What would you do? (1 Viewer)

[conserv.pat15]

If you were the NY Times, would you have printed an article about a secret government program used to track terrorists?

 

[Spartacus FPV]

Depends on the government program... I would have probably done my homework first.

 

[conserv.pat15]

Depends on the government program... I would have probably done my homework first.

The banking program...

 

[Jerry]

If you were the NY Times, would you have printed an article about a secret government program used to track terrorists?

If I were the NY Times, I would kill myself as a favor to the world.

 

[Kandahar]

Of course. It's news, and terrorists already know they're being tracked. Now everyone else knows too.

 

[earthworm]

So, a "secret government program" to control terrorists...
This should never be reported ! In real times of war this would be treason.
The media seems to care nothing about our country, all they want to do is make money, and they do not care how this is done !
And liberalism or conservatism have nothing to do with this..
We need a rebirth of nationalism and patriotism in our country.

 

[DeeJayH]

not to mention that not 2 weeks after 9/11 the NYTimes printed an unsigned editorial demanding that president Bush get more aggressive on tracking terrorist funding
and now almost 5 years later, the scumbags are revealing a CLASSIFIED program, which is doing exactly what they suggested years ago

The program had congressional oversight
the article exposing it, even admitted there was nothing illegal about it
i cant wait for a good laugh when i see how the looney left NY Times apologists justify it
the NYTimes is a rag
its hayday has long since past
and i hope they go down in flames faster than their newspaper burns

there should be an investigation, into the releasing of this CLASSIFIED INFORMATION, and hold those guilty of wrongdoing, accountable to the fullest extent of the law

once upon a time the newspapers were filled with working class joes who were skeptical of big business and government and kept them in check
now it has become a bunch of self serving elitist snobs who graduated from ivy league schools

shame on you NY TIMES

 

[zymurgy]

I would objectively look at the record of the administration and decide they can't be trusted.

 

[Kandahar]

not to mention that not 2 weeks after 9/11 the NYTimes printed an unsigned editorial demanding that president Bush get more aggressive on tracking terrorist funding
and now almost 5 years later, the scumbags are revealing a CLASSIFIED program, which is doing exactly what they suggested years ago

The program had congressional oversight
the article exposing it, even admitted there was nothing illegal about it
i cant wait for a good laugh when i see how the looney left NY Times apologists justify it
the NYTimes is a rag
its hayday has long since past
and i hope they go down in flames faster than their newspaper burns

there should be an investigation, into the releasing of this CLASSIFIED INFORMATION, and hold those guilty of wrongdoing, accountable to the fullest extent of the law

once upon a time the newspapers were filled with working class joes who were skeptical of big business and government and kept them in check
now it has become a bunch of self serving elitist snobs who graduated from ivy league schools

shame on you NY TIMES

If your mad about the leaking of classified information, blame the leakers not the messenger. The New York Times got some information, it was clearly a newsworthy story, so they printed it. Unless there was very good reason to expect that innocent people would be directly harmed, they most definitely did the right thing in running the story.

 

[DeeJayH]

If your mad about the leaking of classified information, blame the leakers not the messenger. The New York Times got some information, it was clearly a newsworthy story, so they printed it. Unless there was very good reason to expect that innocent people would be directly harmed, they most definitely did the right thing in running the story.

so the fact that terrorists will use alternative ways to move money, making it more likely they can fund a terrorist attack does not harm people?

With power comes responsibility
and as I previously stated, and what you chose to ignore
is that the NYT actually lobbied for such a program just after 9/11
and now they are using it to benefit themselves
NOBODY else benefits from the printing of this story
and the LATimes and WSJ were not going to run the story, per the gov'ts request
but once they found out the NYT put it on it website, they went ahead and did it

the leaker should be lined up in front of a firing squad
the NYT should face consequences for not exercising discretion
for not putting aside a headline that would endanger our country
and while the story may have been intriguing, jazzy, interesting, etc....
it was NOT newsworthy as it hinders our war efforts
the blame for the next 3000 people, or however many, that die in the next terrorist attack will rest solely on the heads of the leaker and the scumbags at the Times


And what is the point of classifying ANYTHING if a 'reputable news paper' will print national secrets just because some scumbag leaks it
what happened to responsibilties
oh thats right, liberals dont believe in it

 

[Kandahar]

so the fact that terrorists will use alternative ways to move money, making it more likely they can fund a terrorist attack does not harm people?

