-
We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.
First Amendment right of a free press should not be absolute when it comes to national security?
Page 4 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
palehorse
Lifer
there were legitimate crimes committed by both parties. the disclosure of classified information by someone within the government was the first offense. the publication of said information by the NYT was the second. Both were criminal and both should be persued.
It is similar in nature to the act of knowingly receiving or purchasing stolen property. Just as it is in this case, both parties are guilty of a crime.
The specific information that makes this a big deal are the specific databases named by the NYT in their articles. Prior to that disclosure, the tracking of financial data was only spoken about in general/vague terms. The naming of specific sources is the proverbial straw that broke the camel's back, and it's the reason that the NYT should be investigated and perhaps even prosecuted for their role in this mess.
After all, there has still been no explanation excusing the disclosure. The NYT went so far as to point out that no laws were broken by the government in this program. so, again, why the hell did they disclose the info!?
my personal feeling is that their motive was entirely political as they looked to feed off the lingering hostilities regarding the NSA-wiretapping issue and add to the anti-Bush fervor. So until I see another motive presented, a logical one, that is the belief I will hold and use to personally condemn the morons at the NYT who did this.
OrByte
Diamond Member
I look forward to this issue being brought into the courts. Freedom of Press and of Speech is a hard thing to censor in this country. the AG has his work cut out for him if he wants to drag the NYTs in on charges of treason.
It is possible the adminstration will not pursue because they might not win.
Todd33
Diamond Member
Newspapers are a business. A person leaked the story, the NYT had to decide, lose the story to the competitor or run it and live with the right wing echo chamber babble about treason. The went with the decision that sells papers. You cannot have it both ways paleboy, the NYT was responsible for printing many WMD stories that originated with the VP that help legitimize erroneous intel and help sell the war... are they anti Bush or not?
palehorse
Lifer
ok, you DO realize that nothing you just said excuses the individuals reponsible for the publication of classified material, dont you? The fact that one of their motives is money makes the offense that much worse...
Even after the NYT admitted that there was nothing illegal about the classified program, I simply cannot believe how many of you are willing to excuse their actions. It's been one excuse after another and NONE of you are willing to condemn for what is at the least a very stupid fvcking thing to do, and at worst it's Treasonous. you just can't bring yourselves to see their fault in this equation, can you?
for once I get to throw your own wit back at you: please remove the blinders and realize that this act by the NYT is not justifiable in any way... it's really not.
Okey dokey, lets say I know lefty. Lefty is a con wanted for 100 counts of murder. Lefty is also my uncle. I call Lefty up and say, hey uncle while hanging around the precinct I heard the lieutenant talking to the captain and apparently they have bugged your phone and now know where you live. They are assembling a group right now to raid your place.
I have just aided and abbeted my Uncle lefty.
In the same way although it has been named in ambiguous terms that we are chasing the money to find terrorists. The NY Times has now divulged specific details
of how we are doing it. And placed in on the front page of one of the most prominant newpapers in the country.
A story no doubt read by same terrorists we are following the money to find.
They have essentially called up there uncle lefty and said ." hey someone leaked us some info on you and heres what it is"
Thus aiding and abetting there cause.
You no doubt will reject this argument, but personally I hope they find the little cretan that leaked it and he gets tried for treason. And as for the Al Jezerra Times lets hope at the very least a huge fine.
Pens1566
Lifer
So I'll ask again, were you screaming for the Post/Novak to be prosecuted when he published Plame's name? Didn't think so.
As far as explaining the disclosure, the times has already stated that the admin's feeble reasoning as to why it shouldn't be released didn't make sense to them (if the program was public the banks would no longer cooperate. Even though they're apparently required to via subpoena).
My personal feeling is that the admin is just upset that another one of their questionable programs has been revealed to the public, and since they really have no way to defend it they decide to attack the press.
Todd33
Diamond Member
They sat on the story for weeks and had discussions with the White House. If it was illegal, why didn't they threaten them or stop them? Freedom of the press my man. They might get attacked by hordes of right wing blog-zombies, but I'm sure the NYT will pull through.
You can tell the WH just treated this as bad press and not a crime; they didn't feign anger for four days and they timed a terror event (that Miami farce) to coincide with the bank story - sounds like a PR event to me.
