesnt even the NY Times even mention its not illegal?

I love the argument that everyone knew about it but the voters???? the voters? You mean everyone knew but the American people?

[luckydevil]

It's already being done.

Tis true

[Larry]

Doesnt even the NY Times even mention its not illegal?

I love the argument that everyone knew about it but the voters???? the voters? You mean everyone knew but the American people?

I'll confess I haven't read it. (I've filed it under "so what else is new?")

But I think I caught something about subpoenas being involved.

If so, then chalk me up as a former card-carrying (need to renew) ACLU member who's on the side of "if they've got a subpoena, then it's legal."

[skinthemboys]

Well, Cant say I'm shocked at what the times did. ****in commies! Off with their heads.

[nelms]

The N.Y. Times is the same fish wrap that has supported the rights of pedophiles in the past. They are a left wing propaganda machine that would want nothing more than to see another terrorist attack in the U.S. under Bush's watch.

[Seabee1973]

What do you mean "what's to stop"?

It's already being done.

IMO, there's been only one leak I recall hearing in the last year, of something that, IMO, should have been classified.

We've revealed that we may have a working missile defense. People are debating whether we should, if NK test files a missile, shoot the missile down.

(My personal opinion: Shooting it down might send a message. But shooting at it and missing would send a much louder message. As much as I'd enjoy the image of the missile being shot down before it makes it to Japan, I don't think you roll those dice. I wouldn't even consider the attempt untill the interceptors have shot down their last five test targets in a row.)

(I'll also admit that I'm amused by the thought, if NK "test fires" a missile towards the US without a week's public notice, of the US sending a dozen Minutemen the other way. (Without warheads.)) (One thing that tempers my amusement at the thought, aside from the obvious insanity of doing it, is the fact that that loser Kim probably wouldn't even know the Minutemen were inbound untill China told him about it, later.)

To me, the fact that we might have a working missile defense is something that you just don't reveal. (And this is completely beside my firm opinion that if there's ever a nuclear detonation on US soil, the delivery system will be FedEx.)

But that information, which does affect National Security, was leaked without blinking.

Because that information, makes the administration look good.

So no one knew we had that missle defense system as part of the Star wars program?

[ChiefBigMeat]

The N.Y. Times is the same fish wrap that has supported the rights of pedophiles in the past. They are a left wing propaganda machine that would want nothing more than to see another terrorist attack in the U.S. under Bush's watch.

Nelms,

If you honestly believe that it is the NY Times agenda to aid a terrorist attack then you really need to consider seeking psycological help.

When the U.S. government declares war on the media, it's a clear sign that those in the government know that they are doing exactly what they know they shouldn't.

Trying to cover that up with cries of "treason" and "unpatriotic" as a response? It's worked plenty of times in the past ... to the end of forming fascist regimes ... Hitler did it, Stalin did it. It's EXACTLY the same.

1. Create an overwhelming sense of fear

2. Promote the idea that the country can blame all its problems on one specific group (sound familiar yet?)

3. Spread the belief that the whole of existance is "us or them, with us or against us"

4. Instill the notion that the government knows what is best and everyone should defer control to one strong central authority

5. Immediately label anyone as a traitor or unpatriotic for disagreeing with this authority

Nelms, seriously, this is the NeoCon agenda. It's not American, it's not patriotic. It's exactly what we have been trying to defeat in the world since WWII.

Try to step back for a minute and look at it objectively. If the terrorists' goal was to take away our way of life, our freedoms, then by this response aren't they the ones winning this war? We are going to throw out our own beloved constitution for those barbarians?

We need to face this challenge, but we need to do it OUR way, as AMERICANS! ... not goosestepping and saluting our "infallible" leader. That idea repulses me so deeply, my very soul turns to incessant wretching.

When anyone, including nefarious dicators from countries like Iran and North Korea or, yes, even NeoCon message board posters speak against MY beloved constitution and MY rights as an American citizen, you better believe I will respond with outrage.

[Thiebear]

These are the facts:

NY Times would not post a cartoon of Muhammed.

