So much for the Plame outing - Page 2

Nephythys · 08-30-2006, 08:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by innerSpaceman

Oh, I don't think dead horse. That Armitage is finally confirmed as the source of the Novak leak is indeed fresh news ... and does indeed change the nature of what we Libs thought was going on.

Not 100%, mind you, because the V.P.'s office was still clearly involved in other leaks that, just because they weren't first, does not make them legal.

But I'll freely admit the nefarious conspiracy theories have not proved to play out according to our most salacious imaginings.

wow-did not expect this.

Nephythys · 08-30-2006, 08:00 AM

no- it's only a dead horse now that it did not yield the revelation of some evil intent in the administration.

scaeagles · 08-30-2006, 05:34 PM

No one to blame? It was Armitage. I'm not sure I follow you.

Motorboat Cruiser · 08-31-2006, 12:10 AM

Pardon me if I'm not so quick to put all of the blame on Armitage. Last I heard, he wasn't one of Matthew Cooper's sources. Rove and Libby were. Perhaps it's all just a big happy misunderstanding but, until I hear otherwise from someone a little less partisan than Christoper Hitchens, a self avowed neocon, I'm going to remain suspicious that perhaps we haven't heard the whole story yet.

wendybeth · 08-31-2006, 12:12 AM

I do find the self-righteous indignation very entertaining, considering so many of the neo's found this (originally) not worth discussing. Suddenly, y'all want to talk. I'm with MBC- watchful waiting here.

scaeagles · 08-31-2006, 05:24 AM

I still don't think it is a big story - regarding the supposed outing of Plame. The big story is that it certainly seems as if the conspiracy theory developed of revenge for a so-called (but laughable) investigation of Iraq seeking uranium is not true. And so many wanted it to be true.

Sub la Goon · 08-31-2006, 06:08 AM

I still think Novak should be charged with treason.

scaeagles · 08-31-2006, 06:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sub la Goon

I still think Novak should be charged with treason.

An interesting point.

I have oft pondered what is the appropriate balance between freedom of the press and classified or sensitive information. Is the job of the journalist to report everything they discover (without specific requests from the government to hold a story, as happens on occasion)? Or is there a responsibility to reflect on the ramifications of reporting certain things?

innerSpaceman · 08-31-2006, 07:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by scaeagles

The big story is that it certainly seems as if the conspiracy theory developed of revenge for a so-called (but laughable) investigation of Iraq seeking uranium is not true. And so many wanted it to be true.

Hold on a minute there. The Armitage leak does not make the Libby leak somehow 'go away.' What were the motives of the vice-president's office? (oh, and the Niger documents were rank forgeries, according to British, Italian, Israeli and American investigators ... so where are you getting any of your facts if not from conservative spin rags?)

As for whether journalists have a responsibility to consider the ramifications of publishing sensitive information ... certainly, they do. They fail at it quite often. But in a free society, I'm much more comfortable with that responsibility being in the hands of journalists rather than in the fists of government. The misjudgments and mistakes have to be accepted as part and parcel of the freedoms that protect us from fascism.

Alex · 08-31-2006, 08:31 AM

Hitchens is not the source for the story, he is responding to the story. Time (or Newsweek) broke the story. But I haven't taken the time to read that or much of the other writing on it since so I don't have an opinion yet.

08-30-2006, 08:00 AM	#2
Nephythys Yeah, that's about it- Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: In a state of constant crap to get done Posts: 2,688	no- it's only a dead horse now that it did not yield the revelation of some evil intent in the administration.
	Submit to Quotes

08-30-2006, 05:34 PM	#3
scaeagles I LIKE! Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 7,819	No one to blame? It was Armitage. I'm not sure I follow you.
	Submit to Quotes

08-31-2006, 12:10 AM	#4
Motorboat Cruiser Cruiser of Motorboats Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: So Cal Posts: 3,665	Pardon me if I'm not so quick to put all of the blame on Armitage. Last I heard, he wasn't one of Matthew Cooper's sources. Rove and Libby were. Perhaps it's all just a big happy misunderstanding but, until I hear otherwise from someone a little less partisan than Christoper Hitchens, a self avowed neocon, I'm going to remain suspicious that perhaps we haven't heard the whole story yet.
	Submit to Quotes

08-31-2006, 12:12 AM	#5
wendybeth Nevermind Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 7,847	I do find the self-righteous indignation very entertaining, considering so many of the neo's found this (originally) not worth discussing. Suddenly, y'all want to talk. I'm with MBC- watchful waiting here. __________________
	Submit to Quotes

08-31-2006, 05:24 AM	#6
scaeagles I LIKE! Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 7,819	I still don't think it is a big story - regarding the supposed outing of Plame. The big story is that it certainly seems as if the conspiracy theory developed of revenge for a so-called (but laughable) investigation of Iraq seeking uranium is not true. And so many wanted it to be true.
	Submit to Quotes

08-31-2006, 06:08 AM	#7
Sub la Goon Ride me! Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: The line forms here... Posts: 326	I still think Novak should be charged with treason. __________________ You roll the dice, you move your mice.
	Submit to Quotes

08-31-2006, 08:31 AM	#10
Alex . Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 13,354	Hitchens is not the source for the story, he is responding to the story. Time (or Newsweek) broke the story. But I haven't taken the time to read that or much of the other writing on it since so I don't have an opinion yet.
	Submit to Quotes