You can tell the WH just treated this as bad press and not a crime; they didn't feign anger for four days and they timed a terror event (that Miami farce) to coincide with the bank story - sounds like a PR event to me.
palehorse
Lifer
exactly what valid points did you make with regards to the legality of the knowing publication of classified material? is your attempt to throw some sort of wag-the-dog-theory in my face supposed to respresent a valid argument FOR the justification of NYT's actions? or perhaps it was the whitehouse's "weak argument against the publication of the material" that justified the NYT's crime? So now it's ok for the NYT to completely ignore the white house's requests just because they feel like the whitehouse has a weak defense?
my gawd man.. MAKE YOUR POINT!
(and this time try to do so without resorting to personal attacks...k? good...)
palehorse
Lifer
so it is your belief that nobody on the intel committee knew of the program? or are you proposing that the committee should have knowledge of the operational details of every single intelligence operation conducted during the last 5-6 years? Which of the two ideas are you promoting?
Pens1566
Lifer
Its not my belief, its the fvcking law. Then again, when laws don't suit this group of crooks they just go around it like they did here. Read (if you can) the LA Times article that I LINKED already. They weren't made aware of the program until just before everyone else was going to find out from the NYT story. You are thick, aren't you?
Again, one last time, were you screaming for the Post/Novak to be prosecuted when they leaked Plame's identity? Until you answer this question, I'm not responding to any of your ridiculous crap.
Todd33
Diamond Member
My point was simple, if they were going to break a law the WH had at least two weeks to act. They did nothing (other than say please) until four days after the story was published and now they are just using it to attack the media as a whole. The media is about the only government watchdog left in this country. Of course you are a good soldier, they tell you how to think and how to act. They say the NYT is bad, you attack. You want to shut down the First Amendment or attack the Constitution then you are the traitor, not the NYT.
Well, if the NYTimes committed crimes, then the President did, too.
April 10, 2005
Report: Bush Drafts Plan to See Intl Banking Records
http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=topNews&storyID=8133265******=rss/topNews
April 10, 2005
Government Wants More Access to Banking Records
http://www.talkleft.com/new_archives/010306.html
April 22, 2005
US WANTS ACCESS TO INTERNATIONAL BANKING RECORDS
http://www.aclu-mass.org/update/archives/2005-04-22.pdf
BMW540I6speed
Golden Member
palehorse74 said...
I'm still waiting for any rational point your making....
It is truly amazing that news media organizations like the NY Times, LA Times, and the Wash Post continue to carry the Bush Admin's water time and time again (see last weeks "stories" re : DEMS not unified on Iraq War/ Repubs unified on Iraq War, the Miami 7 debacle, and also a lack of major reporting of David Savafian verdict, not to mention the endless war cheerlaeading during the lead up to the Iraq War)...
What really shocks me is that these news media organizations will then sit back and allow GWB and the rest of the Repubs call for their imprisonment for treason at the drop of a hat when the reporting does not suit the GWB "great protector" narrative.
When will they say enough is enough.
This issue highlights the larger point that this admin and Karl Rove only know one way to operate and that is on the offensive....this whole thing is really a non story since GWB has publically stated that the US will track the terrorists finances thru the banking industry, but since they have ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to be positive about, this is the best Rove could do....anything to make GWB look like he is the "tough", "the man's man", "the fighter", "the defender"
It is really is cheap and pathetic ploy to pick on a newspaper, and really shows how weakened this adminstration has become.
I have to wonder if the only (or at least most compelling) reason motivating republicans is the fear of what would come out and not how this impacts the GWOT. If they weren't so tied to Bush's apron strings, pathalogically attached to the "looking strong" and "fighting terrorists" narrative and if this was a different president I wonder how they would be reacting. They have to defend this, they have to hope that it stays a secret, they have to talk about how reavealing these types are programs is helping terrorists because if they don't, they have to admit their complicity and how much they really find the Constitution inconvenient for political purposes (which is ironic because generally they like to believe they are the only party to truly uphold the Constitution and only they are defenders of the U.S.). And anyway it is quite possible that they will be dead (or at least out of office) when the "law of unintended consequences" hits this country with a sledgehammer and the fruits of their labor/yammering come to fruition.
