U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 1.5 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Jump to a detailed profile or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Business Search - 14 Million verified businesses
Search for:  near: 
 
 
Old 05-28-2013, 11:48 AM
 
Location: The Lakes Region
2,660 posts, read 2,371,529 times
Reputation: 1948

Advertisements

Obama says he has to balance protecting sensitive information against the
1st. Ammendment and that is why Eric Holder can OK bogus search warrants
to tap phones of news agencies and reporters.

Today, the Pentagon reports that China has hacked into some of the US's top
defense weaponry systems iincluding the trillion dollar F-35 Fighter Plane.

If Obama focused half the energy he uses on witch hunting the press towards
stopping computer hacking by the real enemies - China & Russia, maybe
our country could be a lot safer.
Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-28-2013, 11:53 AM
 
Location: Pine Grove,AL
10,095 posts, read 2,736,418 times
Reputation: 1539
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pawporri View Post
Obama says he has to balance protecting sensitive information against the
1st. Ammendment and that is why Eric Holder can OK bogus search warrants
to tap phones of news agencies and reporters.

Today, the Pentagon reports that China has hacked into some of the US's top
defense weaponry systems iincluding the trillion dollar F-35 Fighter Plane.

If Obama focused half the energy he uses on witch hunting the press towards
stopping computer hacking by the real enemies - China & Russia, maybe
our country could be a lot safer.
not sure how you were able to calculate the amount of energy he took up to do this, but none of those searches were bogus, you may not agree with them, but they werent bogus, and the press does not have(and never has had) the freedom to receive classified information. That is illegal and they know they will face jail time along with the person who actually leaked it. They write articles claiming it is their "right as free press" to do it when it never was. They are trying to sway public opinion and some times it works, other times, not so much.

Further more, in the OP, you are arguing a consequence vs an unrelated action. for your comment to make any says, you need to be comparing action vs action or consequence vs consequence, Although, i doubt you will hear about us cyber attacking China back unless it is leaked.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-28-2013, 12:13 PM
 
16,201 posts, read 5,603,080 times
Reputation: 3968
Quote:
Originally Posted by dsjj251 View Post
not sure how you were able to calculate the amount of energy he took up to do this, but none of those searches were bogus, you may not agree with them, but they werent bogus, and the press does not have(and never has had) the freedom to receive classified information. That is illegal and they know they will face jail time along with the person who actually leaked it. They write articles claiming it is their "right as free press" to do it when it never was. They are trying to sway public opinion and some times it works, other times, not so much.

Further more, in the OP, you are arguing a consequence vs an unrelated action. for your comment to make any says, you need to be comparing action vs action or consequence vs consequence, Although, i doubt you will hear about us cyber attacking China back unless it is leaked.
I bet you any amount of money that if I search your post history, you would be here defending Assange, Manning and WikiLeaks. Am I right?
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-28-2013, 12:17 PM
 
Location: The Brat Stop
8,358 posts, read 2,251,053 times
Reputation: 2279
Quote:
Originally Posted by SourD View Post
I bet you any amount of money that if I search your post history, you would be here defending Assange, Manning and WikiLeaks. Am I right?
Is that you Willard?
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-28-2013, 02:02 PM
 
Location: Ohio
10,911 posts, read 6,118,745 times
Reputation: 6167
Quote:
Originally Posted by dsjj251 View Post
... the freedom to receive classified information....
The fact that information was "classified" does not mean that it ought to be classified, or that it actually is classified.

The government often acts in an incredibly prejudicial manner, preferring to cover-up and hide its failures, by classifying things that are not matters of National Security as matters of National Security.

I have repeatedly given numerous examples.

How about the Tuskegee Study? It was a matter of National Security that Americans not be told Black Men underwent immoral and unethical studies on STDs, without their knowledge, without their consent, and without any compensation? National Security.....really? No, it was a matter of National Embarrassment.

How about the illegal radiation experiments conducted at Cincinnati General Hospital --- now University [of Cincinnati[ Hospital? More than 89 people were murdered without their knowledge or consent or any compensation, and all in the name of The Cold War. National Security.....really? No, it was a matter of National Embarrassment.

How about the test shots in the Nevada desert? People flocked to Vegas and Reno to sit atop hotel roofs and party while watching the test shots......and the government claimed the mere fact that it conducted such tests is National Security.....really? No, it was a matter of National Embarrassment. The government did not want to pay VA Disabilty claims to veterans, nor did it want to pay compensation to residents of New Jersey who were harmed....killed....by the radioactive fallout (but the government warned businesses....like Eastman-Kodak).

How about Desert Storm? Gosh, three months ago the government finally told me what I had already known for 22 years, that a great number of troops were exposed to chemical weapons.....including chemical weapons purchased from the United States. National Security.....really? No, it was a matter of National Embarrassment.

How about the Pentagon Papers? National Security.....really? No, it was a matter of National Embarrassment.

And Wikileaks? Oh, yeah, god forbid the Boy King Nobel Peace Prize Winning Big Eared Galoot get caught illegally overthrowing the Honduran government....something the US has done 14 times in the last 100 years. National Security.....really? No, it was a matter of National Embarrassment.

"Classified Information" is a matter for courts to decide....as with the Pentagon Papers....where classified documents did not need to be classified at all, since they had absolutely nothing to do with National Security and everything to do with sparing the government public embarrassment.

