Posted on 06/25/2006 9:18:22 PM PDT by Aussie Dasher
It has become increasingly clear that multiple members, if not most, of the leftist mainstream media no longer care about either the fate of the American people at the hands of terrorists or the survival of the United States. The latest example is that of the New York Times publishing yet another article that stabs our country and its people in the back, by publishing classified information regarding the tracking of radical Islamic terrorists' international banking activities.
The Times’ article (“Bank Data Is Sifted by U.S. in Secret to Block Terror”), which was published Friday, was quickly picked up by all of the other usual media suspects—as well as the so-called primary terrorist news service Al Jazeera. This latest program to meet the fate of no-longer-fully-effective, due to a press hostile toward any attempts to stop terrorism, was legal. Subpoenas had been obtained. Even the unethical NY Times wrote that the program was legal. Under Secretary at the Treasury Department Stuart Levey said that the program “has provided us with a unique and powerful window into the operations of terrorist networks and is, without doubt, a legal and proper use of our authorities.”
Quite apparently, the NY Times cared nothing about a program that would identify the “operations of terrorist networks”. In fact, the Times seems to have viewed it as a “duty” to inform said terrorists of the program’s danger to their organizations. The US government asked the NY Times to hold off publishing the story, as it would hurt our efforts to stop terrorist funding. The Times, however, refused and used the old, weary and catch-me-if-you-can excuse that it was “in the public interest”. Virtually anything can be construed to be in the public interest. That doesn’t mean the public has the “right to know” everything; most specifically an agenda that allows the government to identify and stop terrorists before they can hit us again. It appears that the Times’ “journalists” have either forgotten the attacks the country suffered on 11 September 2001 or simply choose to ignore them.
Is this just another example of anything for a buck or is it that the NY Times well-known hatred of President Bush is now clouding and influencing everything the paper prints? Irrespective of their ostensible “reasoning” (although I doubt any real reason was or is involved), this publication has again printed classified information about a program meant to help the US and other countries avoid another terrorist attack. This had nothing to do with the “rights” of US citizens. But, it did have everything to do with stopping terrorist funding.
So, in order to keep the terrorists informed of current US counter-terrorism activities, the NY Times printed a detailed account of another essential anti-terrorist program. This not only fully and unequivocally provides aid, comfort and support to those who long ago announced their plans to either take over or destroy our country but, continues to keep the “destruction game in play”. It’s a shame and has, once again, created another clear and present danger to the US—a US that no longer seems to have the internal fortitude to charge and prosecute the obvious perpetrators of criminal activities. In this case, prosecutions are not only highly warranted, they are necessary for our continued survival. The Constitutional protections afforded to a “free press” do not include treason.
Here is where to voice your concerns about the NYT and leakers behind the 'veil'..
http://www.usdoj.gov/contact-us.html
There are no words to describe my rage at the NYTimes and the LATimes and the person or persons who feel free to blab secret intel. info. I want the guilty ones tarred and feathered, then put in stocks in a very public place where we can have a go at them! Just WHO do these scum-sucking low-lifes think they ARE???? THEY'RE WORKING FOR THE EFFING ENEMY!
How long do we have to wait for something to be done. How much damage is too much? Americans hurting America. Hmmmmmmmm, don't we have a word for that?
In WWII they would be asked 2 questions: Blindfold? Cigarette?
Pray for W and Our Freedom Fighters
You really should direct your anger at the leaker!! The taxpapers are paying someone to sell us out.
The New York Times is expected to print just about everything they're given. That they don't print some things and print others based on ideological concerns is their concern.
The traitors and truly treacherous are those who have sworn an oath or signed a contract with the government and violated that and given over information to the NYT's for dissemination.
Freedom of the Press is important. It is important that the press be able to print any information that they confirm to be true, even if it is harmful to the country. Economics will take care of the wayward press eventually, as patriotic citizens boycott their products. Anti-American editors are eventually going to become anathema to stockholders who want their investments to show a profit.
But protections for leakers of national security information should not be protected under the first amendment. If a leaker feels that the information is important to get out to the public, and the leaker is right - the public will choose to protect the leaker from the consequences. But ideologically driven leaks, for crass political purposes, that endanger the national security are expressly unpopular - and the leakers must be brought to justice.
If you'll look at my post again, you'll see that the leaker is mentioned here.
I wonder if some of today's journalist would have told the Nazis' or Nips about our ability to read their encoded radio traffic?
Sorry!!!!!