The terrorists would have to be retarded to be completely taken by surprise by this story. I didn't know about this specific program before the NYT broke the story, but it certainly doesn't surprise me. If you were going to commit a terrorist attack, wouldn't you just expect that your financial records might be monitored without the NYT telling you so?

With power comes responsibility
and as I previously stated, and what you chose to ignore
is that the NYT actually lobbied for such a program just after 9/11
and now they are using it to benefit themselves
NOBODY else benefits from the printing of this story

The American people benefit from the printing of newsworthy information and having a relatively open government.

and the LATimes and WSJ were not going to run the story, per the gov'ts request
but once they found out the NYT put it on it website, they went ahead and did it

If that's true, it may be a case of the Bush Administration crying wolf too often. Generally the news organizations won't print a security-related story if the government requests it, but if the NYT felt that the government abused this they may have run it anyway. I can't say I blame them.

the leaker should be lined up in front of a firing squad
the NYT should face consequences for not exercising discretion
for not putting aside a headline that would endanger our country

And who decides what endangers our country? The Bush Administration alone? You'll have to forgive me if I'm wary of the government imprisoning reporters for doing their job in the interest of "national security." Why do you automatically assume that the government is always a trustworthy, benevolent entity? Power corrupts.

and while the story may have been intriguing, jazzy, interesting, etc....
it was NOT newsworthy as it hinders our war efforts

I suggest you learn the meaning of "newsworthy," as it has nothing to do with how it affects our war efforts.

the blame for the next 3000 people, or however many, that die in the next terrorist attack will rest solely on the heads of the leaker and the scumbags at the Times

Yep, terrorists capable of plotting a 9/11 type attack probably would've been caught completely off guard by the government monitoring their bank statements. :roll:

C'mon, *I* would've thought of that!

And what is the point of classifying ANYTHING if a 'reputable news paper' will print national secrets just because some scumbag leaks it
what happened to responsibilties
oh thats right, liberals dont believe in it

What happened to being skeptical of government hauling in reporters for questioning? Oh that's right, Republicans don't believe in small government.

 

[DeeJayH]

The terrorists would have to be retarded to be completely taken by surprise by this story. I didn't know about this specific program before the NYT broke the story, but it certainly doesn't surprise me. If you were going to commit a terrorist attack, wouldn't you just expect that your financial records might be monitored without the NYT telling you so?

it is one thing to suspect it, it is another thing to have it confirmed
guess you would have thought it would be cool for the NYT to uncover the plans for normandy and print it cause it was newsworthy, despite the fact that it would have given our enemy the edge
and how about the cracking of the german code, guess that is a newsworthy story too?

The American people benefit from the printing of newsworthy information and having a relatively open government.

than i guess you think NOTHING should be classified for national security
good luck with that philosophy
any country that does that will surely fall

If that's true, it may be a case of the Bush Administration crying wolf too often. Generally the news organizations won't print a security-related story if the government requests it, but if the NYT felt that the government abused this they may have run it anyway. I can't say I blame them.

do you have a link to show all the news stories the press had uncovered but did not report because the govt requested them not too
i didnt think so
so quit you BS

And who decides what endangers our country? The Bush Administration alone? You'll have to forgive me if I'm wary of the government imprisoning reporters for doing their job in the interest of "national security." Why do you automatically assume that the government is always a trustworthy, benevolent entity? Power corrupts.

let me inform you
we live in a democracy
we elect officials to determine such things
the president decided
and if it was illegal i am sure the NYT would have uncovered that prior to going to press
since they didnt, it in all likelihood isnt

I suggest you learn the meaning of "newsworthy," as it has nothing to do with how it affects our war efforts.

and you should learn the meaning of responsibility
newsworthy does not mean it is worthy of being in the news
that whole 'whats best for the country, not whats best for the NYTs ratings'

Yep, terrorists capable of plotting a 9/11 type attack probably would've been caught completely off guard by the government monitoring their bank statements. :roll:

maybe you werent able to connect the dots, but i believe you are just being obtuse
it is all but impossible to commit terrorist acts without funding

What happened to being skeptical of government hauling in reporters for questioning? Oh that's right, Republicans don't believe in small government.

and if in the course of their investigaion, the NYT found an angle in the story that exposed corruption/abuse of power, etc... it, and your partisan tripe, might have a leg to stand on. But it appears you and the NYT are more interested in bring down Bush and rep/cons in general than you are in defending our nation
congratulations traitor
so how far along are you in learning how to speak arabic?