I guess fear (of failure, discovery, self image, terrorism) trumps reason.
Again, the strategy is simple: The Right-wing use every rhetroical means possible to evoke a feeling of disgust in the rightwing reader/believer. This disgust is to be channeled at these left-wingers who "supoosedly" exhibit no shame in their hatred for the US and their support for the terrorists.
That the rhetroic is an appeal to emotions is no big deal.
Disgust, though, is inherently maladaptive to reasoned argument. Instead it accepts the notion that the feelings it is based on are more honest and authentic than reason. It is from this basis in human sensibility that the Right-wing fans the flames of disgust. Disgust is easily directed at groups and branding those groups as subhuman and unworthy of respect and basic human concern.
To broaden these comments somewhat, the attacks on the press are part of a larger plan to undermine every means of rational debate and discussion. Once mistrust is sowed, once reason is poisoned with mistrust and distrust, then the appeal to the more irrational emotions like disgust will become more successful.
The reason these people feel the need to so viciously go on the offensive is to perpetrate their long held opinion that they are the ones who people try to silence and that 'they will not be silenced'! The so-called 'liberal media' is just another form of the arguement of "the attack on Christmas", meanwhile conservative Christians have never had more power in society. Add to that the fact that our 'traditional values' are under attack (supposedly) even though so-called value voters are the ones who put the current President in place...the country is run by their chosen elected officials, if values are under attack, it is not from liberals. Its the same thing as blaming the media for reporting the bad news from Iraq, "swift boating" the generals who have come out to criticize the administration and Rumsfeld and the list goes on. It is NEVER their fault. Even though these programs have been widely discussed by administration officials previously, if the terrorists find out, its NOT their fault, its the NYT. Its all part of the same mental disorder...inability to admit error.
It?s clearly an orchestrated effort to rouse the right wing masses, presumably for the fall elections, and in my mind, it?s a a bit too over the top. It?s too easy to show that there simply is no basis to the Administration?s principal assertion, that the Times? (and others?) articles disclose anything new about what our intelligence agencies are doing to gather financial information. In fact, all of this information was previously disclosed by members of the Administration themselves. These newspapers just have a wider audience, and different take on that information. The best response, in my opinion, is to state, over and over and over again - HEY, ?the terrorists already had this information and it was provided to them by this Administration?, and HEY, rightwingers, when are you going to get tired of being so obviously manipulated?
Furthermore...
Anyone who knows just a little bit about banking knows that banking is one of the most highly regulated and monitored businesses out there. ALL swift wires originating to and from the US are already monitored via a vehicle called OFAC - a government program which banks must comply (easy to google). In addition any large cash movements within the banking system must also be reported to the Feds.
The only difference here is the government is monitoring purely international transactions. Transactions that neither originate or terminate in the US. This is not unprecidented. The US used this exact same tactic during the "war on drugs" to track international drug cartels with some success. It seemed to be the exact same law which allows them to track terrorist money flows.
Personally I find the arguement that by reporting this legal activity to be "aiding the terrorits" to be absolute bunk. That's like saying if you report there are silent alarms in banks you are assisting bank robbers. As a matter of fact the opposite is true, by revealing it you are detering bank robbers, make them think twice in essence. Like the old saying "you use a lock to keep honest people honest".
This whole story is a non-event. However this press issue seems to be what the right wants to hang the next election on. If anything this makes me want to go out and subscribe to the Times.
I'm still waiting for any rational point your making....
It is truly amazing that news media organizations like the NY Times, LA Times, and the Wash Post continue to carry the Bush Admin's water time and time again (see last weeks "stories" re : DEMS not unified on Iraq War/ Repubs unified on Iraq War, the Miami 7 debacle, and also a lack of major reporting of David Savafian verdict, not to mention the endless war cheerlaeading during the lead up to the Iraq War)...
What really shocks me is that these news media organizations will then sit back and allow GWB and the rest of the Repubs call for their imprisonment for treason at the drop of a hat when the reporting does not suit the GWB "great protector" narrative.
When will they say enough is enough.
This issue highlights the larger point that this admin and Karl Rove only know one way to operate and that is on the offensive....this whole thing is really a non story since GWB has publically stated that the US will track the terrorists finances thru the banking industry, but since they have ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to be positive about, this is the best Rove could do....anything to make GWB look like he is the "tough", "the man's man", "the fighter", "the defender"
It is really is cheap and pathetic ploy to pick on a newspaper, and really shows how weakened this adminstration has become.