Time to mock them in song --- http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1655590/posts
"You will wait until I'm President again
because I have EVERYONEs FBI files, and WE have the power and the control and the Press."
If he or she has to ask that question now, he or she hasn't been paying a heck of a lot of attention to what the left has been up to for the last several years.
They are indeed, but how come that their accomplices from the NYT aren't?! It's just a judicial common sense, an axiom, that the thief and the receiver bear equal responsibility.
So, the US government shouldn't "ask the NY Times to hold off publishing the story", but remind them that making classified information public they violate the law - and if they insist on doing that, the law should be vigilantly enforced.
This is a war, isn't it?
The USG can ask the NYT not to print a story of National Security interest, but it shouldn't be able to "force" them not to print.
However, the sources should not be protected under the First Amendment, which would mean that the NYT can't refuse to reveal their sources when subpoenaed without being charged with obstruction of justice.
The leakers feel secure in their ability to escape responsibility for their actions because the reporters they use to disseminate the information face no consequences for protecting them. And thus, the leakers feel secure in their anonymity and ability to escape consequences and responsibilities for their actions.
Protecting freedom of the press, even when we disagree vehemently with the press and its actions, is necessary - even when it is distasteful. But letting the press protect sources who are committing a crime, but who are too cowardly to break their silence without the press to shield them is not freedom of the press. That is protecting cowardly, political maneuvering at the expense of the Constitution, which doesn't protect criminals who break the law by abusing the first amendment.
In today'NY Daily News Congressman Peter King of Long Island says it is now time to prosecute the NY Times. Freedom of the press is not absolute.
Like I said, prosecute the NYTs if they don't give up their sources, for obstruction of justice.
A crime has been committed by a leaker in a our government. The source(s) committed treason and espionage. The NYTs was merely the vehicle by which the source(s) exposed their information. While the NYTs was a willing patsy, they aren't the problem. The problem is that there are people in positions of trust who are violating that trust to the benefit of our enemies.
Essentially, the NYTs is a tool. Their political agenda isn't illegal. Their publishing of classified information isn't illegal. However, if they're protecting a criminal from prosecution, they are committing a crime. And if they participated actively in recruiting or suborning a source for the purpose of obtaining classified information, that would be illegal.
"Is this just another example of anything for a buck or is it that the NY Times well-known hatred of President Bush is now clouding and influencing everything the paper prints"
YES!
Prosecute the NYTimes to the fullest extents possible. If the AG can get wins in court, well, that would be right and proper. Even losing in court or in the following appeals will bear fruit, the attempts to prosecute will cost Pinch and the stockholders many millions in legal fees, perhaps ruin them financially. They're in the red as is.
OMG, I can not begin to comprehend that possibility. I don't want to. I won't do it. I wouldn't know how to get passed that horrible face. It just can't happen.
New York Times- All the news that misfits print.
Next FREEPER "GIG" ?? March on the "SLIMES"??
6/24/06 | Darth Airborne
Posted on 06/24/2006 10:51:40 AM PDT by AirBorn
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/1654959/posts
Well...considering that the "LEAKS" that are finding their Way TO the Slimes from someone..(..where HAS Sen. Jay R been recently??) ---that in all odds were ALLOWED to stay FROM the Clinton Admin.--It is Hopeful that maybe NOW Presdient Bush will at LEAST Begin to think over his " New Tone " Philosophy!
How many is this?? Five? Six??
And yet No-One wants to go Protest Down at the slimes??
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1654945/posts
Indict the NY Times
American Thinker ^ | June 24, 2006 | Bill Lalor
Posted on 06/24/2006 10:19:26 AM PDT by maximusaurelius
Baloney. It's the concern of every serviceman or woman, intelligence gathering operative or citizen of the United States and our allies.
The traitors and truly treacherous are those who have sworn an oath or signed a contract with the government and violated that and given over information to the NYT's for dissemination
Being an integral and indespensible part of a plan to commit a crime against the United States makes then just as culpable as the rest of the conspirators of that crime.
It is important that the press be able to print any information that they confirm to be true, even if it is harmful to the country.
This is easily one of the most ignorant statements I've ever read. If I began broadcasting the names, pictures whereabouts, and times of day that your children are at their most vulnerable to every known child rapist and murderer in the world that I could locate, knowing that this information would be harmful to your children, would you defend my right to do so as not only legal, but "important"?
Your further assertions that crimes and criminals will be sorted out by the market instead of laws and justice are so far under water as to have lost the slightest reflection of light.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.