 

[Kandahar]

it is one thing to suspect it, it is another thing to have it confirmed

Umm no. Actually it's the exact same ******* thing. A terrorist who SUSPECTS the government is watching his bank transactions, versus a terrorist who KNOWS the government is watching his bank transactions, will behave EXACTLY the same way. They'll each take whatever precautions they feel are necessary (assuming they aren't idiots).

guess you would have thought it would be cool for the NYT to uncover the plans for normandy and print it cause it was newsworthy, despite the fact that it would have given our enemy the edge
and how about the cracking of the german code, guess that is a newsworthy story too?

Did the Germans already know about Normandy or that their code had been cracked? If so, then yes, any newspaper that got those stories should've printed them. If not, then your comparison makes no sense at all.

than i guess you think NOTHING should be classified for national security
good luck with that philosophy
any country that does that will surely fall

I have no problem with things being classified when their knowledge truly threatens national security. However, this administration loves to classify anything for any reason at all. While that is their prerogative to run a shadowy government with little accountability, I don't have much sympathy for them when a story like this breaks and is so mundane that it's hard to believe that it was classified in the first place.

do you have a link to show all the news stories the press had uncovered but did not report because the govt requested them not too
i didnt think so
so quit you BS

Of course not, if I had a list of those news stories than they wouldn't be secret, now would they? I don't understand the point you are making here...are you disputing my assertion that the government routinely asks journalists not to print national security stories, and the journalists often acquiesce?

Were you actually disputing that or were you just arguing for the sake of arguing?

let me inform you
we live in a democracy
we elect officials to determine such things
the president decided

That doesn't mean we elect someone with absolute power to determine what the press is and is not allowed to print.

and if it was illegal i am sure the NYT would have uncovered that prior to going to press
since they didnt, it in all likelihood isnt

I didn't say that it was, so cease with the straw-men.

and you should learn the meaning of responsibility
newsworthy does not mean it is worthy of being in the news
that whole 'whats best for the country, not whats best for the NYTs ratings'

You still have failed to show how this harms the country.

maybe you werent able to connect the dots, but i believe you are just being obtuse
it is all but impossible to commit terrorist acts without funding

And it will still be all but impossible to commit terrorist acts without funding, in the wake of this story. So quit your bitching.

and if in the course of their investigaion, the NYT found an angle in the story that exposed corruption/abuse of power, etc... it, and your partisan tripe, might have a leg to stand on. But it appears you and the NYT are more interested in bring down Bush and rep/cons in general than you are in defending our nation

How does this story bring down Bush and rep/cons in general? I haven't heard anyone suggest that this program is illegal or unwarranted or unconstitutional or anything else. It seems to me to be a pretty straightforward, factual story.

What I object to is the incessant bitching at the NYT that they had the gall to print the story.

congratulations traitor
so how far along are you in learning how to speak arabic?

Derka derka Mohammed jihad.

 

[Alastor]

I would have printed the article. The White House has played cat and mouse games about this long enough. The denials are what the story was aimed at obliterating, not the revelation of classified secrets.

If the White House had come clean and said, "We're doing some pretty nasty crap and here's why" then there wouldn't be any reason for the article to be printed.

But we didn't. We said, "We're good guys. We're only doing righteous things."

And apparently that's not the case. The media has often been the watchdog of the government, and this seems to fall under that same category to me.

 

[DeeJayH]

Umm no. Actually it's the exact same ******* thing.

whatever makes you sleep well

Did the Germans already know about Normandy or that their code had been cracked? If so, then yes, any newspaper that got those stories should've printed them. If not, then your comparison makes no sense at all.

just like our military, i am sure the germans were preparing for many contingencies. and without a press release about our plans, they would be just guessing
until the NYT decides to print how we are engaging in the war efforts

Of course not, if I had a list of those news stories than they wouldn't be secret, now would they? I don't understand the point you are making here...are you disputing my assertion that the government routinely asks journalists not to print national security stories, and the journalists often acquiesce?

exactly

How does this story bring down Bush and rep/cons in general? I haven't heard anyone suggest that this program is illegal or unwarranted or unconstitutional or anything else.

than there was absolutely no reason to print the story was there?
atleast not that any reasonable person would buy
even your own excuse is about payback, bitterness, resentment... of the administration
nothing more

 

[Kandahar]

just like our military, i am sure the germans were preparing for many contingencies. and without a press release about our plans, they would be just guessing
until the NYT decides to print how we are engaging in the war efforts

The Germans might've anticipated that the Allies would attack somewhere, without knowing where. The Germans might've suspected that their code was broken without knowing for sure. But any newspaper printing those kind of details would certainly threaten national security.

