House vote slaps news organizations

[Bustem' Down]

WASHINGTON (AP) -- The House on Thursday approved a Republican-crafted resolution condemning news organizations for revealing a covert government program to track terrorist financing, saying the disclosure had "placed the lives of Americans in danger."

"The recent front-page story in the aforementioned New York Times cut the legs out from under this program," said the Financial Services Committee chairman, Rep. Michael Oxley, R-Ohio. "Now the terrorists are well-informed of the details of our methods and will find other ways to move money outside of the formal financial system."

You see, if you want real security come join my Facist nation, I'll take care of the news media.

 

[vraiblonde]

You see, if you want real security come join my Facist nation, I'll take care of the news media.

Wait a minute, hoss. It's not fascist to prevent the media from revealing covert ops during wartime. What I think is hysterical is that the House had to pass a resolution to "condemn" them for committing an act of treason.

"We will send you a strongly worded letter..."

 

[Bustem' Down]

Wait a minute, hoss. It's not fascist to prevent the media from revealing covert ops during wartime. What I think is hysterical is that the House had to pass a resolution to "condemn" them for committing an act of treason.

"We will send you a strongly worded letter..."

No I'm saying that in my world, I'll give the media thier stories. No need for this investigative journalism crap.

 

[Bruzilla]

I think the Congress is taking the typical knee-jerk reaction road... again... in dealing with this issue. The problem is not the press reporting what they are told, it is the people who are telling them secrets. I had a security clearance for 26 years, and I had to attend briefings and sign agreements each and every year stating that I understood that I could not divulge secrets and that I would be severly punished for doing so. But when was the last time that anyone was punished? We've had people talking about the extraction efforts, the secret prisons, the wiretapping, and now tracking money... and who's gone to jail? No one. All you have to do is say you talked to the media because you disagreed with the Administration's policies or that you thought what you were doing might be illegal, and you have an instant shield or protection. So we now have teams of highly-paid government lawyers and law makers reviewing and approving on policies, only to have them compromised because some dipshit in the CIA, with little or understanding of the law or any agreements that have been reached, decides he/she knows more than anyone else and spills the beans. Then what was agreeable to politicians behind closed doors becomes a dangerous liability in the light of the media, and we end up losing another weapon in the anti-terrorist arsenal.

The media guys know full well what they're doing and what their rights and limitations are, and so do the CIA and other agency folks who are feeding them the information. The media folks have carte blanche to do whatever they want, but the sources know they face life inprisionment for devulging classified material and the best way to stop the leaking is to start sending these guys to prision.

 

[Pete]

I disagree in part. True leakers need to be identified and prosecuted BUT the news media not only has a compelling public interest in reporting the news they also have a responsibility to not harm the American people. Exposing covert anti-terrorism initiatives could very well cost American lives and that is very wrong. National Security is not a effing game and media organizations have a responsibility to use judgement IF they discover it regardless of how they obtained it.

How would the NYT respond if their disclosure was linked directly to allowing in some way a terrorist attack in the future and they get sued for negligent homicide by 500 people killed? They would scream like babies.

I agree that media does enjoy certain freedoms to report, criticize and uncover, but those privileges DO not allow them to disclose anything secret that endangers the very people who read their paper.

I am not saying they cannot investigate, dig, uncover and report. If they found out W likes to dress in a mini-skirt, put on lipstick and prance around the West Wing on Fridays nights after the staffers go singing show tunes, go right ahead, print it, post pictures because that does not endanger the Nation, just W.

 

[Bustem' Down]

I disagree in part. True leakers need to be identified and prosecuted BUT the news media not only has a compelling public interest in reporting the news they also have a responsibility to not harm the American people. Exposing covert anti-terrorism initiatives could very well cost American lives and that is very wrong. National Security is not a effing game and media organizations have a responsibility to use judgement IF they discover it regardless of how they obtained it.

How would the NYT respond if their disclosure was linked directly to allowing in some way a terrorist attack in the future and they get sued for negligent homicide by 500 people killed? They would scream like babies.

I agree that media does enjoy certain freedoms to report, criticize and uncover, but those privileges DO not allow them to disclose anything secret that endangers the very people who read their paper.

