Well it ain't covert anymore

Well it ain't covert anymore (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

TheHeretic -> Well it ain't covert anymore (1/10/2009 8:48:33 PM)
You won't find many people more pro free speech/expression than I am, but I also believe there needs to be a bit of sense involved. I just read this article... http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090111/ap_on_go_pr_wh/us_israel ... where, once again, the New York Times has decided to sabotage the efforts of this country to deal with national security threats. WTF? In a free society, with freedom of the press, how do we address this kind of idiocy?

slaveboyforyou -> RE: Well it ain't covert anymore (1/10/2009 9:08:06 PM)
quote: In a free society, with freedom of the press, how do we address this kind of idiocy? Don't buy the New York Times, don't buy advertising space in the New York Times, and try to influence other to do the same. Other than that, I don't see what you can do. I certainly don't want the government deciding what the press can and can't report. It's a slippery slope that we don't want to go down.

Sanity -> RE: Well it ain't covert anymore (1/10/2009 9:11:47 PM)
Iran needs nuclear power to meet its energy requirements, Rich. Don't you know nothin'?

Owner59 -> RE: Well it ain't covert anymore (1/10/2009 10:04:01 PM)
Ever since the Times helped cheney-bush lie us into invading Iraq,I have little use for them.Maybe as a doormat wipe or litter paper for the dogs.

Musicmystery -> RE: Well it ain't covert anymore (1/10/2009 10:19:11 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic You won't find many people more pro free speech/expression than I am, but I also believe there needs to be a bit of sense involved. I just read this article... http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090111/ap_on_go_pr_wh/us_israel ... where, once again, the New York Times has decided to sabotage the efforts of this country to deal with national security threats. WTF? In a free society, with freedom of the press, how do we address this kind of idiocy? On the other hand, 1) it wasn't very "covert" if the Times got ahold of it--maybe we should work on that 2) Bush/Cheney (and past administrations) have been known to strategically "leak" information I don't think this will bring down the Free World--but if it does, then the Times won't be allowed to do this anymore. I say keep the Free Press. Even the bad ones.

Lorr47 -> RE: Well it ain't covert anymore (1/11/2009 3:54:09 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic You won't find many people more pro free speech/expression than I am, but I also believe there needs to be a bit of sense involved. I just read this article... http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090111/ap_on_go_pr_wh/us_israel ... where, once again, the New York Times has decided to sabotage the efforts of this country to deal with national security threats. WTF? In a free society, with freedom of the press, how do we address this kind of idiocy? Didn't Scooter and Cheney set the standard when they started broadcasting the names of CIA operatives?

Termyn8or -> RE: Well it ain't covert anymore (1/11/2009 4:15:10 AM)
Israel bugging Bush to bomb Iran and Bush does the right thing for once ? Or do you want another war ? Would you be happier if this was top secret and not leaked, and we started another war for fucking nothing before we are even finished with the one we have ? Do you wipe your ass with the AFP because of their anti abortion stance, even though time and time again they are proven right on political issues ? You know Ron Paul writes for the AFP. Reporting the fact that a foreign (almost) country is trying to get us into another war is not quite undermining our defense efforts. T

Lorr47 -> RE: Well it ain't covert anymore (1/11/2009 4:29:07 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Termyn8or Israel bugging Bush to bomb Iran and Bush does the right thing for once ? Or do you want another war ? Would you be happier if this was top secret and not leaked, and we started another war for fucking nothing before we are even finished with the one we have ? Do you wipe your ass with the AFP because of their anti abortion stance, even though time and time again they are proven right on political issues ? You know Ron Paul writes for the AFP. Reporting the fact that a foreign (almost) country is trying to get us into another war is not quite undermining our defense efforts. T Since I agree with most of what you said, I think you are replying to the wrong person. However, I will wipe my ass with any document published a by anti Choice organization.

Termyn8or -> RE: Well it ain't covert anymore (1/11/2009 4:48:00 AM)
I've never tampered with the"reply to" thing. As far as the AFP, go ahead and throw the baby out with the bathwater if you choose, I choose not to, each article is taken on it's own merit. T

corysub -> RE: Well it ain't covert anymore (1/11/2009 5:36:45 AM)
The New York Times is bankrupt financially and bankrupt as a corporate citizen of the United States. To sell a few more papers...and only a few...by generating controversy seems to be the mantra of this once proud institution. Does it make our lives any better by exposing the work of our intelligent agencies, particularly when it involves a covert action against a country that would like nothing better than destroying our way of life? Men and women are risking their lives every day for us in ways we will never, and should never, know about, but the Times with their extreme hatred for George Bush would publish anything if it serves their needs. I guess they can't come up with news that's fit to print and should change their masthead. Where is the FBI investigation in these matters? I thought they were charged with protecting the domestic secrets that could endanger our agents and the country itself. Historians will look back on the ancient democracy that was once America in five hundred years and wonder what were citizens thinking to allow their country's secrets to be so easily compromised by a newspaper and the media in general.

