Here we go... Eliminate the free press, another one of your liberties to hit the dirt. How can you not see the dangerous direction in which you are steering your country? Mark, haven't you learned anything from history?

Without the freedom of the press you will be no better off than those 'other' countries you want to democratize.

By the way, I do see a glimmer of hope for America in the horizon. Feingold for President!
With a man of his integrity leading the U.S., you would definitely win back much of the respect you have lost around the world with the Bush debacle.

Ahh, irony, delicious irony. Because of the NYT's alleged terrorist sympathies, you recommend... a terrorist act against them. Wow, that makes perfect sense to me.

Of course, you claim you don't really want to bomb the NYT (well, maybe you don't), but "we've tolerated too long" the NYT, and something should be done.

Short of bombing the NYT and killing everyone in the building (sorry, janitors, you shouldn't have been cleaning up this liberal commie pinko terrorist rag!), what do you recommend? Oh, I know, how about stop reading or discussing in any way the NYT? Maybe a boycott, like your fellow bomb-fanatic Bill O'Reilly always likes to do. Its a market based solution, after all, and isn't that what conservatism is all about.

The real irony here is that today you talk about bombing the NYT, tomorrow you will be approvingly quoting a favorable story in it. You are truly a hypocrite, and a stupid one to boot. You will go far in the Republican machine, Matt.

The New York Times is the most anit-American major newspaper in the country. Worse even than the Washington Post. William Randolf Hearst was a patriot. He knew how to run a newspaper too. The people running this newspaper are traitors to the Republic. The entire base of executives should find themseves in extremely hot water!

If a reporter killed someone then published a story about it, does the reporter get a free pass because of "freedom of the press?"

(insert liberal deflections here)

According to Bill Clintons standard the Times would be a legitimate target. How many press buildings did he bomb in Kosovo cause they were spewing enemy propaganda?

I guess it comes down to trust. If you trust the Bush administration to monitor Americans' financial transactions, phone records and conversations, then you probably aren't that concerned about their efforts to stifle the free press in the name of national security.
If, however, you believe that the Bush administration is a failed presidency that has attempted to encase its failures in secrecy, then you want the press to be vigilant as ever, and you are grateful for the NYT. Bush has taken spectacular risks and has failed spectacularly- failed to respond in a responsible manner to pre-911 warnings, the ravages of Katrina, insurgency in Iraq, problems with the Dubai ports deal, severe decrease in respect for America on the international stage, and is now failing in his only previous success- Afghanistan. Respect for American military might has fallen so sharply that North Korea now feels comfortable launching a test missile that has the range to hit the continental U.S. Bush's pro-oil energy policies have ignored the specter of global warming, and failed to advance conservation and alternative fuel sources.
His economic policies have been disasterous as well-turning a 200 billion dollar surplus into a 400 billion dollar deficit, and the trade deficit now tops 1 trillion. Inequality,cronyism,and governmental corruption flourishes, while Bush family lawyer Gonzales taps our phones.
So now with his predecessor's popularity topping 61% and his own at 36%, Bush, in desperation, has turned to an unusual role model-Harry Truman. But unfortunately for America, George W. Bush is no Harry Truman.

"I guess it comes down to trust. If you trust the Bush administration to monitor Americans' financial transactions"

When you start your first sentence with a lie there is no reason to read any further

I'm in complete agreement that the NY Times has committed treason. I also think we need to bring back hanging and firing squads for those that commit treason.

So what you are saying, kritter, is that the men and women who are actually performing the searches (if you think that Bush, Gonzales, etc are performing them personally, you're crazy) are out to get Americans individually, and cannot be trusted with the jobs they are tasked to do.

Well, the typical first response by Republicans. Disagree with them? Bomb 'em. Problem solved.

Canadian Observer and other Canadian friends posting here: I visited Waterton Lakes National Park in your fair country last week. Wow! Be-U-Tiful!

William,

I am glad you can trust, but i don't trust these un-elected no ones, doing who knows what with our information. All it takes is one unscrupulous person who is willing to sell personal info to crooks, and then we are in a world of hurt, I don't trust these folks with that much of my life, if you can, then so be it, but i'm not trading my freedoms, for security; it isn't worth it to me to be a slave to my government, as opposed to being a free man in peril.

This topic makes a lot of sense.

As it is, because of the corporate interests, the U.S. MSM is ranked under #200 for the country that has the freeest press.

Theres not a lot of "free press" left, and what remains needs to be preserved as it is critical to preserving a strong democracy, which is also faltering at the moment in America as well.

EXECUTE THE TRAITORS!!!

Looks like I'm not the only one who believes the death penalty is appropriate for the traitors who leak our national security secrets.

I heard a guest on Fox News suggesting that as a possibility -- just like any other common traitor would get... life in prison as a minimum!

If current laws don't permit it, then change the laws for the next time the traitorous liberal press decides they want to publish our national defense secrets to the terrorists who want to destroy our cities and kill American citizens!!!

FREEDOM OF THE PRESS DOES NOT EXTEND TO HELPING THOSE WHO HAVE PLEDGED TO DESTROY OUR CITIES AND KILL AMERICANS AND THEIR FAMILIES!!!!!

AAR

Geeze,

All these alleged crimes against our civil liberties...all false. If you are phoning Syria every day and transfering millions of dollars to Iran, I'm sure National Security would like to know why. This is not affecting any of you! I'm sure if this was an act of the Clinton administration, the media would have it be an act of heroism!

About bombing NYT, well...I guess liberals don't have a sense of humor unless they are watching the Colbert Report...then its really funny, eh?

