NYT Has Undermined Americans’ ‘Right to Live’

by **sunny** » Mon Jun 26, 2006 5:41 pm

<a href="http://p216.ezboard.com/frigorousintuitionfrm10.showAddTopicScreenFromWeb">p216.ezboard.com/frigorou...eenFromWeb</a> <blockquote>Quote:<hr>But certainly nobody is going to deny First Amendment rights. But the New York Times and other news organizations ought to think long and hard about whether a public’s right to know in some cases might override somebody’s right to live, and whether in fact the publications of these could place in jeopardy the safety of fellow Americans.<hr></blockquote> Geez, is that a threat?

by **Sepka** » Mon Jun 26, 2006 6:01 pm

I think if a few reporters were executed for treason, the rest might think twice before undermining national security in wartime. -Sepka the Space Weasel

by **slimmouse** » Mon Jun 26, 2006 6:57 pm

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>I think if a few reporters were executed for treason, the rest might think twice before undermining national security in wartime. <hr></blockquote> Wartime ? Care to expand on who AmeriKa is fighting here, and why ?

by **sunny** » Mon Jun 26, 2006 6:58 pm

Reporters engaging in their constitutionally protected duty to expose government wrongdoing are not the ones who should be executed for treason.

by **StarmanSkye** » Mon Jun 26, 2006 7:10 pm

"I think if a few reporters were executed for treason, the rest might think twice before undermining national security in wartime." JeSuS CrIsCo! What WORLD are you talking about???? The TREASON here isn't betrayal during the immensely droll, inane notion of 'wartime', but the MSM's complicity in blindly repeating the lies and colluding in covering-up the crimes of fat-cat politicos, Pentagon officials, military-and-policy wonks and influential corporate elites that have acted in secret contrary to the tenets of a genuine democracy, and betrayed essential American principles, ie. rule of law and basic human rights, election legitimacy and serving the American people instead of, ahead of, economic and special interests. "Undermining" National Security? Yeah, right ... Like subverting the genuine public's crucial interest in being accurately informed, and destroying the public's right to good government and being protected from bad policy that encourages and hides institutional corruption, fraud, misfeasance, negligence, obstruction of justice, and the public's exposure to unneedful, dangerous threats and risks? The biggest farce of all is this latest entirely specious and contrived 'wartime' -- following a long tradition of wholly exploitive, elective wars based on false pretexts and falsehoods, whose main purpose is to consolidate the priveleges of wealth and power for the PTB -- and keep the public off-balance and distracted from how ordinary citizens are being cheated and badly-ruled, and foreign nations pillaged and exploited. When Justice and Rule of Law and Human Rights become incompatable with National Security, then common sense suggests there's something SERIOUSLY wrong with how the concept of National Security is being defined. As never before, America the nation isn't being threatened by 'external' dangers as much as by internal rot. IF we actually had a vibrant, courageous 'Free' press that reported honestly and truthfully, we wouldn't be in such enormous crises. But I guess some folks will always find appeal in focusing on illusive, convenient 'dangers' from without as much less discomfitting and threatening than acknowledging the serious issues caused by abuses of authority and fraud, corruption and injustice --and which violate the core principles of government By, Of and For the People. Starman

by **wintler** » Tue Jun 27, 2006 1:56 am

That the Bush junta are so worked up over this is i think good news - we're up to 'then they fight you'. Netizens and/or uncorrupted law enforcement must be getting close, sniffing down all the money trails their evil octopus has around the world. Thats the problem with having/handling so much black money, it get damn hard to hide it all (as the IRS knows and applies to catch small fry). Hearing Bush squeal, like hes doing today, is music to my ears.

by **professorpan** » Tue Jun 27, 2006 2:00 am

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>I think if a few reporters were executed for treason, the rest might think twice before undermining national security in wartime.<hr></blockquote> Context? Is this something you truly believe, or satire without a smiling emoticon?

by **Gouda** » Tue Jun 27, 2006 5:36 am

There seems to be a "contrarian comment generator" on the loose in some of these threads; an antagonistic program running script devoid of context, depth or any kind of human elucidation. Programmed to rankle rather than stimulate or progress (verb) discussion.

by **friend catcher** » Tue Jun 27, 2006 6:00 am

<a href="http://www.urban75.com/Mag/troll.html">www.urban75.com/Mag/troll.html</a> Journalist can seem like a dirty word sometimes but there's still many who pursue their occupation with integrity.Here's a list of some who did and died. <a href="http://www.wan-press.org/rubrique.php3?id_rubrique=706">www.wan-press.org/rubriqu...brique=706</a> Some were unlucky, some were targeted and some we'll never know

by **Sepka** » Tue Jun 27, 2006 6:15 am

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>Is this something you truly believe, or satire without a smiling emoticon?<hr></blockquote> I do most assuredly believe that if the reporters responsible for this story were executed for it, we'd see some very circumspect reporting in future. To be something less of a smartass, and answer what I think you're actually asking, I'm somewhere between the two extremes. The NYT don't really seem to care how much damage they cause, or who gets hurt, so long as they have an exclusive story that will sell papers. In general, I'm frustrated with the overall attitude of the media (of business in general, actually) that they should have no loyalty to anyone but their stockholders. I'm disgusted with their narcissism as well. Any time a third-rate stringer is killed in Iraq, that dominates the news for the better part of the week. All that being said, I really doubt that this article caused any actual damage. Any terrorist, or conspirator of any stripe, is going to recognize that international transactions will be watched. That's common sense, and anyone who fails to expect that is probably more a danger to his own side than to his enemy. In the end, I'm speaking more from frustration than voicing an actual conviction. That being said, if the government *did* haul them away to be shot, I'd shed no tears. -Sepka the Space Weasel