NY Times would post articles on secret investigations.

Those of you that were outraged about Valerie Plame should damn well be upset over this.

Those of you that were NOT outraged about Valerie Plame, you have no reason to be upset over this.

Put down your talking points and be REAL!!!

I know vaguely about nuclear bombs, but if you give me the plans I now can make them.

The Germans knew we were trying to break their codes (DUH!) but telling them we did hurts the war.

The tracking of financial records is of course known: Specifics on which countries are helping and how well were doing is very serious...

I've turned around on prosecuting the NY Times... I WISH we could just boycot them, but there are "democrats" that would buy extra copies just to spite the administration.

The leakers need to be hung at Ft. McNair, SW D.C. (Same place as Lincoln conspirators)...... the paper needs to be punished via. subscription.

[@DCGoldPants]

maybe I missed this in all the back and forth stuff.

But, who told the Newspaper of this program? Did a Newspaper break into Gov't records and steal the info? Everytime there is a program now, there seems to be somebody with some sort of clearance who believes what they're seeing is wrong.

[aREDSKIN]

Organizing the hijacking of the planes that crashed into the World Trade Center and the Pentagon took significant sums of money. The cost of these plots suggests that putting Osama bin Laden and other international terrorists out of business will require more than diplomatic coalitions and military action. Washington and its allies must also disable the financial networks used by terrorists. The Bush administration is preparing new laws to help track terrorists through their money-laundering activity and is readying an executive order freezing the assets of known terrorists. Much more is needed, including stricter regulations, the recruitment of specialized investigators and greater cooperation with foreign banking authorities. There must also must be closer coordination among America´s law enforcement, national security and financial regulatory agencies. Osama bin Laden originally rose to prominence because his inherited fortune allowed him to bankroll Arab volunteers fighting Soviet forces in Afghanistan. Since then, he has acquired funds from a panoply of Islamic charities and illegal and legal businesses, including export-import and commodity trading firms, and is estimated to have as much as $300 million at his disposal.Some of these businesses move funds through major commercial banks that lack the procedures to monitor such transactions properly. Locally, terrorists can utilize tiny unregulated storefront financial centers, including what are known as hawala banks, which people in South Asian immigrant communities in the United States and other Western countries use to transfer money abroad. Though some smaller financial transactions are likely to slip through undetected even after new rules are in place, much of the financing needed for major attacks could dry up.Washington should revive international efforts begun during the Clinton administration to pressure countries with dangerously loose banking regulations to adopt and enforce stricter rules. These need to be accompanied by strong sanctions against doing business with financial institutions based in these nations. The Bush administration initially opposed such measures. But after the events of Sept. 11, it appears ready to embrace them. The Treasury Department also needs new domestic legal weapons to crack down on money laundering by terrorists. The new laws should mandate the identification of all account owners, prohibit transactions with "shell banks" that have no physical premises and require closer monitoring of accounts coming from countries with lax banking laws. Prosecutors, meanwhile, should be able to freeze more easily the assets of suspected terrorists. The Senate Banking Committee plans to hold hearings this week on a bill providing for such measures. It should be approved and signed into law by President Bush. New regulations requiring money service businesses like the hawala banks to register and imposing criminal penalties on those that do not are scheduled to come into force late next year. The effective date should be moved up to this fall, and rules should be strictly enforced the moment they take effect. If America is going to wage a new kind of war against terrorism, it must act on all fronts, including the financial one.

This from the NY Times dated September 24, 2001. Words cannot describe what a POS organization the NY Times is and always will be IMO.

http://64.233.161.104/search?q=cache:zYSeRb3pBDsJ:support.casals.com/aaaflash1/busca.asp%3FID_AAAControl%3D5821+%22finances+of+terror%22&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=3

[Mad Mike]

Nelms,

If you honestly believe that it is the NY Times agenda to aid a terrorist attack then you really need to consider seeking psycological help.

When the U.S. government declares war on the media, it's a clear sign that those in the government know that they are doing exactly what they know they shouldn't.