Maybe there's hope for the death penalty for those who release our nation's security secrets!

This -- Supreme and Appellate Courts -- is why we elected President Bush! Even if Conservatives and Republicans disagree with him on everything else, until we get those liberal activist "law giver" judges and courts under control, we have no Constitution!

Note the last sentence about the reaction of the four LIBERAL JUDGES!!!
"New Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito broke a tie Monday to rule that Kansas' death penalty law is constitutional."

"By a 5-to-4 vote, the justices said the Kansas Supreme Court incorrectly interpreted the Eighth Amendment's protection against cruel and unusual punishment to strike down the state's death penalty statute. "

"The dissenters, the four liberal members of the high court, bitterly complained about the decision."

FOUR MORE TO GO!!!!!

AAR

Axis,

Care to provide a cite to your typically outrageous claim about freedom of the press in the US? The only cite I could find was a survey done by "Reporters Without Borders", which ranked it 40th out of 167. And their methodology has been questioned by a number oc critics.

"Theres not a lot of "free press" left".

So, the NYT can publish classified information that undermines our Global War on Terror efforts, without repercussions.

Any journalist can write any article or publish a book filled with lies, and get away with it.

The networks and cable stations can broadcast any news story, true or not, without censorship. In fact, they can make up stories, such as "Rathergate", and drag the story out for months, without fear.

The US governement has never shut down a newspaper, or taken a radio or TV Station off the air because of its political beliefs, and you think the freedom of the press is virtually gone?

Oh..I forgot. You live in a liberal, virtual world where everything is 180 degrees out of phase. So, where we see total freedom of the press, you see no freedom.

Your comments make sense now.

Alito is pro-death, as are the 4 justices who voted as he did. "Bomb" the NYTimes,"execute" the "traitors", pre-emptively invade the "terrorists", is killing the only solution to problems that the Republican's can formulate? Or is it just the christian-fascist wing of the Party who wants "everyone" dead? Peace

I say frogmarch the reporters and their editors off to jail until they reveal their sources, then prosecute the government officials leaking to them. That would solve the problem w/o running afoul of the 1st Amendment.

William-what I'm saying is that I see no reason to trust an administration thats failed so spectacularly in so many areas with expanded executive powers. I'm saying that past incompetence does not give me confidence in future performance. If I don't trust the government to perform with the authority it was granted by the Constitution-why truat it with powers it was not expressly granted????

Fine: 30 million

prison time: LIFE!!

A-10,

When you have corporate policy that silently mandates that stories against the percieved best interest of that company, get buried, or killed, then there is a problem with a "free press

http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=1387

Now, now everyone. I think we should stop blasting the NYT. After all, it's about freedom of the press.

Who gives a damn if they used this freedom to write about a secret program that targeted terrorists and saved lives in the process? Who cares if the story gave the terrorists information on how we knew about their financial schemes to fund their operations to kill infidels? Who cares if this program tracked close to 2,000 such schemes and led to the arrest of dozens of terrorists?

We should all remember that freedom of the press trumps saving American lives. Silly people.

Has the Belgian company in question afforded the same consideration to other governments relative to their national security needs, or are we somehow unique in our access?

Come on people! We have all known for some time that ALL unusual transactions including anything greater than $10k are reviewed by DHS. This is not just old news, it's barely news at all.

"....you're either with us, or you're with the terrorists...."

1. It's because of that simple-minded rhetoric that made become a liberal in the first place, and its the reason you guys are in the minority.

2. You are aware that its possible to support your contry, but not the president, right?
Example: I love my country, but I am deeply ashamed an embarassed that George Bush is our president.

3. Bomb the NYTimes! Jail the journalists for doing their jobs! That's the way! Who gives a shit about a "free press", we're at war!

God help us all.

When you start your first sentence with a lie there is no reason to read any further.

CJ, there's never any reason to read a kritter post. Chances are, you've read the post already--they're talking points parroted by every good brown-shirt lemming libgressive.

Kritter, if by chance, you happen to be a victim of the next terror attack, can we call you "krispy kritter?"

Canadian Observer,

Perhaps you can enlighten us about some of your Canadian "free speech" laws.

According to one article, it is against the law in Canada (and Europe) to even quote verses from the Bible that may offend homosexuals. Is that correct? One person who did so had to pay something like $1,500 to each of three people he offended -- for exercising his "free speech" and freedom of religion! Right?

RE: "How can you not see the dangerous direction in which you are steering your country?"

How can you not see the dangerous direction in which you are steering your country?

Oh, I would rather America to be respected (multiple definition) for it's strength -- military and otherwise -- patted on the head as a third rate nation like many!!!

AAR

steve,

No, steve, it it The New York Times that is "pro death". They release our classified national defense secrets so the terrorists and our enemies know what we were doing to stop them from destroying American cities and killing American citizens and their families. The New York Times provide support and information to the terrorists. The New York Times provide support to those who have and will kill us. That makes The New York Times "pro death"... OURS!

No, steve, five good Supreme Court Judges opposed the liberal "catch and release" program for our nation's worst criminals.

FOUR MORE TO GO!

(Oh, I'm sure I won't agree with all of their rulings either.)

Vote Republican!!!

AAR

Funny, I don't remember far left wing kooks like steve or teenage liberal being outraged when Bill Clinton bombed several newspaper buildings in Kosovo. I wonder why that is?

Amazing what a lack of sarcasm detection the left has on this entire thread.

"Free speech in Canada"....Ha! When does Fox News get carried up there?

Until then, you don't have the high ground to make such statements.

