Posted on 12/24/2005 8:25:40 AM PST by ncountylee
Plain enough language for me! MSM is a domestic enemy...period!
A nuked city is just another big story to break, and a chance to make a name for themselves, to these sociopathic dirtbags. That they might be the victim is just another worthwhile risk, like hugging a telephone pole in the middle of a hurricane. They will destroy the preventative measures, then blame Bush for not preventing it. They are sick, evil people.
Part of the problem there is that the liberals have been allowed to define everything out of the word treason. Just try to get a liberal to define what is treason without defining it as Bush/Cheney.
Don't forget the Upper West Side political class, and the Hollywood political class.
No let's use it as yet another excuse for an Anti-Dc tirade.
-----
Who sets national defense policy and carries the responsiblilty for it?? Journalists?? Nice try.
It might be worth reviving. We definitely need treason laws to protect our country. But let's start by jailing the reporters, a remedy that has already proven effective in the Plame case. Also their editors, who presumably authorized these stories and, if what they were saying in the Miller case is true, were told the names of the sources.
Criminals are responsible for their crimes. But if law enforcement doesn't do it's job, then they share some of the responsibility.
If you never arrest anyone for robbing a bank, soon you will have a lot of people robbing banks.
If you never arrest anyone for leaking vital national secrets, soon you will have a lot of people leaking national secrets.
The rule of law, by which our country lives, requires that the laws be fairly, justly, and reasonably enforced.
And there's no use blaming the Democrats. Sure, many of them are criminally complicit, but they will not be punished unless the Republicans who control the Justice Department arouse from their stupor and do something about it.
Bush is by no means chiefly to blame, but after a while, if he continues to do nothing, he becomes technically complicit and shares some of the blame.
They did it anyway because they have only one agenda - the deposing of President Bush before his term is over. We are going to hear a constant increase in the MSM about impeachment until by late summer '06 it will be so shrill you will not be able to turn on your TV let alone read a newspaper. The RATS are going to run advertisement stating "Here is our articles of impeachment - vote DEMONRAT for the house and we promise you impeachment" Mark my words the stage is being set, MSM is a major player and the NYT cares much more about restoring DEMONRAT power than they do about the safety of America. Hope the next islamofacist plane plows into the NYT building.
A hypothetical for you. Imagine there has been wrongdoing by people in power in this country, imagine there are witnesses to that crime who wish to report it to the FBI. The wrongdoers, having knowledge of this, proceed to call out the agency under discussion and interecept their communications, all in the name of national security. Smacks of tyrany to me. Lest we forget Richard Nixon.
Watergate actually showed that the exedcutive branch is in danger of wrongdoing from the FBI. There was more wrongdoing at the FBI than the White House and "deep throat"(Asst. director of the FBI) was later convicted of felonies while Nixon never was.
Anyone who can wiretaps and spies. There is supposed to be a giant radio installation in Cuba just for monitoring U.S. communications. And I'd worry more about loony Fidel than the U.S. spies motives.
There aren't any secrets, get used to it.
Sir, that was the "old" FBI. Nixon ordered the assassination of at least one journalist -- Jack Anderson. Then, there was the threat against Kathryn Grahm by Attorney Journal, John Mitchell. How would you like yours put through the wringer?
To figure out who is sponsoring them would I not have to turn them on? I can not do that any more.
I'm not suggesting an official sponsor boycott. Lots of vagueries and cross-overs, but generally support your radio and internet site sponsors.
"A good start would be to subpoena the reporters and editors concerned and jail them until they reveal their sources.
The sources should be fired and tried for violating the oaths they took when they got their security clearances.
I doubt whether it's practicable to try anyone for treason at this point, but they can still lose their jobs and spend a few years in jail for breaking the law.
This article makes exactly the point I have been making. The entire press has been saying that people must be punished for the minor crime of leaking about Plame. Or perhaps no crime at all, since she was outed many years before, and didn't have the right job description to make it a crime to reveal it.
Now that a major crime has been committed, it should be punished. If the administration fails to do it, they will as good as say that they will not enforce our secrecy laws. These leakers are not stupid. They see repeatedly that they can get away with it without any consequences, so they will continue to do it.
For the sake of our country's security if not to protect the administration from more similar attacks, Bush must act. It is his duty to do so, and there has never been a better time."
I listened very closely to Fox over the holiday to see who, if anyone, focused on the leak rather than the spying. I found little if any until this morning's re-run of Cavuto. And it wasn't even Cavuto, it was the British man who sits in for him and he pretty much blasted off with the same case as you have!
The tide needs to turn on this IMMEDIATELY. The focus must be taken off of the 'spying' and put on to finding out who committed the real crime, leaking of national security information to the press. THAT should be the story. We need to demand that something be done.
Until someone is brought up on charges of treason, the leaks will never cease.
And let's not forget that every leak is has a "hot off the press" book attached to it.
You left out the part about having to endure a spinless Republican leadership as well...
And let's not forget that every leak is has a "hot off the press" book attached to it.
Better yet, they'll be easier to find and question.
A friend of mine just used this particular article to rebutt a libs accusations of Bush's 'illegal' wiretaping. Has any of it since been legitimately debunked? She was provided with evidence (links to thinkprogress site) debunking the claim that Clinton and Carter had done the same thing. That, "Bush cannot claim "inherent authority" over warrantless electronic surveillance because there is already statutory law prohibiting it in the FISA law. The Bush administration's claim is utterly bogus on these circumstances."
Is it also true that those in congress who knew about the wiretaps were NOT able to do anything because they were sworn to secrecy?
anyone?
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.