NY Times and intelligence leaks

[Ghoulish Delight]

Originally Posted by scaeagles

Would not reporting on (and leaking, for that matter) a classified program on the surveillance of terrorists who wish to bring harm to us be the very definition of treason?

I find the act of questioning our government about as far from teason as possible. One of the things that used to separate the American ideology from the rest of the world is that information is not dangerous, information is not illegal, information is freedom. That's the beauty of the freedom of press, that's the beauty of the freedom of speech (which was written into the Constitution in order to protect our right to question our government, not Howard Stern's right to talk about vaginas).

It may be that all of these programs, including the wire tapping, turn out to be perfectly legal and justifiable. What angers me is Bush's attitude that to even question whether they are or not is inherently unamerican. As far as I'm concerned, it's about as American as it gets.

[scaeagles]

Originally Posted by Ghoulish Delight

I find the act of questioning our government about as far from teason as possible.

Good lord, GD. There is a huge difference between questioning the government and revealing classified programs. Any cries of treason for questioning if we should be in Iraq are ridiculous. Cries of treason for revealing classified terrorist surveillance methods? Certainly not.

This is WAY beyond questioning the government.

Certain information most certainly can be and is dangerous. Loose lips sink ships and all. There is a reason certain things are classified.

[Ghoulish Delight]

Originally Posted by scaeagles

Good lord, GD. There is a huge difference between questioning the government and revealing classified programs. Any cries of treason for questioning if we should be in Iraq are ridiculous. Cries of treason for revealing classified terrorist surveillance methods? Certainly not.

But it's gone beyond cries of treason for revealing the information. Bush has urged people to drop lawsuits that came up after the program was already leaked because "it might risk national security." Sorry, bub, but just because you want to continue to sneak around doesn't mean citizens have to give up their right to protect their freedoms.

I believe anyone who has classified clearence that leaks classified information should be prosecuted. But I don't believe the people who receive that information have any obligation to keep it a secret once it's been leaked. If Bush can't inspire his people to work with him on this oh-so-vital programs, that's a problem he has to deal with internally. It's not a problem that or should be solved by going after the messenger.

[scaeagles]

Originally Posted by Ghoulish Delight

But it's gone beyond cries of treason for revealing the information. Bush has urged people to drop lawsuits that came up after the program was already leaked because "it might risk national security." Sorry, bub, but just because you want to continue to sneak around doesn't mean citizens have to give up their right to protect their freedoms.

Without addressing the merits of that argument, that steps beyond the original scope of what I was addressing, being whether or not the revealing of classified information in his instance could be considered treasonous. It is not unreasonable to suggest it.

As far as dropping lawsuits.....any discussion of this classified program would reveal more methodology, I would suspect. What is wrong with urging anything anyway? And as previously mentioned, bank records have already been ruled on by the SC to not be privileged information.

[Ghoulish Delight]

Originally Posted by scaeagles

Without addressing the merits of that argument, that steps beyond the original scope of what I was addressing, being whether or not the revealing of classified information in his instance could be considered treasonous. It is not unreasonable to suggest it.

Perhaps, but that requires some pretty liberal stertching of the definition of "purposely aiding". I mean, if that's treason, than so is the many times we've all posted about how easy it is to get through Disneyland bag checks with knives in our pockets. Heck, that's worse as we provide a specific method for our enemies to defeat security.

What is wrong with urging anything anyway?

What's wrong is that it continues the implication that "you're either for us or against us." Either you simply take for granted that our government is doing the right thing, don't question it, waive your flag, and cheer 'em on...or you're trying to undermine America. I'm insulted by that attitude, and insulted that our leader has it.

[Alex]

Do we agree that there exists a need for our government to be able to classify information for the benefit of the country?

If you don't agree with that statement then obviously a newspaper can never be wrong in revealing any classified information that comes into its possession.

However, if there is a value to the government being able to hide certain information then who decides when it is ok to break that veil?

If CNN had learned the details our attack on Zarqawi and hour before it happened and went on the air spilling all of the details. Would that be right? After all, I too like to know things. Do I have the right to know that my government is about to commit a targetted killing?

Obviously that leak is not the same thing as this leak, it is just to probe whether you think there is ever information that the press could come to possess that it should not divulge.

I'm guessing that nobody is at either extreme on this issue. That nobody thinks either that the government is absolute in its right to determine the secrets to be kept (I have no problem with the publication of the Pentagon Papers) or that the government has zero right to decide that some information need be kept secret.

So then we're just haggling over where the line is, not whether there is actually a line. For me, I am uncomfortable with the decision being solely in the hands of three people in a New York City highrise in personal political opposition to the person they are reporting on. This is a situation where there is no claim that a law is being broken (as can be claimed with the domestic call monitoring) or even that there has been a change in legal methods.

As I said earlier in this thread, I am of an overall position that what the Times did is a cost of allowing the press to generally be free. However, it is comical to watch people engage in the synchronized dance of hypocrisy on the issue of leak punishment (where people take equal and opposite positions on the issue depending on whether the specific case fits their worldview of which party is evil). But that doesn't mean they aren't bad people.

And GC, I have no doubt at all that they are trying to find out who leaked the information.

[Gemini Cricket]

Originally Posted by Alex Stroup

And GC, I have no doubt at all that they are trying to find out who leaked the information.

So why not say this as well while they lambast the NY Times? Because it plays better for the GOP to act like the NY Times is a threat to our country. Our country seems so fragile if the NY Times can bring it down with one story...

[DreadPirateRoberts]

Originally Posted by Alex Stroup

However, it is comical to watch people engage in the synchronized dance of hypocrisy

I liked this...

I'm still amazed that people reveal classified information. Back when I used to deal with it, we had the pants threatened off of us if we were to lose the information, much less release it to the public....