"Funny, I don't remember far left wing kooks like steve or teenage liberal being outraged when Bill Clinton bombed several newspaper buildings in Kosovo. I wonder why that is?"

That's because he thought it was an aspirin factory...erh terrorist hideout...erh Chinese embassy.

LOL

teen,

It is not because of the rhetoric of others that you became a simple minded liberal!

Yes, people can support their country and not the president. You and the liberal Democrats support neither! You support the terrorists!!!

Yep. It's time we put every last one of those [liberal] traitors in prison!

Maybe it's time to change those "free press" excuses for supporting our enemies! I'm all for it!!! How about you?

If you town and your family were the next to be destroyed by the terrorists because of the classified security information The New York Times provided to those terrorists... would you still support their right to broadcast our defense secrets to our enemies? I really don't think you would, regardless of your answer!

AAR

AAR

It does make you wonder. What exactly do liberals get out of providing our national security secrets to al Qaeda?

Orion,

RE: "I say frogmarch the reporters and their editors off to jail until they reveal their sources, then prosecute the government officials leaking to them. That would solve the problem w/o running afoul of the 1st Amendment."

You are right!

Jail The New York Times editors, reporters, and anyone else involved or who knew about it.

Keep them in jail until they squeal. If that's for the rest of their lives, so be it. That's just as good as a conviction!

If they do talk, try, convict, and put every last one of those [liberals] who leaked to the Times the in prison for life -- or worse! That is a conviction!

In either case, any other potential "leakers" may think twice before they decide to release our national defense information to our enemies.

In either case, the Times' sources will quickly dry up.

In either case, the Times will SHUT UP!!!

AAR

Uggg. This makes me so mad. My husband is active duty Air Force. He has Top Secret clearance and works with classified information every day!!

If he were to take this classified information and relase it to the public, he would be sitting in the brig right now!

How can ANYONE not see that reporting CLASSIFIED information is subject to prosecution.

CLASSIFIED IS CLASSIFIED and IS NEVER SOMETHING THE PUBLIC NEEDS TO BE MADE AWARE OF!

Bush just may do it:
PRESIDENT Bush planned to bomb Arab TV station al-Jazeera in friendly Qatar, a "Top Secret" No 10 memo reveals.
But he was talked out of it at a White House summit by Tony Blair, who said it would provoke a worldwide backlash.

Bush acts like the spoiled brat who’s only method of coping is violence.

AAR writes "If current laws don't permit it, then change the laws for the next time the traitorous liberal press decides they want to publish our national defense secrets...."

Question?? who decides what atr national defense secrets? Was the FBI invesigation of MLK a national defense secret? is the over charges by certain contractors in Iraq national defense secrets, was the taping of converations in the white house (Nixon) a national defense secret? just a question.. what is a NDS and who decides?

The answer to your questions, OhioGolfer, is no. None of the above has/had anything to do with national defense. I would definitely consider a program that saves lives and tracks down those who want to kill us a national defense secret. I appreciate CanuckGuy for recognizing this fact earlier and agreeing that devulging this secret was wrong.

Haven't seen you around this neck of the woods lately and wanted to let you know you never said anything to offend me.

Blarney, once again I ask, was Bill Clinton childish when he blew up the newspaper buildings in Kosovo? The hypocrisy of the left is stunning!

The New York Times is an EVIL organization, now the united states is subject to even more evil than it was already!

In other words we are screwed!!

I think it's times we WE PUT EM OUT OF BUSINESS!

They are evil because they are a liberal organization!!

Any one in their right mind KNOWS how evil the Liberal communist are!!

PUT EM UNDER THE JAIL, AND THROW AWAY THE KEYS!!

enough said!!

Some people here seriously need to re-read the Constitution. The 1st does not simply confer the media with the right to print whatever they feel like. With freedom comes the responsibility to act appropriately and informing the terrorists of our activities to thwart their actions is simply not appropriate.

There is no Constitutional right to Privacy and a lot of people seem to forget that.

EXECUTE THE TRAITORS!!! Looks like I'm not the only one who believes the death penalty is appropriate for the traitors who leak our national security secrets. - AAR

so by that measure, the leakers inside the government would really be the traitors. and also by that measure looks like porcine-bodied karl rove and scooter would also have.. ahem.. 'hang' (or do they get a pass bc they are republicans)
HYPOCRISY, HYPOCRISY, HYPOCRISY

OhioGolfer,

RE: "...who decides what are national defense secrets?"

The person or persons who has or have "classification authority" in accordance with applicable laws, policies, and regulations, their position, and their assigned job duties! There are also different levels of classification.

The material may be declassified by those individuals who have "declassification authority" in accordance with applicable laws, policies, and regulations, their position, and their assigned job duties!

Just because a person has "declassification authority" on one document does not mean that same person has declassification authority on another.

Just because a person has a security clearance, does not give that person the "right to know", "view", or "access" classified information. The person must also have a "need to know" and be authorized access to the information by the nature and the duties of their job.

Even a member of Congress (or maybe I should say especially a member of Congress) does not have blanket access to classified information. They must still have a legitimate "need to know", and only for that particular piece or pieces of information.

Information is classified for many reasons. I would think most of the classified information relates to our national defense, but it could also be classified or sensitive for "diplomatic" reasons, because it could damage U.S. relations with other nations, and other reasons.

President Bush and Vice President Cheney have "declassification authority", but I do not know how far that extends. I would doubt that they have "blank declassification authority" up to "compartmentalized information", but I can't say for sure.

NOT THE PERSONS ILLEGALLY LEAKING THE CLASSIFIED INFORMATION!

NOT THE NEW YORK TIMES!