When I take over and create a facist dictatorship, would you and Bruz like to be in charge of the press?

 

[Pete]

When I take over and create a facist dictatorship, would you and Bruz like to be in charge of the press?

You really suck at sarcasm or whatever you are trying to convey. Rephrase and try again because I cannot derive the meaning of your post, either time you have made it.

 

[residentofcre]

I think the Congress is taking the typical knee-jerk reaction road... again... in dealing with this issue. The problem is not the press reporting what they are told, it is the people who are telling them secrets. I had a security clearance for 26 years, and I had to attend briefings and sign agreements each and every year stating that I understood that I could not divulge secrets and that I would be severly punished for doing so. But when was the last time that anyone was punished? We've had people talking about the extraction efforts, the secret prisons, the wiretapping, and now tracking money... and who's gone to jail? No one. All you have to do is say you talked to the media because you disagreed with the Administration's policies or that you thought what you were doing might be illegal, and you have an instant shield or protection. So we now have teams of highly-paid government lawyers and law makers reviewing and approving on policies, only to have them compromised because some dipshit in the CIA, with little or understanding of the law or any agreements that have been reached, decides he/she knows more than anyone else and spills the beans. Then what was agreeable to politicians behind closed doors becomes a dangerous liability in the light of the media, and we end up losing another weapon in the anti-terrorist arsenal.

The media guys know full well what they're doing and what their rights and limitations are, and so do the CIA and other agency folks who are feeding them the information. The media folks have carte blanche to do whatever they want, but the sources know they face life inprisionment for devulging classified material and the best way to stop the leaking is to start sending these guys to prision.

Everyone who works with or for the government knows what to say [or not to say] to the press.

I wonder if the thought of Watergate Type fame ever crossed their minds.

 

[Bustem' Down]

You really suck at sarcasm or whatever you are trying to convey. Rephrase and try again because I cannot derive the meaning of your post, either time you have made it.

Eh, I quit. I'm trying to do three things at once and it's not working, so I better cut out the forum.

 

[Railroad]

I disagree in part. True leakers need to be identified and prosecuted BUT the news media not only has a compelling public interest in reporting the news they also have a responsibility to not harm the American people. Exposing covert anti-terrorism initiatives could very well cost American lives and that is very wrong. National Security is not a effing game and media organizations have a responsibility to use judgement IF they discover it regardless of how they obtained it.

How would the NYT respond if their disclosure was linked directly to allowing in some way a terrorist attack in the future and they get sued for negligent homicide by 500 people killed? They would scream like babies.

I agree that media does enjoy certain freedoms to report, criticize and uncover, but those privileges DO not allow them to disclose anything secret that endangers the very people who read their paper.

I am not saying they cannot investigate, dig, uncover and report. If they found out W likes to dress in a mini-skirt, put on lipstick and prance around the West Wing on Fridays nights after the staffers go singing show tunes, go right ahead, print it, post pictures because that does not endanger the Nation, just W.

One little detail of this that gets underplayed is that this is WARTIME. The rules of reporting necessarily should change and be more restrictive in wartime. The bent of the people in and out of security-related jobs should be naturally to protect information that could be sensitive. The way Congress and the Supremes treat issues like wire taps, etc., should change during wartime to favor the interests of the nation (and protect the lives of our armed forces people) over the rights (real or perceived) of the individual.

 

[Pete]

Eh, I quit. I'm trying to do three things at once and it's not working, so I better cut out the forum.

Good choice

 

[Coaster]

Wait a minute, hoss. It's not fascist to prevent the media from revealing covert ops during wartime. What I think is hysterical is that the House had to pass a resolution to "condemn" them for committing an act of treason.

"We will send you a strongly worded letter..."

Agreed. The press used to be self-governing and did a good job of it. Exposing troop movements, strategies, etc. and endangering lives is unbelievable. Government intervention is not the answer though. It's all tabloid journalism.

 

[Vince]

Exposing troop movements, strategies, etc. and endangering lives is unbelievable. Government intervention is not the answer though. It's all tabloid journalism.

The news media just pissez me off. They think they have the right to print anything in the name of "freedom of the press" and to hell with everyone and everything else.

