for Gun Ownership
I Have Ever Read
What a fantastic job "Existing Thing" did here! A great read you'll be sending to your friends.
and now hijacked by imported Liberals. This is the product of a self-imposed duty to continue to speak my Traditionalist Values
despite the Left's proliferation, procreation and perpetual regurgitation."
were once revered. Proudly clinging to my guns. Proudly singing to my God."
It's an unusual and powerful thing, this freedom that our founders gave to the press. Who are the editors of The New York Times (or the Wall Street Journal, Los Angeles Times, Washington Post and other publications that also ran the banking story) to disregard the wishes of the President and his appointees? And yet the people who invented this country saw an aggressive, independent press as a protective measure against the abuse of power in a democracy, and an essential ingredient for self-government. They rejected the idea that it is wise, or patriotic, to always take the President at his word, or to surrender to the government important decisions about what to publish.What does publishing this information have to do with taking the President at his word? Keller is wrapping himself in the First Amendment because his only argument in favor of publishing this information is simply that he can.
A secondary argument against publishing the banking story was that publication would lead terrorists to change tactics. But that argument was made in a half-hearted way.
So, in other words, the Times decided to put vital national security secrets on the front page because the people charged with protecting the public from terrorist attack didn't bend down and kiss the ring of the Times quite vigorously enough. They only did so half-heartedly.
What I'm struggling to figure out is, if you as a private citizen came into the exact same information that the Times eventually published, but instead of publishing it, you passed it along to an al Qaeda operative in a dark alley somewhere, you would be guilty of treason and could be executed.
Yet, Bill Keller seems to think that "freedom of the press" amounts to one huge legal exemption--the espionage laws do not apply to him!--and by being chosen by a handful of old-money New Yorkers to edit a newspaper, he is somehow in better position to decide what is in the public interest than the government officials that we the people elected to act on our behalf.
We've already seen in previous cases that The New York Times believes that it should never have to disclose its sources in court. And now we see that the Times believes that it should be allowed to publish information that could get you executed if you passed it on in private. That's one hell of a loophole!
Why run the risk of going to jail or even being executed for passing along classified information to our enemies? Just start a newspaper, and have all your informants send along whatever secrets they uncover. If you publish it, you're above the law. After all, you're a journalist. And if you get dragged into court, just refuse to give up your sources. Again, you're a journalist; laws are for commoners.
But why even bother going through the trouble of starting a newspaper? The New York Times already provides this service today.
I don't mean to argue that reporters should be jailed for this sort of reporting as a matter of course. But the fact that the Times continues to act in such an irresponsible manner, jeopardizing the non-military portion of the war at the same time that it criticizes every use of our military, makes it all the more likely that reporters in the future will be hauled into court for breaking similar stories.
I think the public realizes that the Times crossed a line here. But to Bill Keller, there seems to be no line at all. He sees his press freedoms as an absolute, without any countervailing responsibilities.
While he applauds reporters for being "a protective measure against the abuse of power in a democracy", he fails to address an important question: Where is the check against Bill Keller? Where is the check against the press? I don't remember getting to vote for any newspaper editors, and nobody else I know does, either. And yet they have the power to change the future by making it more likely that terrorists can move throughout the world without detection.
The ultimate check against the press would be to enforce our espionage laws against reporters who expose classified information to the entire world. Prosecuting journalists is a very dangerous road for a democracy to go down, and one that could easily be abused by the government. But journalists are not a separate class exempt from the law, and they would be wise not to test the patience of the public. Another story like this, and I think the backlash against the Times will be severe. People will call for prosecutions, and bendy politicians, sensing the mood of the public, will gladly oblige, regardless of the consequences.
And if reporters end up in jail, they may have Bill Keller to thank.By Evan Coyne Maloney
Evan Coyne Maloney is a political commentator based in New York City. More of his work can be found on the website Brain Terminal.
I could extend the list down the page...
While I sure as hell am thankful it is not President John F'n Kerry in there, I am not without major criticism of how Jorge has allowed this PC disease to encroach upon effective and complete execution of this most important of wars since we gained our sovereignty.
And neither does it make any sense in the case of the traitors at the NYT's.
Enforce the law, do what is right and regain the traditional American BALLS!
My belief is that we, first and foremost, go after the LEAKERS of this secret information. Prosecute them and use the "journalists" at the NYT's as first squealers, then witnesses. Any resistance from them to participate in the prosecution of the leakers makes them accessories to the crimes. Then you can add those charges to the crimes of being active and willing conduits to dissemination of the secret info worldwide.
The NYT's actions embolden the terrorists and become evidence to enable them as they indoctrinate more evil animals into their Jihad through creation of more films and propaganda. (The cacophony of laughter roaring out of the caves is deafening!) Unlike Liberals, the terrorists don't ignore nor forget a history of actions!
For us to respond otherwise is to cow tow to actual terrorist support from within our very own borders.
Now what President and Congress could be trusted further if such was to be allowed to occur and continue?
They have sold out their own country once again for the hopeful opportunity of some sort of journalistic achievement award. A proven, formerly functional and LEGAL program (by their own reporting) has now been made public despite repeated requests by the administration to keep it quiet.
Their thinly veiled attempts to explain their actions as "in the public interest" are empty and hollow.
LOOK! Do you see it, too??
The Emperor has NO CLOTHES!
Despicable... and astonishingly dangerous!
Well, after getting my comment status "banned" from one of the more popular blogs, I have decided to create a forum wherein I can freely post my views without that continued risk. It seems that a multitude of these posting forums are only interested in views which reinforce their own... and in words that they insist to be sanitary, canned and pre-packaged.
I will enable and invite comments here. I will never require anyone to agree with me, although I will expect arguments to be based in fact and please abstain from only personal insults (throw some substance in there, too... OK?).
That does not mean you cannot insult me, nor does it mean that I won't reciprocate. It simply means that I require some foundation stemming from history and actual occurrence when you wish to attempt to negate my views and statements.
I appreciate emphasis and heartfelt emotion in expression of your views (contrary to the sometimes popular opinion of us as "unfeeling, mean-spirited" Conservatives perhaps?). Therefore, I will tolerate some occasional use of profanity. I will not tolerate nothing but profanity, nor will I allow any blasphemy... whether you believe in God or not.
I will remove any comments which, in my opinion, deviate from the above basic rules.
I don't have endless amounts of time... actually, very little. I am a Landlord, a Sole Proprietor of a separate business, a devoted husband, a good friend to worthy people and a dedicated enthusiast to the pursuit of LIFE. I will post here as a self imposed duty to speak my mind and, secondarily, as a recreation. I am a politically active Conservative, I write my Congressional members and I always vote.
That's it. Sparse, yet firm, rules to allow as much freedom for you to respond as I feel is reasonable. Post your words as you wish...