NOT THE PRESS!

AAR

The NY Times is the enemy of America. The liberal "yellowbellies" are fully represented by NYT. They show their hatred of American is operating at full blast when they deliberated give secrets to their terrorist friends. There is a major difference in reporting the news freely and giving the enemy dogs assistance in their war against the United States. Is there a difference in between NYT and Al Jezzera? I think not, both hate America. Should we blow both up? I think so.

With the 4rth of July holiday coming, I can think of no greater way to honor the United States of America, than for everyone to call the NY Times and cancel your subscription.

proudUSAFwife,

You are absolutely, 100% right!

Most people who work with classified information like your husband fully understand why it is classified.

Most people would never think of releasing it and even the slightest failure to protect it or even a possible leak results in all sorts of investigations. They are trained and retrained in protecting, controlling, accessing, and disseminating that information! Most people who work with classified information know the consequences of failing to protect the information.

Unfortunately, most of our "liberal experts" have absolutely no idea of why it is classified and don't even care. If it were up to them, they would give away all of the nation's secrets and put the security and defense of our entire nation at risk! Fortunately for their own security, that of their families, cities, and this nation, most people who work with classified information do know it is critical to our national defense, do know how to secure it, and do their job to make sure it stays secure!

My guess it that the information is being leaked by a "disgruntled liberal Democrat" for political purposes and to advance their political ideology. If they don't like they policy, they believe it is perfectly alright to violate the law!!!

AAR

Could we file a class action lawsuit against the New York Times for 100 billion dollars or whatever the NYT is worth and put this treasonous organization out of business permanently?

I just found a kook even more intellectually vacant than leftorium. It's bloviator. As we all know Rove was cleared and Libby was not indicted for "leaking" anyones name. Are they all this incredibly stupid?

AAR, you said:

"Oh, I would rather America to be respected (multiple definition) for it's strength -- military and otherwise -- patted on the head as a third rate nation like many!!!"

You may want America to be respected for its military strength but it's not going to happen. When that military strength flexes its' muscles and innocent people die as a result, believe me, there is no respect given. Respect has to be earned. Being the neighborhood bully is not the wonderful thing you may think it is.

I agree though, Canada & perhaps Europe does have more stringent laws against hate groups and those who spread discriminatory, prejudicial beliefs.
There is no problem, however, in criticizing or condemning corrupt & inept governments.

"I agree though, Canada & perhaps Europe does have more stringent laws against hate groups and those who spread discriminatory, prejudicial beliefs."

Yes, and it's worked so well. I mean all we've had this year are riots in Paris with Muslims. Riots over soccer matches, the rebirth of skin heads, etc.

It's sort of like the liberals in S.F. and D.C. who outlaw guns and are then standing dumbfounded when gun crimes still exist.

You cannot legislate behavior.

AAR,
Wrong again, you American idiot. I am for America, I am against the Ne-Cons who have hijacked America.

btw: any proof that I, or the Dems, support terroists? None of your GOP rhetoric, actual evidence that shows us giving aid to the enemy will do.

What proof do you have that the New York Times releasing stories does anything to harm the US?

None. Ok then, shut up idiots.

"CLASSIFIED IS CLASSIFIED and IS NEVER SOMETHING THE PUBLIC NEEDS TO BE MADE AWARE OF!"

Now proudwife, let's not get into that Plamegate thing again. Okay?

bloviator,

As CJ has already pointed out... Karl Rove has not been charged with anything -- except by your liberal friends and KOS bloggers. He was cleared of any wrong doing by Fitzgerald. Scooter Libby was not charged with "leaking" Valerie Plame's covert identity. He was indicted for lying and trying to cover it up (obstruction of justice) and even that could still turn out to be a matter of faulty memory. Even Libby has not been tried or convicted of anything yet.

RE: "...so by that measure, the leakers inside the government would really be the traitors."

Yes. If it had been accidentally or unintentional, I would not call it traitorous, but even then there would have been ramifications and likely punishment -- which could range from a reprimand, to revoking the person's security clearance, to firing. etc.

In this case and the NSA telephone surveillance, the leak was OBVIOUS and INTENTIONAL. That is TREASON, and the individual deserves the maximum punishment under the law. Spying and treason could even include the death penalty! I would give the person or person as many years in prison as possible if I were on the jury!

The New York Times KNEW the information was classified and that it's DISCLOSURE WOULD HARM America's ability to identify terrorists, potential attacks, and to protect Americans and our cities. Republicans and Democrats both asked The New York Times not to release the information for reasons of national security. They did it anyway. Hopefully there is some law by which those responsible can be placed in prison for years, and hopefully Congress will pass new laws with severe sentences to cover any other releases.

The following quotes are from the Weekly Standard...

"Although the editors of the Times act as if prosecution is not a possibility, not everyone concurs. One person who is still mulling the matter over is Attorney General Alberto Gonzales. Asked in late May about the prospect of prosecuting the Times and others who publish classified information, he by no means ruled it out. 'There are some statutes on the books,' he said, 'which, if you read the language carefully, would seem to indicate that that is a possibility.'"

"Unsurprisingly, given what is at stake, even that tentative opinion elicited a fire and brimstone denunciation from the Times. An editorial on May 24 dismissed as 'bizarre' the attorney general's 'claim that a century-old espionage law could be used to muzzle the press.' It has long been understood, added the newspaper, that the 'overly broad and little used' Espionage Act of 1917 applies only to government officials and 'not to journalists.'"