 

[SamSpade]

The news media just pissez me off. They think they have the right to print anything in the name of "freedom of the press" and to hell with everyone and everything else.

I think they really showed their stripes when Bush flew off to Iraq without telling them. They were friggin' irate. The President of the United States is flying into a war zone, and they think they have a right to know. They like to think it's the public's right to know, but I'd bet anything the public is totally cool with the idea that that kind of thing is on the QT when it happens.

Meaning, they're only pizzed because *THEY* weren't informed - not that "the public" was deprived of information it could care less it had or not.

 

[Bruzilla]

When I take over and create a facist dictatorship, would you and Bruz like to be in charge of the press?

I'm sorry... but I think that the government should have no control over the press, so I must decline your kind offer.

I was wondering if anyone else's double standard alarms were going off? When I suggested having the government take over the oil drilling and distribution efforts for the US all I heard about was how free enterprise was paramount and how market forces should decide all things in America. Since we don't have much of a government media that I know of (military news services being the ones I do know of) it seems to me that the press is just your basic for-profit operation, and as such are free to do whatever they want to do as long as they don't violate any laws. And since they pretty much have sweeping freedom to do whatever they want, what's the harm in selling out a few secrets to make a buck? So what if they put the country at risk (physically or economically) to make a good profit... most of you felt that the same thing was fine for the oil companies. If the government should be hands off on oil companies they should be hands off on the media right? Afterall... they're just out to make a buck like the next guy, and if people really object to what's being reported they'll stop buying the papers and watching the shows on TV... the free market forces win again.

 

[alex]

One little detail of this that gets underplayed is that this is WARTIME. The rules of reporting necessarily should change and be more restrictive in wartime. The bent of the people in and out of security-related jobs should be naturally to protect information that could be sensitive. The way Congress and the Supremes treat issues like wire taps, etc., should change during wartime to favor the interests of the nation (and protect the lives of our armed forces people) over the rights (real or perceived) of the individual.

While I am not to fond of the media did I miss something? I do not remember Congress issuing a declaration of war. Maybe if they had the guts to do that the media might - I say might - behave a little better and so would the people who are feeding them this information.

Unfortunately I do not see the big deal about any of this. The Bush administration did say that they would go after terrorist and their funding sources way back when. Everyone knew they were going to to do this. How does a news article about this endanger the American People or our security?

 

[Bruzilla]

Everyone who works with or for the government knows what to say [or not to say] to the press.

I wonder if the thought of Watergate Type fame ever crossed their minds.

I think what's important about your post is "knows what to say to the press." In 26 years of being in the Navy or working for the Navy I never had cause nor reason to talk to the press. It's not like these leakers are letting things slip as they cross a Maginot line of reporters outside CIA or State Department headquarters. These are not designated press contacts who are dealing with reporters as a part of their job. These are folks who are initiating contact with reporters and purposefully devulging classified information for their own purposes, and that's a clear violation of the law. Yet no one is getting punished for it, so it's quickly becoming the national security version of removing the tags from a mattress.

We need to forget about the press doing what the press does, and punish thoses who we hold in confidence for doing what they know is prohibited and punishable by a long stay in prision.

 

[SamSpade]

So what if they put the country at risk (physically or economically) to make a good profit... most of you felt that the same thing was fine for the oil companies. If the government should be hands off on oil companies they should be hands off on the media right? Afterall... they're just out to make a buck like the next guy, and if people really object to what's being reported they'll stop buying the papers and watching the shows on TV... the free market forces win again.

Somehow, I feel differently about oil companies screwing the consumer - and selling out information to our enemies that will get our boys killed.

 

[Bruzilla]

Somehow, I feel differently about oil companies screwing the consumer - and selling out information to our enemies that will get our boys killed.

I don't see why... the principles are the same. Should we always allow the quest for profits to superceed the best interests of the country? That just doesn't seem like a policy you can turn on and off to meet a specific situation.

 

[ylexot]

Everyone who works with or for the government knows what to say [or not to say] to the press.

Not true. I don't know what to say (or not say) to the press. I just know what not to say to anyone who does not have the proper clearances and need to know. The leakers should be found and executed for treason.