Close Topic Options

Bush Condemns New York Times? - Page 2

Media is big business and with the inception and growth of the internet paper media has to make something big in order to remain in the highlight, so your question could be relevant, but even more... where will it end?

Times York Condemns Bush

I disagree. Financial companies keep our records for their purpose and to determine our credit, not to track our usage and everyday life. The spending habits and financial records of US citizens are not fair game for the government, no law exist to grant them that power, so it doesn't exist. Since it doesn't exist, I believe the paper had the right and duty to report it. It is activities done on the US citizens, and last I checked, the government wasn't at war with US citizens, so what war rights can it have over information regarding us? And incidentally, I don't recall any of the terrorist at 9/11 being US citizens either.

The phone tapping of US/International calls is allowed for under the FISA. It requires more lenient burdens of proof for a warrant to tap a phone and the process is expedited to allow for quick surveillance in the right situation. No warrant request has ever been denied by the FISA. The US government is not going through the FISA to get warrants to tap lines, they aren't going through any thing at all. This makes the phone taps illegal and the Supreme Court recently agreed with me. They sited that we already have systems in place to take care of the need to tap domestic and international calls, so going around it and evading it without approval from congress to do so was against the law.

Since the financial spying is on US citizens, and US citizens cannot be the target of any US war, then its not a "war secret" that was released. Telling us that big brother is spying on us is not a "war secret", its a duty of any real media. To bad the NYT was the only one with the guts to tell us what they were doing to us. I also believe in any americans right to peacefully protest war or anything else. The right to peacefully assemble should not be inhibited. If a past president did put people in jail for peaceful protest, then he was wrong, and I would have shouted it from the mountain tops if I was alive. But I wasn't, and I have to do what I can now for tomorrows generation.

Bush Condemns New York Times? History & Civil Business Politics

Nighthawk said:

To be honest with you and with all due respect (please do not take this personally), sometimes some of your statements sound just like you are either a Communist or one of those military guys from the 70's in Argentina. The reason for saying this is that you support sending anti-war activists in prison...aren't you living in a country that boast itself of having freedom of speech? Why can't people express how they really feel about the war? Why is that called treason? I do not think anyone MUST agree or SUPPORT something they do not agree with. If you think they should, then the US is living in a military government not very different from a Central America country.

Why they should? They are journalists. They are paid to inform and if the kind of information reported is not of your likeness, then do not buy the newspaper. I do not see the NYT helping the so called "enemy" at all. They are just doing what journalists do, investigate and report. It is interesting how some people get so angry at NYT for reporting certain "war secrets" yet their own government is taping them and recording them for who knows what purpose and not criticism is hold by such behavior.

Edited: LDS_forever on 18th Jul, 2006 - 1:57pm

Page 2 Times York Condemns Bush

No, I want traitors put into prison. I don't care about anti-war protesters or the fact that the NY Times distorts and lies so much.

As for them just being journalists, doing their jobs, what, in their job description, demands that they publish Top Secret information? What allows them to deliberately do things that will extend the war? I thought they wanted us OUT of the war. Yet, by deliberately exposing three different Top Secret, effective programs that were used to capture terrorists, they have made sure that the war will continue.

Oh, I see. They want the war to continue, and more people to be at risk of terrorist attacks, so that they can sell more papers.

Good job. I thought that they (the NY Times) were supposed to be American citizens, and human. It seems that they just want to increase their circulation. Too bad it didn't work, as they announced that they are downsizing significantly.

Times York Condemns Bush

What lies are they telling that you are talking about? Last I checked this issue is about the fact that they told a truth that the government didn't want to get out. As you can see here, not everyone thinks that what they did is anything put patriotic to the ones the really matter in this country, its citizens. So if their attitude and behavior is treasonous, then mine is to because I think they finally did something right, telling us we are being spied on with no warrant. That means they never had to show any cause what so ever for pulling your financial records and the like. Haven't you read 1984? You sound much like the minister of truth telling people that truth is bad. Truth is never bad, and this information was not helping the war on terror unless WE are the ones who the war is on. Sorry, we obviously have to disagree here, and I remain on the "traitors" side of this argument.