"But this interpretation, even if it were accurate (which it is not), is entirely beside the point. The attorney general did not mention the 1917 Espionage Act or any other specific law. But if the editors of the paper were to take a look at the U.S. Criminal Code, they would find that they have run afoul not of the Espionage Act but of another law entirely: Section 798 of Title 18, the so-called Comint statute."

"Unambiguously taking within its reach the publication of the NSA terrorist surveillance story (though arguably not the Times's more recent terrorist banking story), Section 798 reads, in part:"

"Whoever knowingly and willfully communicates, furnishes, transmits, or otherwise makes available to an unauthorized person, or publishes, or uses in any manner prejudicial to the safety or interest of the United States or for the benefit of any foreign government to the detriment of the United States any classified information . . . concerning the communication intelligence activities of the United States . . . shall be fined not more than $10,000 or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both."

Hopefully Attorney General Gonzales can haul them into court under one or both of the mentioned acts. Hopefully several people will be fined the $10,000 maximum and get 10 years in prison. Congress should then increase the penalties for any releases in the future... to include life in prison -- or worse!

If a person offering classified information came up to me -- or to any responsible American -- that person would have been reported to the FBI. The Times chose not to do that. The Times chose to report to the terrorists and our enemies -- disregarding your safety, my safety, and the safety of ALL Americans and our cities.

Why don't we just have the Times report all of the ongoing police investigations and sting operations to the criminals so they can avoid them?

Why don't we just have the Times report all of your banking, social security, health, and other private information?

It's "free speech".. freedom of the press... don't they have that right?

If not, why do they have the right to disclose information and programs intended to protect your very life, the lives of your family, and the safety of your city?

Why even worry about protecting Americans from terrorists at all?

AAR

Plame was classified? She shouldn't have been telling her neighbors and outing herself then.

Oh isn't this rich. Teenage Liberal is also a non-American.

And I'm supposed to give a rip about what you think even more now? LOL

Dear Messrs. Keller, Lichtblau & Risen:

Congratulations on disclosing our government's highly classified anti-terrorist-financing program (June 23). I apologize for not writing sooner. But I am a lieutenant in the United States Army and I spent the last four days patrolling one of the more dangerous areas in Iraq. (Alas, operational security and common sense prevent me from even revealing this unclassified location in a private medium like email.)

Unfortunately, as I supervised my soldiers late one night, I heard a booming explosion several miles away. I learned a few hours later that a powerful roadside bomb killed one soldier and severely injured another from my 130-man company. I deeply hope that we can find and kill or capture the terrorists responsible for that bomb. But, of course, these terrorists do not spring from the soil like Plato's guardians. No, they require financing to obtain mortars and artillery shells, priming explosives, wiring and circuitry, not to mention for training and payments to locals willing to emplace bombs in exchange for a few months' salary. As your story states, the program was legal, briefed to Congress, supported in the government and financial industry, and very successful.

Not anymore. You may think you have done a public service, but you have gravely endangered the lives of my soldiers and all other soldiers and innocent Iraqis here. Next time I hear that familiar explosion -- or next time I feel it -- I will wonder whether we could have stopped that bomb had you not instructed terrorists how to evade our financial surveillance.

And, by the way, having graduated from Harvard Law and practiced with a federal appellate judge and two Washington law firms before becoming an infantry officer, I am well-versed in the espionage laws relevant to this story and others -- laws you have plainly violated. I hope that my colleagues at the Department of Justice match the courage of my soldiers here and prosecute you and your newspaper to the fullest extent of the law. By the time we return home, maybe you will be in your rightful place: not at the Pulitzer announcements, but behind bars.

Very truly yours,

Tom Cotton
Baghdad, Iraq

Tom Cotton....now that's an American hero!

Tony Snow put it quite well today.

"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."

teen,

Your words say otherwise!!!

You don't know what you believe or want... except for some attention.

You are barely "dry behind the ears" and even that is questionable! You think and do as your liberal "handlers" tell you to do.

A rational and logical thinking person could easily understand how it helps the enemy to tell them what we are doing to catch and stop them. You and the rest of your liberal friends can't even figure that out that simple fact.

If you tell a burglar about and where all of the security features are in a jewelry store, for example, it doesn't take a genius or rocket scientist to figure out that a burglar can then avoid or deactivate those devices and steal the jewelry!

What do you want for proof? Your city and family destroyed like those four airplanes, the WTC, the section of the Pentagon and all of the people who died there?

AAR

kimberly4bush,

Thanks for the post!

I will forward it along with some of my comments to as many of my friends and contacts as possible and ask that they also forward it on. Hopefully, others will do likewise!

The liberal left are totally and utterly clueless. They have no idea of what it means or takes to secure this nation and their anti-American "free speech" and "free press" rights!

If it were up to the liberal Democrats, all of our military secrets would be on the front page of The New York Times.

If it were up to the liberal Democrats, we wouldn't have a military... they would negotiate and talk to the terrorists and our enemies to secure our security.

No... if it were up to the liberal Democrats, they would negotiate our surrender!!!

AAR

These editors okaying this classified information
have only ONE AGENDA....."Defeat the Conservative
Bush, and his administration, at ALL Costs"....
they care less, that it gets our brave soldiers killed, while they work for the freedom to live of
all people....Us, and the Iraqi people. Doesn't
matter to the Liberal/Leftists. Many who are also
on these posts, touting the "public's right to know"....ridiculous. Would you rather be reading
about your right to know, or having you or yours'
being buried, because someone "outed the ways in which we can garner information about the inside goings on, of terrorists"......These liberal rags,
NEED TO ANSWER FOR THEIR 'RIGHTS', AND IN TURN, WE
SHOULD BE ABLE TO JAIL THEM FOR TREASONIST ACTS DURING A TIME OF WAR-TO PROTECT INNOCENT AMERICANS
AGAINST THEIR LIBERAL, DESTRUCTIVE AGENDAS.