by **StarmanSkye** » Tue Jun 27, 2006 1:31 pm

"I do most assuredly believe that if the reporters responsible for this story were executed for it, we'd see some very circumspect reporting in future." What an absolutely incredible thing to say. Esp. because you acknowledge the actual 'security' breach here is zilch. SO, your criticism of the media is that they are too independent? That they should unquestionably accept what the Executive Branch declares, despite what the law says and courts rule, and simply repeat the Party Line, regardless of the looong-standing role of the press in a democracy to keep the citizens accurately informed and contrary to the press's express function as a check on official abuses and excesses? "That being said, if the government *did* haul them away to be shot, I'd shed no tears." Why not just have Government disseminate 'news' then? Who needs a rigorous press anyway? The press SHOULD be under constant threat of summary execution? Should the executions be publicized so reporters 'get the message' -- or allowed to spread via gossip? And anyway, if an intimidated press is good enough for North Korea, and was good enough in the former Soviet Union, it should be perfect for the US, right? That much better to ensure the citizens aren't distracted by complex issues of rights and liberty and legitimate government? In other words, the nation would be MUCH better served if the press didn't report ANYTHING government officials and agencies do that is controversial or that appears to be contrary to the law, principles of good government, and according to the Constitution? THAT'S what you seem to be saying. It would be ludicrous even IF the checks and balances that are a cornerstone of US governance hadn't already been dismantled by the PTB. I suppose you also object to the woefully-few press reports on the many problems with electronic voting and widespread election fraud in the 2000, 2002 and 2004 elections? This reminds me of, "People should be willing to sacrifice some of their freedom in order to protect their liberty." Heh -- I guess I can't argue against THAT! ( ; Starman

by **professorpan** » Tue Jun 27, 2006 2:15 pm

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>In the end, I'm speaking more from frustration than voicing an actual conviction. That being said, if the government *did* haul them away to be shot, I'd shed no tears.<hr></blockquote> I've heard plenty of freepers say the same thing. Wow. I find it hard to even dredge up a response, so I won't.

by **NewKid** » Tue Jun 27, 2006 2:16 pm

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>This reminds me of, "People should be willing to sacrifice some of their freedom in order to protect their liberty."<hr></blockquote> Correction Starman, people should be willing to sacrifice their liberty to protect freedom. And if they don't, then let's execute 'em. Freedom isn't free.

by **Gouda** » Tue Jun 27, 2006 2:25 pm

Did I hear "freeper"? Well, in fact: <a href="http://www.rawstory.com/news/2006/Posters_at_rightwing_board_threaten_to_0626.html">www.rawstory.com/news/200..._0626.html</a> <blockquote>Quote:<hr>Posters at right-wing board threaten to kill Times editors, reporters <hr></blockquote> Sample responses: <blockquote>Quote:<hr>"The Slimes [sic] and its puppets in the MSM ARE THE ENEMY. They simply hate America as it is. They want a socialist-homosexual utopia. Thus, they are simply aiding and abetting their faithful followers abroad and here. They are giving intel to their friends of gee-had. They are the enemy. Problem is, many Americans simply do not know or care." "Any retired snipers out there?" "They are, without a doubt our enemy. We need to treat them as such." "I think it will be dangerous for a Slimes [sic] reporter to step foot out of Manhattan."<hr></blockquote> The whole slew of hate, anger, ignorance and dysfunction is here: <a href="http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1655965/posts">www.freerepublic.com/focu...5965/posts</a> I recommend not reading this, actually. There are better uses of time and sanity.

by **NewKid** » Tue Jun 27, 2006 3:20 pm

Good stuff, Gouda. <blockquote>Quote:<hr>I can only hope I get to see the video of Sulzberger's beheading! <img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/smile.gif ALT=":)"> <hr></blockquote> <a href="http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1655965/posts?page=24#24" target="top">www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1655965/posts?page=24#24</a> <blockquote>Quote:<hr>I've been reading a book about Nazi Germany. It's funny how things don't change. Back in the 30's, after making a provocative move, Hitler would immediately call in the western press (namely the Times of London, the New York Times, and whatever the big paper in France is). Anyway, he would hold conference with them and just wax on and on about his love of peace and his distaste for war. Naturally, those publications drank this B.S. up went home and published it for an ignorant world to read. These big papers were efectively tying the hands of the west by rallying public sentiment against responding to Germany's provocations. Hitler used to sit back and laugh at how easy it was to manipulate the free press into doing his bidding. Do the Editors of our large news organizations realize that they are once again being used like whores?<hr></blockquote> <a href="http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1655965/posts?page=22#22" target="top">www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1655965/posts?page=22#22</a> I don't know. I kinda think Hitler would be proud. <a href="http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1655965/posts?page=27#27" target="top">www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1655965/posts?page=27#27</a>

NYT Has Undermined Americans’ ‘Right to Live’

NYT Has Undermined Americans’ ‘Right to Live’

Re: NYT Has Undermined Americans’ ‘Right to Live’

Wartime ?

Again, geez

Re: NYT Has Undermined Americans’ ‘Right to Live’

Re: NYT Has Undermined Americans’ ‘Right to Live’

Exsqueeze me?

Re: Exsqueeze me?

The loneliness of the cyber fishermen

Re: Exsqueeze me?

Re: Exsqueeze me?

Re: Exsqueeze me?

Re: Exsqueeze me?

Re: Exsqueeze me?

Re: Exsqueeze me?

Who is online