In contrast, any terrorist who isn't already 99.9% sure that the government is watching his bank statements is an idiot and will probably do something stupid to get caught anyway.

than there was absolutely no reason to print the story was there?
atleast not that any reasonable person would buy

Sure there was: It's a newsworthy story. Although it may seem that way at times, not every newsworthy story involves a government scandal.

even your own excuse is about payback, bitterness, resentment... of the administration
nothing more

Actually my posts have been about freedom of the press. I haven't even mentioned the administration, except to say that I don't have much sympathy for them. As far as I can tell from the NYT story, there's nothing in this program that I would have a problem with.

But then, I guess you hear what you want to hear.

 

[DeeJayH]

The Germans might've anticipated that the Allies would attack somewhere, without knowing where. The Germans might've suspected that their code was broken without knowing for sure. But any newspaper printing those kind of details would certainly threaten national security.

In contrast, any terrorist who isn't already 99.9% sure that the government is watching his bank statements is an idiot and will probably do something stupid to get caught anyway.

while i am sure they were well aware we were trying to track their finances in the US, i highly doubt they knew the extent and reach of the global searches. otherwise they would never use it, and we would not have seized so many accounts as a result

Actually my posts have been about freedom of the press. I haven't even mentioned the administration, except to say that I don't have much sympathy for them. As far as I can tell from the NYT story, there's nothing in this program that I would have a problem with.

But then, I guess you hear what you want to hear.

here are your words in response

it may be a case of the Bush Administration crying wolf too often

While that is their prerogative to run a shadowy government with little accountability, I don't have much sympathy for them when a story like this breaks

now to this

Of course. It's news, and terrorists already know they're being tracked. Now everyone else knows too.

so the govt knew
the terrorists knew
but americans did not?
seems you have a much higher regard for terrorists than americans:roll:

 

[Kandahar]

while i am sure they were well aware we were trying to track their finances in the US, i highly doubt they knew the extent and reach of the global searches. otherwise they would never use it, and we would not have seized so many accounts as a result

You said yourself that planning a terrorist attack requires money. That isn't going to change anytime soon, and certainly not as a result of this story.

here are your words in response



now to this

The "shadowy government" comment was about the government not disclosing even a mundane thing like this, not about the program itself. I don't have any problem with the program.

so the govt knew
the terrorists knew
but americans did not?
seems you have a much higher regard for terrorists than americans:roll:

It has to do with experience. If you're a liquor store robber, you'll probably know more about liquor store security than the average person. If you're a terrorist, you'll probably know more about anti-terrorism measures than the average person. Wouldn't you agree?

 

[Alex]

I would have printed it. Given this administration's track record, I think it would be my duty. I believe the duty to expose overzealous government goes above all others.

 

[DeeJayH]

You said yourself that planning a terrorist attack requires money. That isn't going to change anytime soon, and certainly not as a result of this story.

dodge

The "shadowy government" comment was about the government not disclosing even a mundane thing like this, not about the program itself. I don't have any problem with the program.

spin

It has to do with experience. If you're a liquor store robber, you'll probably know more about liquor store security than the average person. If you're a terrorist, you'll probably know more about anti-terrorism measures than the average person. Wouldn't you agree?

what a crock. they would have to assume they were being tracked in NY, but i doubt they suspected it in the middle east or SE asia or other places

all your statement says is americans are idiots and didnt know what everybody els knew
and if everyone knew it why was it newsworthy
keep on apologizing for them all day long.

I want the leaker to be captured, adjudicated, and penalized to the fullest extent of the law
those responsible for printing classified materials, where there is no benefit to anybody but our enemies should be prosecuted and the NYTimes itself, should have their press credentials stripped for the remainder of the administration, in all federal media matters, at the very least
IMO