BTW: Those posting from Canada, etc. YOU, have no
decisions in what we have to do in America, so why
the hell, don't you just butt out of our country.
If you, were attacked by an onslaught of Terrorist
Killers, WHO, WOULD YOU TURN TO? Your neighbor to
the south? Just keep letting those into your own
country, as anyone can come, and you don't check on their background, Terrorist or otherwise, and
you want to spout off, on what WE should/shouldn't
do. Like I SAID, BUTT OUT, YOU HAVE ENOUGH GOING
ON IN YOUR OWN COUNTRY.

The people who "hate" America are the people who would violate our Constitution for the sake of a little safety. Amendment I,IV and my favorite IX, all make for good reading. The money spying program has been ineffective for about 18 months, because the "terrorists" figured it out. So the only people in the dark about the program was "we the people". Peace

Funny political cartoon from ThePeoplesCube.com posted on Lucianne.com-

Thank you, Allah, for the New York Times!

Great post, Kimberly4bush! Tom Cotton rocks!

This cartoon below says it all

The NY TIMES

Jo opined:

"Like I SAID, BUTT OUT, YOU HAVE ENOUGH GOING
ON IN YOUR OWN COUNTRY."

If the U.S. will do the same and not invade & occupy other nations, I'll be overjoyed to accomodate your request. To paraphrase, 'America butt out, you have enough going on in your own country.'

The libs are completely oblivious to the fact that 3,000 americans were killed less than 5 years ago. These are the same bastards who accused President Bush of not connecting the dots in the 7 1/2 months he was president before 9/11. And they are the same bastards that would blame President Bush if there was another attack on american soil. Cancel your subscription to the NY Times and vote against every lib running for office.

steve,

NEVER... EVER... trust or vote for anyone -- or political party (i.e. liberal Democrat) -- who believes that The New York Times irresponsible publication of our defense secrets is more important than protecting Americans from another 9/11.

I think the liberal Democrats should run and campaign on that slogan!

I don't know that the program has been ineffective, but one thing is for sure... it and the NSA phone surveillance programs are CERTAINLY INEFFECTIVE NOW -- thanks to the liberal New York Times!

I wonder what secrets the liberal New York Times will release next?

AAR

steve..peaceman..
for the sake of a LITTLE safety..you delusional little twit!!
And thank you, Tom Cotton, may you and all of our fine troops be safe.

Hey YO, CO,

Don't get the picture dude!!

I'm gonna say it ONE MORE TIME!!

!!!!!!!!!!!BUTT OUT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Canadian Observer,

RE: "...Canada & perhaps Europe does have more stringent laws against hate groups and those who spread discriminatory, prejudicial beliefs. There is no problem, however, in criticizing or condemning corrupt & inept governments."

You impose your social beliefs on others and then make it illegal for those who disagree to even quote the Bible because it "offends" your "protected" groups. You take away their free speech rights, and then take away their religious freedom! Sure! Right! Just what Americans don't want!!!

You don't mind discriminating against those who don't share your social beliefs, do you? You don't have a problem condoning prejudice as long as it is against others who don't agree with your liberal social engineering program, do you?

Maybe more Canadians will start watching Fox News Network and get some real news instead of the standard Canadian liberal propaganda. It sounds like Al-Jazeera had an easier time getting approval than Fox News!

You Canadians aren't one be telling America about free speech!

AAR

A slightly shortened version of my post on a previous thread, but appropriate here for other readers...

Liberal Democratic Hypocrisy...

-- Following 9/11:

Liberal Democrats BLAMED President Bush for NOT KNOWING about the attack... for NOT DOING MORE to learn about the attack... for NOT DOING MORE to prevent the attack!

-- Now:

Liberal Democrats BLAME President Bush for DOING TOO MUCH to learn about planned Al Qaeda attacks... for DOING TOO MUCH to protect Americans from another 9/11... for DOING TOO MUCH to prevent another 9/11!

Democrats TRY TO STOP President Bush's efforts to protect Americans from another 9/11! They ENCOURAGE and CONDONE the ILLEGAL release our national defense secrets! They CHEER The New York Times for DISCLOSING NATIONAL SECRETS about our efforts to stop terrorists! They CHEER The New York Times for ALERTING TERRORISTS around the world to what we are doing to stop them!

-- When the next 9/11 happens:

LIBERAL DEMOCRATS... and THE NEW YORK TIMES... can TAKE THE BLAME!!!

AAR

Yes, Democrats are SO filled with HATE!!

It was supposed to ba funny when some numbskull praised Chuckie Schumer for heing willing to put a bullet in the head of the President---the fact that we were offended just proved we didn't "get it" or understand truly intellectual humor.

But joke about an act of violence against a company---a company which is actively working againtt the best interests of the country and of Americans---and watch the HORROR on the Left. You know, that political segment which thrives on OUTRAGE.

The simple fact is, if any publication had published information like this in WW Two, information about steps being taken to identify and thwart the enemy, that publication WOULD have been tried for treason.

Freedom of the Press? Well, how about publishing the addresses of safe houses for battered women. After all, The Public Has A Right To Know, right? So what if the enraged batterers can now find their victims to hurt them again---it's just freedom of the press, after all. Protected under the Constitution, doncha know.

Why not print the new identities and locations of all in the secret witness program? Hell, isn't it our RIGHT to know every single thing about every single person or every single event in the country. People die? Tough. People stop testifying to help convict criminals? Hey, you gotta weigh all that against Our Right To Know.