I have to wonder if the only (or at least most compelling) reason motivating republicans is the fear of what would come out and not how this impacts the GWOT. If they weren't so tied to Bush's apron strings, pathalogically attached to the "looking strong" and "fighting terrorists" narrative and if this was a different president I wonder how they would be reacting. They have to defend this, they have to hope that it stays a secret, they have to talk about how reavealing these types are programs is helping terrorists because if they don't, they have to admit their complicity and how much they really find the Constitution inconvenient for political purposes (which is ironic because generally they like to believe they are the only party to truly uphold the Constitution and only they are defenders of the U.S.). And anyway it is quite possible that they will be dead (or at least out of office) when the "law of unintended consequences" hits this country with a sledgehammer and the fruits of their labor/yammering come to fruition.
I guess fear (of failure, discovery, self image, terrorism) trumps reason.
Again, the strategy is simple: The Right-wing use every rhetroical means possible to evoke a feeling of disgust in the rightwing reader/believer. This disgust is to be channeled at these left-wingers who "supoosedly" exhibit no shame in their hatred for the US and their support for the terrorists.
That the rhetroic is an appeal to emotions is no big deal.
Disgust, though, is inherently maladaptive to reasoned argument. Instead it accepts the notion that the feelings it is based on are more honest and authentic than reason. It is from this basis in human sensibility that the Right-wing fans the flames of disgust. Disgust is easily directed at groups and branding those groups as subhuman and unworthy of respect and basic human concern.
To broaden these comments somewhat, the attacks on the press are part of a larger plan to undermine every means of rational debate and discussion. Once mistrust is sowed, once reason is poisoned with mistrust and distrust, then the appeal to the more irrational emotions like disgust will become more successful.
The reason these people feel the need to so viciously go on the offensive is to perpetrate their long held opinion that they are the ones who people try to silence and that 'they will not be silenced'! The so-called 'liberal media' is just another form of the arguement of "the attack on Christmas", meanwhile conservative Christians have never had more power in society. Add to that the fact that our 'traditional values' are under attack (supposedly) even though so-called value voters are the ones who put the current President in place...the country is run by their chosen elected officials, if values are under attack, it is not from liberals. Its the same thing as blaming the media for reporting the bad news from Iraq, "swift boating" the generals who have come out to criticize the administration and Rumsfeld and the list goes on. It is NEVER their fault. Even though these programs have been widely discussed by administration officials previously, if the terrorists find out, its NOT their fault, its the NYT. Its all part of the same mental disorder...inability to admit error.
It?s clearly an orchestrated effort to rouse the right wing masses, presumably for the fall elections, and in my mind, it?s a a bit too over the top. It?s too easy to show that there simply is no basis to the Administration?s principal assertion, that the Times? (and others?) articles disclose anything new about what our intelligence agencies are doing to gather financial information. In fact, all of this information was previously disclosed by members of the Administration themselves. These newspapers just have a wider audience, and different take on that information. The best response, in my opinion, is to state, over and over and over again - HEY, ?the terrorists already had this information and it was provided to them by this Administration?, and HEY, rightwingers, when are you going to get tired of being so obviously manipulated?
Furthermore...
Anyone who knows just a little bit about banking knows that banking is one of the most highly regulated and monitored businesses out there. ALL swift wires originating to and from the US are already monitored via a vehicle called OFAC - a government program which banks must comply (easy to google). In addition any large cash movements within the banking system must also be reported to the Feds.
The only difference here is the government is monitoring purely international transactions. Transactions that neither originate or terminate in the US. This is not unprecidented. The US used this exact same tactic during the "war on drugs" to track international drug cartels with some success. It seemed to be the exact same law which allows them to track terrorist money flows.
Personally I find the arguement that by reporting this legal activity to be "aiding the terrorits" to be absolute bunk. That's like saying if you report there are silent alarms in banks you are assisting bank robbers. As a matter of fact the opposite is true, by revealing it you are detering bank robbers, make them think twice in essence. Like the old saying "you use a lock to keep honest people honest".