Trying to cover that up with cries of "treason" and "unpatriotic" as a response? It's worked plenty of times in the past ... to the end of forming fascist regimes ... Hitler did it, Stalin did it. It's EXACTLY the same.

1. Create an overwhelming sense of fear

2. Promote the idea that the country can blame all its problems on one specific group (sound familiar yet?)

3. Spread the belief that the whole of existance is "us or them, with us or against us"

4. Instill the notion that the government knows what is best and everyone should defer control to one strong central authority

5. Immediately label anyone as a traitor or unpatriotic for disagreeing with this authority

Nelms, seriously, this is the NeoCon agenda. It's not American, it's not patriotic. It's exactly what we have been trying to defeat in the world since WWII.

Try to step back for a minute and look at it objectively. If the terrorists' goal was to take away our way of life, our freedoms, then by this response aren't they the ones winning this war? We are going to throw out our own beloved constitution for those barbarians?

We need to face this challenge, but we need to do it OUR way, as AMERICANS! ... not goosestepping and saluting our "infallible" leader. That idea repulses me so deeply, my very soul turns to incessant wretching.

When anyone, including nefarious dicators from countries like Iran and North Korea or, yes, even NeoCon message board posters speak against MY beloved constitution and MY rights as an American citizen, you better believe I will respond with outrage.

And off the deep end he goes...

Let me know when you see someone goosestepping. In the mean time those of us plugged into reality will keep focusing on the terrorists who would remove your ultimate human right. THE RIGHT TO LIVE.

Heres a tip. Try really studying history and learn what true facism looks like. Then when you see america look even remotely like germany in 1941, get back to me. You see I've talked to people who lived there and then. They know what it's like to live in true fear of their government and anyone in athority. You spout off about facism but the irony is that you are publicly criticising the government without fear of reprisal. Do you have any idea how silly you look? Maybe you should have lived in Saddam's Iraq and tried criticising HIM. Then maybe you would appreciate the freedoms you have and understand that no one is trying to take them away. :doh:

[Mad Mike]

maybe I missed this in all the back and forth stuff.

But, who told the Newspaper of this program? Did a Newspaper break into Gov't records and steal the info? Everytime there is a program now, there seems to be somebody with some sort of clearance who believes what they're seeing is wrong.

Show me one such person who believes the program to track the money is wrong. :doh:

[Larry]

So no one knew we had that missle defense system as part of the Star wars program?

No one knew that we had one that might work.

In the past few days, I've heard analysis from "experts" stating, for example, exactly how many interceptor missiles we have, and which phases of an inbound missiles flight they (might) work in.

Now, the good news is, it's possible that the expert's opinions may all be vaporware.

(And, after making my post, another thought occurred to me regarding these supposed sites: It's entirely possible that the US has already informed at least the major nuclear powers about the sites, in order to assure them that we're not deploying more offensive missiles above our treaty-imposed "quota".

In short, it's likely that any nation with reconsats has already been informed about what those new missile sites we're building are.

The only thing that's been leaked is that the darned things (might) work.

Still, IMO, something that we shouldn't have revealed, but not as major as I'd first thought.

[Larry]

Let me know when you see someone goosestepping.

Consider yourself notified.

Heres a tip. Try really studying history and learn what true facism looks like. Then when you see america look even remotely like germany in 1941, get back to me. You see I've talked to people who lived there and then. They know what it's like to live in true fear of their government and anyone in athority.

Government surveilance on every citizen in the country? Check.

Constant, organised announcements from the government that opponents of the administration are enemies of the country? Check.

People disapearing without probable cause for indefinitate detention, based on secret, anonymous allegations which cannot even be revealed, let alone challenged? Check.

Secret detention facilities that "don't exist" to store and torture prisoners that the government says it doesn't have? Check.

Wars launched under the claim of self defense, who's true purpose is to obtain staging areas from which to launch more wars? Check.

(And let's just ignore more esoteric things like the use of religion to justify discrimination, or the deliberate assault on all things scientific in favor of scientists being told what conclusions their research better arrive at.)