So, let's demand that the New Jihad Times print the addresses and home phone numbers of all their staff, from the publisher on down to every reporter. Because I WANT TO KNOW. And that should be enough. So what if all the people they have written bad things about would also like to know? It's a free country.

And the claim that it's OK to publish classified information which impacts national security would seem to knock the silly Valerie Plame thing out of the water, wouldn't it? Because The Public Has A Right To Know.

I suggest that we immediately pass new laws which clearly define the boundaries of what can and cannot be published, and which establish strong and very unpleasant penalties for revealing classifed information. We could call it the NYT law.

I also suggest that when a newspaper crosses the line from being a publisher of the news to being an arm of a political party, it can no longer fall back on the hallowed protections offered the press.

I just have one question. Will the media make it a daily story to find the "leaker" as they did Valerie Plame's leaker?

Anyone want to take a bet on that?

The whole conservative outrage over the anti-patriotic publishing of such treasonous information rests on only a single solitary argument, that it compromises the effectiveness of the program itself (which might not be legal in the first place, but thats another matter).

So to begin lets take a look at this quote from the Swift website: "SWIFT is the financial industry-owned co-operative supplying secure, standardised messaging services and interface software to 7,800 financial institutions in more than 200 countries."

From my understanding Swift is the sole provider of this service, meaning all wire transactions are picked up by the messaging service. Assuming this is the case, now that terrorists are now privy to the fact that US government is able to monitor Swift messages, what are they to do?

Have you thought about it enought yet? There is nothing the terrorist really could do short of not making any wire transactions at all, because no matter with who, where, or when you make a transaction Swift would know about it. So, assuming our terrorist nemeses aren't complete morons they would have already known that avoiding any traceable wire trails unless unaviodable would be the best course of action to avoid detection by the CIA, FBI, NSA, and the like.

So finally, were this program to continue would the knowledge of its existence really matter? Nope. Would it embarass the President, expose another program he was trying to keep secret that had dubious legal foundings at best, and that would actually spark meaningful debate about the broad increase in power the executive has gained after 9/11? You be the judge.

Or you could be a conservative and spew some hateful diatribe that doesn't address my point in any way, calls me an unpatriotic fiend that should be hanged, and wishes that Bush could be supreme dictator of the world.

The National Review suggests that the White House should revoke the NY TIMES' press creditials. I think it's a damn fine idea!

CJ -

"...when Bill Clinton bombed several newspaper buildings in Kosovo."

You keep repeating this. Any links to a newspaper article that describes the US military bombing "several" newspaper buildings in Kosovo? (no, links to other B4B posts or other wingnut blogs doesn't count). I know that NATO bombed the Serbian television building in Belgrade, but I have never heard of the bombings of "several newspaper buildings in Kosovo". (by the way, Tony Blair, your favorite foreign leader and Bush lapdog, described the bombing of Serbian TV as "entirely justified")

Why do you repeatedly malign our military?

AAR -

"Following 9/11...Liberal Democrats BLAMED President Bush for NOT KNOWING about the attack... for NOT DOING MORE to learn about the attack... for NOT DOING MORE to prevent the attack!"

AAR, you're starting to froth at the mouth - have you had your rabies shots?

Anyway, I don't recall liberals in general saying Bush was to blame for the attacks on 9/11, or that he personally didn't do enough to prevent them. There has been some criticism after 9/11, however, on his failure to secure our ports and chemical plants. Personally, I'd rather he'd spent a tiny portion of the $1 trillion we're going to waste in Iraq on providing real security here at home for dangerously exposed ports and chemical plants.

In any case, this faux indignation over the NYT reporting on financial surveillance is way overblown. The WH is just trying to cause a huge stink about it as a way to muddy the waters and deflect attention away from the illegal warrantless wiretapping program. I don't think anybody really cares about the monitoring of large transactions overseas. Such transactions have been heavily scrutinized for some time, and there have been many newpaper stories about such surveillance.

btw: any proof that I, or the Dems, support terroists? None of your GOP rhetoric, actual evidence that shows us giving aid to the enemy will do.

Posted by: teenage liberal at June 26, 2006 06:03 PM

Uh yah dummy, go read the article NYT wrote on secret government national security programs! what the hell do you think this thread is all about? Oops, sorry your a lib & a teen to boot/ stupidity excused for now!

When is Canadian Observer going to live up to his tag and just OBSERVE!

In any case, this faux indignation over the NYT reporting on financial surveillance is way overblown. The WH is just trying to cause a huge stink about it as a way to muddy the waters and deflect attention away from the illegal warrantless wiretapping program. I don't think anybody really cares about the monitoring of large transactions overseas. Such transactions have been heavily scrutinized for some time, and there have been many newpaper stories about such surveillance.

Posted by: Aarontime at June 27, 2006 12:11 AM

Aarontime, did you miss the poll showing 86% of the country in favor of the wiretapping? I thought you libs live by the polls, or is it just when it's in your favor! Well the polls are slowly tipping bud, not that I care! I think polls are for sh..!

---?? You mean you are now in favor of executing Scooter Libby, Karl Rove, Dick Cheney and President Bush for leaking classified info to the press as well as the identity of a CIA operative?

You must have a liberal streak in there.

Posted by AAR:
Looks like I'm not the only one who believes the death penalty is appropriate for the traitors who leak our national security secrets.

Aarontime,

Do you think it helps to come charging out like some frilled lizard or a rooster ruffling its neck feathers trying to make yourself look bigger and more ferocious for your attack? I think not. You still look like a liberal to me!