Rational people, like Bradley Manning, are perfectly capable of making the distinction between National Security and National Embarrassment.

Classifying...

Mircea
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-28-2013, 03:16 PM
 
Location: The Lakes Region
2,660 posts, read 2,371,529 times
Reputation: 1948
Quote:
Ouote: Mircea

How about the test shots in the Nevada desert? People flocked to Vegas and Reno to sit atop hotel roofs and party while watching the test shots......and the government claimed the mere fact that it conducted such tests is National Security.....really? No, it was a matter of National Embarrassment. The government did not want to pay VA Disabilty claims to veterans, nor did it want to pay compensation to residents of New Jersey who were harmed....killed....by the radioactive fallout (but the government warned businesses....like Eastman-Kodak).
Newest scam is to give Bad Conduct or Dishonorable Discharges so the VA won't have to even treat returning soldiers for their combat wounds.

As far as illegal wiretaps, we are supposed to believe the lying AG, Holder, that he signed a search
warrant that he forgot he signed. Ummmm. I know, lets allow him to investigate himself, that way we will know for sure that he is as pure as the driven snow.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-28-2013, 03:17 PM
 
8,458 posts, read 2,794,032 times
Reputation: 1080
A new version of the shield laws appears to be in the works.
Free Flow of Information Act of 2013 (H.R. 1962) - GovTrack.us


I think people should pay attention to this and the implications. Here is what I found from an earlier discussion on the 2009 version mentioned in a headline that the President wanted reintroduced.

Quote CDusr :

Version Word Count Changes From Previous Version Percent Change
Introduced in Senate 1,580 n/a n/a
Reported in Senate 4,851 101 Show Changes 75%
S.448: Free Flow of Information Act of 2009 - U.S. Congress ...

Here is an earlier "discussion" to this bill originally. Have seen some papers also. Interesting. The bill also mentions sex offences against minors, disclosure agreements, communication service providers and quite a few other things. So it seems worth reviewing to see implications.

Hanging citizen journalists out to dry: shield-law amendment excludes unpaid bloggers | The Bilerico Project

quote:
So there's no doubt that independent bloggers are the target here. At once we're considered irrelevant and so dangerous they have to legislatively set up a slippery slope that can land us in the clink or left penniless just for trying to participate in citizen journalism. Wow. The real issue here, however, is less the shield law than placing a definition of what is a journalist on the books. That will alllow pols, news outlets, state governments, etc. to deny citizen journalists press access because they are not "journalists" as defined by federal law.


why is the federal government getting into the business of regulating journalism to begin with? Surely there are Constitutional issues at play here. But that's a different topic worthy of debate...


Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-28-2013, 03:59 PM
 
Location: Northeast Kansas
1,345 posts, read 374,491 times
Reputation: 323
It is NOT the responsibility of the press to prevent national security items from being released unless they possess the needed security clearance and training to handle or be in the possession of classified materials. The breach did NOT occur from the reporter who had no security clearance or training. The breach came from the individual that released that information to the reporter.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-28-2013, 04:00 PM
 
29,210 posts, read 11,825,079 times
Reputation: 7746
Quote:
Originally Posted by dsjj251 View Post
not sure how you were able to calculate the amount of energy he took up to do this, but none of those searches were bogus, you may not agree with them, but they werent bogus, and the press does not have(and never has had) the freedom to receive classified information. That is illegal and they know they will face jail time along with the person who actually leaked it. They write articles claiming it is their "right as free press" to do it when it never was. They are trying to sway public opinion and some times it works, other times, not so much.

Further more, in the OP, you are arguing a consequence vs an unrelated action. for your comment to make any says, you need to be comparing action vs action or consequence vs consequence, Although, i doubt you will hear about us cyber attacking China back unless it is leaked.
I believe it is the right of a free press to receive information, classified or not, and to make that information available to the public. Rights are rights. Sometimes when you exercise a right, there is a consequence to your choice. And so the right of free press to break the law doesn't mean that the lawbreakers are exempt from the consequences of breaking that law. They aren't. They have a choice.

The administration has a responsibility to find the source of information leaks, because protecting information can often be connoted to protecting the public. Certain information needs to be controlled. The government has a say in what information needs to be controlled, and the press, when privy to that information, has a say as well. The government will often stretch its control of confidential information. The press pulls in the opposite direction.

It's about striking a balance. Our government is about balance. And there is a reason the press is called the Fourth Estate. There has to be tension in order to have a balance.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-28-2013, 04:19 PM
 
11,078 posts, read 2,859,954 times
Reputation: 2869
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pawporri View Post
Obama says he has to balance protecting sensitive information against the
1st. Ammendment and that is why Eric Holder can OK bogus search warrants
to tap phones of news agencies and reporters.

Today, the Pentagon reports that China has hacked into some of the US's top
defense weaponry systems iincluding the trillion dollar F-35 Fighter Plane.

If Obama focused half the energy he uses on witch hunting the press towards
stopping computer hacking by the real enemies - China & Russia, maybe
our country could be a lot safer.
The most damaging security leaks come from Obama's own administration, and they all went unpunished. Obama is all about punishing his Republican enemies, if the Chinese ever presented a political challenge to Democrats winning elections, then he would be all over them.
Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


 
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:
Over $84,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2014, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25 - Top