Now, you're correct. The things that are going on have not (yet) reached the level that they did under Hitler or Stalin. But frankly, that's a lot like the claims that we're superior to Saddam because interrogating a (non-existant) prisoner by using hypothermia to the point of unconsciousness is "better" than using a wood chipper.

No, I'm not saying Bush = Hitler.

I am saying that "America under Bush" is closer to "Germany under Hitler" than "America before Bush" was.

[Burgold]

I'm aghast. The solution is clear and simple. We need to expand the government. We need a department of Media Oversight. A department that can vet every article, interview or internet correspondence before it is published or produced. For the safety of the country and for the sake of our nation's morale that is the only way to curb the monstrosity, the leftist terrorist supporting ghouls of the media.

We know that only the government can be entrusted to police itself. Let me reemphasize this point! Only the Executive Branch has the authority and right to prosecute itself. More specifically, only those who planned and executed operations have the ability and knowledge to fully understand a policy in its complexity. Therefore, only the people directly involved in any plan that could be in anyway deemed controversial or illegal should be able to rule on its legality. The Department of Media Oversight is needed to defend America against its true enemies.

The media's role of watchdog needs to be modified. Who's watching the watchers. Who's controlling or tempering the sword these lunatics weild. The media has been slicing away at our liberties and securities for too long. They are the protectors of filth and the promoters of the crooked and the dangerous. They need to be leashed, prosecuted, and tamed. We are at war, people. This is a time for propaganda, not truth. This is a time when generic stories that do not list operational specifics can cause irreparable harm! It is time for the Department of Media Oversight.

[Kilmer17]

Rule of poker, when you spot a mans tell, you dont let him know you've spotted it.

That's what the Times did.

It might not be illegal, but it certainly hurts our efforts against terror. I cant believe anyone would deny that.

[Burgold]

The modern political philosophy is attack. As soon as this story was broken that's what the White House did. I suppose it's better than denial, but the attack is bull in many respects.

The intention of the attack is to create a diversion. They're not angry because this story reduces security, it doesn't, not in any substansive way, they're angry at being outed. They're worried that their polls could dip as they did when the wireless warrant story broke. To prevent that, they create a diversion or a scapegoat that's easy to hate. That's the media.

They've been working for years to generate antipathy and hate of the media. It's a brilliant strategy. If everyone distrusts the media and they're the only ones who can tell you when something goes wrong or when someone does something wrong... then you're safe or there is a perception that the story has been alterred/exaggerated to suit the needs of an enemy's bias.

This is, why the government needs the Department of Media Oversight. If the media is as biased and willing to compromise or purposefully cause damage to the nation to the extent that the government tells us they are then, the government should just step forward and control all information. This will accomplish two things: 1) it will prevent embarrassing stories and leaks from being released and 2) It will decrease the necessity for the overclassification of documents

[Kilmer17]

Outed?

For what?

Doing their job? There is nothing illegal or unsavory about what we were doing.

It was exactly what we SHOULD be doing, and precicely what Bush said we WOULD be doing.

The issue is that now the terrorists know that we arent just TRYING to do it.

The NYTs published this for 1 reason. They hate Bush. There is no greater public interest, or oversite. What they did hurt our interests fighting terror. But it's clear that many people dont care, because it hurt Bush in the process. So it must be okay.

Seriously, how can ANYONE say this doesnt hurt our fight. Whether it's a miniscule amount or huge amount, denying it had any affect at all is simply the worst of partisan politics.

[Redskins Diehard]

Disclosing means and methods is harmful, even if the overall objective is well known.

Police start dusting for prints to identify crooks, crooks start wearing gloves.

The New York Times is wrong for publishing it in my opinion. But not as wrong as the "leaker".

[Kilmer17]

Correct. The NYTs was wrong, but not illegal.

The leaker probably committed a crime.

[Midnight Judges]

edit: sorry I misunderstood a previous post.

[Air Force Cane]

no one has elected the NY Times to anything.

even though our population continues growing, their viewership continues to dwindle. I wonder why :mad:

I despise them, if this was WWII they would be charged with treason.