This whole story is a non-event. However this press issue seems to be what the right wants to hang the next election on. If anything this makes me want to go out and subscribe to the Times.
palehorse
Lifer
not quite. in all of the ravings above, every single example given, and every single excuse given, fails to show anyone else in the government, including the President, listing specific databases that are being monitored. in this case, that is the information in question, and that is the information that the NYT should be held accountable. I've also said all along that they should also pursue and prosecute whoever leaked the info to begin with. Several crimes were commited here, and not just by the NYT.
Lastly, folks keep saying that the WH didnt act for the two weeks prior. The irony is that if they had acted, in terms of threats or arrests, then you'd all be coming down on them for being too stiff-handed. Well, they chose to leave the decision up to the editors at NYT, and in the infamous words of he who guards the holy grail, "they chose poorly."
NONE of you are addressing my points. Every single on of you has resorted to insulting me instead of addressing the issue. In this case, it is almost sick that none of you are at least condemning the NYT for what they've done. I wouldn't expect any of you hardcore anti's to take up the "treason!" cheer, but you could at least admit that the entire act by the NYT was FVCKING STUPID! After all, even they testified that there does not appear to be anything illegal about the program itself. So again, for the last time, WHY DID THEY RELEASE DATABASE SPECIFICS CONCERNING A CLASSIFIED AND LEGAL PROGRAM?!
for political reasons, that's why. period.
1prophet
Diamond Member
Did the Supreme Court rule correctly in this case for the New York Times during a time of war?
New York Times Co. v. United States, 403 U.S. 713 (1971) was a United States Supreme Court per curiam decision. The ruling made it possible for the New York Times and Washington Post newspapers to publish the then-classified Pentagon Papers without risk of government censure.
Excerpt from article:
It doesn't really matter why, does it? I can't say I'd make the same decision if I was in their place, but at the end of the day, it has to be their decision. If we allow the government to silence the press with nothing more than a claim of secrecy, we virtually eliminate the idea of a free press...something the founding fathers understood was among the most vital components of a free country.
And I know, I know, we'd only line them up and have them shot when they revealed "bad" information...but if the government decides, that kind of misses the point, doesn't it? Really the best way to regulate the press is the free market, if they spend too much time persuing political points (not that I agree with your "assessment" of what's going on here) at the expense of national security, people are going to start looking elsewhere for their news. I realize that doesn't satisfy those of you fixated on swift and brutal vengence, but I seriously question your abilities to see past the end of your nose and take into account the long term effects of trying reporters for treason if they expose classified information.
For what it's worth, I don't know why there isn't more focus on the government workers who leaked the information in the first place. I realize that the NYT is hardly a beloved paper for Bush supporters, but it seems like you're directing your rage (and boy do you guys have a lot of THAT) at the wrong target for reasons that seem more political than reasonable. We already HAVE a mechanism in place to protect classified information, and the people who have access to it are well aware of what they are doing, and have signed agreements to keep such information secret. I find it sort of amusing that going after them is almost an afterthought, if it's politics for the NYT, it's no less politics for their attackers.
D
Deleted member 4644
Palehorse:
Two specific questions.
1) What about Novak/Plame? Why are you not as upset about the outing of a CIA operative? Or are you?
2) Do you understand that the fundamental core of a "free" nation is a *constant* struggle between the press and government secrecy? From Vietnam to the War on Terror, our democracy only functions when the people know what the government is doing. Maybe it is true that the government didn't break any laws with this banking system, but ask yourself WHY the government doesn't invade our privacy more? I believe the answer is that it knows it is being WATCHED -- by the press. What is your response to my belief that without an *aggressive* press, a tyrant would slowly grow?
Two specific questions.
1) What about Novak/Plame? Why are you not as upset about the outing of a CIA operative? Or are you?
2) Do you understand that the fundamental core of a "free" nation is a *constant* struggle between the press and government secrecy? From Vietnam to the War on Terror, our democracy only functions when the people know what the government is doing. Maybe it is true that the government didn't break any laws with this banking system, but ask yourself WHY the government doesn't invade our privacy more? I believe the answer is that it knows it is being WATCHED -- by the press. What is your response to my belief that without an *aggressive* press, a tyrant would slowly grow?
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 24K
-
-