As a matter of fact, Aarontime, I have had rabies shots -- five of them! How many have you had?

I think you better check your senility medication though, because you do need a refill!

Where were you during all of 9/11 hearings and during the discussions and accusations that preceded them? I don't know about your newspapers and television coverage, but it was clear to me that Democrats were blaming President Bush for not knowing about the 9/11 attacks and for not doing more to prevent the attack. If you want to go back and search through all of the news from that time, go ahead. I don't have the time to search for information that you will "disagree with" for some reason, and that will not change the facts.

Do you recall the little episode with Hillary standing up on the Senate floor saying that "Bush knew, he knew." Here's a quote from Time on that one.

"With the cries of 'What did Bush know?' at their most hysterical ... The clearest evidence that the White House was on war footing came with a statement from the First Lady, which recalled the times Barbara Bush deployed her carefully controlled patrician anger in defense of her husband ... With that, the Democrats were forced to recalibrate. Their unstated implication had been that, in abler hands, the country might have been spared the tragedy. On the Senate floor on Thursday, Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton had cited a New York Post headline that declared 'Bush Knew,' and added, 'The President knew what? My constituents would like to know the answer.' But by Friday, Mrs. Clinton was backing off, saying that she was not 'looking to point fingers or place blame on anybody.' Said Georgia Senator Max Cleland: 'This thing went south fast. One side defends, the other side finger-points, and you get nowhere."

Where were you when Ashcroft and other administration officials were being grilled about why our intelligence agencies didn't know and why the administration (i.e., President Bush) didn't do more to prevent 9/11?

If you want to do the research, feel free. I'm sure you can find enough to satisfy even your liberal requirements for "proof".

As to "faux indignation," not at all! Leave it up to a liberal to downplay and trivialize the leaks of our national defense secrets. Leave it to a liberal to show a lack of concern for the impact on our nation's security and American's lives and our cities.

Perhaps you and the rest of the liberal left might try showing just a little concern for the security and lives of American citizens. Perhaps you and the liberal left could show just a little concern for the leaking of our national defense secrets.

Perhaps you could show at least as much concern for this nation, our cities, and the lives of Americans as you liberals did for Valerie Plame. Talk about faux indignation...

No, Aarontime. The liberal left Democrats are the ones who are out of touch with the facts and reality. You continue to defend something that is indefensible!!!

AAR

Earth to axis. Earth to axis. Come in axis.

O.k., Scotty, Lock on and beam him aboard from wherever in deep space he's drifting.

For the 9,762,373rd time, AXIS, President Bush, Vice President Cheney, Karl Rove, and Scooter Libby have not been convicted of ANYTHING. Only Libby was charged with -- but not convicted of -- lying and trying to cover it up.

Valerie Plame's identity -- which was likely leaked by a liberal trying to frame Rove -- does not carry the same penalty as leaking our national defense secrets. It's like this axis, the fine for speeding is different than the punishment for robbery which is different than the sentence for murder which is different than that for serial killings!

Axis, please extract your head from where you have placed it so you can see the light of day and understand the news reports!

AAR

Ed,

Or, we can just put you on ignore!

AAR

Aarontime,

Did you forget about the Chinese embassy? Didn't that kill some Chinese in the embassy?

Wasn't there something about a train?

And a convoy? Was that red cross? I'd have to check on that to make sure and get the details.

I thought a school bus was in there too, but I'd have to check on that also.

I'm sure there were more too!

Most people don't remember much about Clinton's "mistakes" because the liberal media blow them out of all proportion!

AAR

Why hasn't there been more outrage about the Washington Post and Wall Street Journal also running this story?

I thank G+d for the Fourth Estate. Without it who knows what Bush and his cronies would do in the name of 9/11?

Perhaps you and the liberal left could show just a little concern for the leaking of our national defense secrets.

And why isn't the outrage directed at the leaker? Let's bomb him/her in Matt's world.

Given a choice between a free press and the government, I'll take a free press anyday. (Hat tip to T. Jefferson)

Ash,

This isn't about the people needing to know about some nefarious act of government - even the NY Times admits it is a perfectly legal enterprise...meanwhile, their explanations for why they felt it necessary to publish are quite weak...in reading the excuses, I get the feeling that they didn't even think much on it before publication....just knee-jerk anti-Bushism driving the news.

As for why the NY Times is catching the most flack - because the story was leaked to them, first, and the other news outlets only picked it up later.

Who leaked it? Why? I was under the impression that the NYT had several meetings with security officials. Did you read Kelly's statement? It sounded thoughtful and well reasoned. Even if you don't agree with his conclusion.

Nefarious? First wire taps. Now bank records. Next up medical records? Travel habits? We need to know because this administration has a track record of pushing the legal envelope. It has a history of denying these activities until they are caught.

I applaud the NYTimes for standing up to the bully pulpit and saying we will take your concerns under advisement, but ultimately you are not the editor of this newspaper, and the constitution (First Amendment, remember that troubling little article?) gives us the right to publish what is truthful.

I am suprised by the uproar about this as I always thought of the Republicans as the party of small government. Whoa they are now playing a very large role in our lives.

AAR -

CJ said Clinton blew up "several newspaper buildings in Kosovo" - and you come back with the Chinese Embassy in Belgrade, and a train. So I take that as a concession that CJ just made up the newspapers in Kosovo thing.

And since when is Bush or Clinton personally involved with deciding what bombs fall on which targets? "Clinton bombed this, Clinton bombed that, blah blah" - hmmmm, I was unaware that Clinon knew how to fly a plane...