Bush Condemns New York Times?

Apparently they, and you, want this war that you are so against, the war on terror, to last a lot longer. While it is remotely possible that one or even two of the programs the NYT outed are illegal (but that is very debateable as they only dealt with overseas communications), the third was not in the least illegal or immoral. Again, it dealt with only overseas transactions. Even the NYT admitted this in their expose. They only exposed the financial tracking because they wanted to boost their circulation.

I claim that they are traitors in that they have deliberately, with malice aforethought, damaged the security and integrity of our country, in order to make money. I think that they are traitors for the first two exposes, but the last one just takes the cake.

Perhaps you wish the US government to just stop ALL attempts to stop terrorists? After all, aren't you claiming that every effort that the US makes to stop terrorists is illegal and immoral?

In my opinion, what the NYT has done is just as if they had published the date for the landing at Normandy on June 3, 1944, giving the Germans three days warning. It is the same as if they had explained to the British in 1775 what "one if by land, two if by sea" meant.

So, yes, I think they are traitors. I can guarantee that they will pay a hefty price for their choices. Their circulation is already down so much that they are looking at some big layoffs. American people don't really like traitors. I think that the NYT is going to become even more marginalized, as only the far Left will pay much attention to it.

Let them reap what they have sown.

---

Oh, yes, about the lies. They have consistently distorted the news about what is happening in Iraq, what President Bush has done and said. This amounts, in my opinion, to lieing, as it distorts what people understand about current events.

Edited: Nighthawk on 19th Jul, 2006 - 5:24pm

Bush Condemns York Times - Page 2

Sure I want terrorism stopped, but not at the price of my privacy and liberty (yes we disagree on this and it will never change). But when exactly do you think the "War on Terror" will end? When is it going to be OK to start reporting everything again? The "War on Terror" is a farce because it has no clear enemy and no clear end. Under your ideas of "stopping terrorism", this nation will forever grant our president far reaching powers as long as any religious extremist nut thinks blowing something up proves something! Can't you see, your idealistic view of a grand war on terror never existed, it can't exist, because no real enemy was ever declared! There is no real war on terror, just a broad claim of being at war to be able to expand presidential powers in a way that can effectually be continued on forever because no one can ever truly say terrorism doesn't exist any more! Under your ideal, publishing anything that "helps the enemy" (Cyber-person as of yet) and exposed the government is traitorous. So no I don't want the war on terror to go on longer, but it doesn't exist any way. Tell me, who do we need to beat to end the war on terror and make it OK for the NYT to report on what the government is doing behind our backs again? Do you not think that WE RUN THE GOVERNMENT? We are the power in this country, or are supposed to be, and the government can only have power we give to them. If they believe, as I do, that they are protecting the citizens from something greater than terrorism, which is a powerful government over its people, then the only people that they are traitors to are those who believe in a strong, large government that doesn't have to answer for the people, which you must believe in since you are for putting anti-war people in jail and think keeping the public aware of what the government WE have empowered informed as to what they are doing!

Bush Condemns York Times Politics Business Civil & History - Page 2

I still don't understand what liberty and privacy you have lost! Nor do I understand what the incredible powers are that you seem to think that President Bush has acquired.

Back to what the NYT did. The US was tracking international telephone calls, which the US Congress authorized many decades ago, and which has been going on for decades. There are, and were, strict rules about what could be done with those phone calls. They weren't listening in on your phone calls to your parents, your banker, your local pizza house, or any other domestic calls.

Next, the US was establishing a database of every phone call possible. Then, when they identified a telephone number used by a terrorist, they could go back and find all the phone numbers that called, or were called by, that number, so that investigators could seek out networks of terrorists.

Finally, the US, along with several other countries, was tracking international money transfers. By doing this, they had a proven record of locating and capturing terrorists.

Now that the NYT has exposed these Top Secret activities, they are no longer useful. The NYT single-handedly aided the terrorists in their designs. They aided and abetted the enemies of the United States. They helped organizations such as Hamas and Hezbollah, as well as the despotic governments of Iran and Syria. All for money.

Again, what liberty and privacy have YOU lost from these actions?