Termyn8or -> RE: Well it ain't covert anymore (1/11/2009 5:47:52 AM)
Who said this was secret ? T

Sanity -> RE: Well it ain't covert anymore (1/11/2009 6:30:21 AM)
I guess that if you read the New York Times you wouldn't have any way of knowing that neither Scooter Libby nor Dick Cheney had anything to do with "broadcasting" Valerie Plame's status as a desk jockey with the CIA. If you wanted to know "who done it" you would have to go to a reputable news source... like perhaps, CBS: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/09/07/eveningnews/main1981433.shtml quote: ORIGINAL: Lorr47 Didn't Scooter and Cheney set the standard when they started broadcasting the names of CIA operatives?

Owner59 -> RE: Well it ain't covert anymore (1/11/2009 7:14:54 AM)
He was just one of many who leaked her name. Funny,I never saw Armitage go of trial or needing a presidential pardon. The bushies are not off the hook.The neo-conservatives own this. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Personally,I`m on the edge of my seat waiting to see who bush pardons and how he does it. Will he pardon people for crimes not yet charged or investigated? Will he give blaket pardons covering all and any un-named crimes and violations of law?A "get out of jail for anything,whatever that might be card"?lol And very anxious to see if he pardons himself. ~~~~"Oh what a wicked web we weave when first we practice to deceive"~~~~ And just when folks were forgetting/forgiving tricky Nixon,lol,now this guy bush goes and kills the republican brand for another 30 years.

Sanity -> RE: Well it ain't covert anymore (1/11/2009 7:45:14 AM)
Do you really believe that, or do you just think you're fooling someone who may be reading this? I'm curious because whether you're aware of it or not, it only takes a few mouse clicks to establish that you pull all of your arguments out of thin air, and that there is absolutely no foundation for any of them.

CatdeMedici -> RE: Well it ain't covert anymore (1/11/2009 7:51:26 AM)
Information is leaked to the press for a reason---to stir or quiet public interest. Any rag worth its salt sleeps with someone to get "the scoop".

kittinSol -> RE: Well it ain't covert anymore (1/11/2009 10:21:19 AM)
Why don't you explain the reason for your indignation, instead of trying to be all cryptic?

Owner59 -> RE: Well it ain't covert anymore (1/11/2009 10:29:24 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Sanity Do you really believe that, or do you just think you're fooling someone who may be reading this? I'm curious because whether you're aware of it or not, it only takes a few mouse clicks to establish that you pull all of your arguments out of thin air, and that there is absolutely no foundation for any of them. There was a day when republicans would have been calling for the heads and blood of anyone even remotely involved in destroying the cover of a field agent, during a time of war. Now the chief of staff for dick cheney(no doubt under the direction of his boss) is committing those crimes. Why was "Scooter" investigated and what crime was he convicted of obstructing justice over? There was time when republicans would never have dreamed of apologizing for treason.

TheHeretic -> RE: Well it ain't covert anymore (1/11/2009 4:14:37 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kittinSol Why don't you explain the reason for your indignation, instead of trying to be all cryptic? If you need an explanation, Kitten, you probably aren't going to comprehend anyway. Nor are those incapable of rising above partisan hackery to answer the simplest of questions about their philosophy. I'm going to try and make this very simple. A nuclear Iran would be a bad thing. That is the official position of our government, and I fully agree with that position. According to the article, Israel asked us for help in blowing the shit up (a military act), and we said no. The story goes on to discuss covert programs by our government to prevent an Iranian Bomb by means of espionage/sabotage (a non-military act). You know what, Kitten? It isn't up to me to explain my indigation. Please explain to me where you might have forgotten your own? I want to know why this doesn't bother you. Think about this for a moment, instead of just having a snark reflex to my avatar. You should be a little ticked, if the values you proclaim in these forums actually play a role in your worldview. Maybe the Iranians thought we had something to do with the facility problems. Now they know. It was in the Allah-Be-Praised New York Times! How many electricians and technicians are wishing, this very minute, that they had the protections of Guantanamo Bay? You think imprisonment and torture are bad, don't you? Far worse, Kitten, and you really should care about this a whole lot, confirming such a program makes it a lot less likely the non-military option will work. Are you thinking a U.S. bombing strike in Iran would be better than a non-violent option? Do you think going to war with Iran is a good outcome? Why aren't you upset with the Times for doing something that could make war more likely? Or do you only think war is bad when it suits your prejudices?

Termyn8or -> RE: Well it ain't covert anymore (1/11/2009 4:19:52 PM)
If you can quit bickering for a moment ....... (Gawd they're like children aren't they XI) Interestingly, this story just appeared in the local newspaper today, and on the front page no less. The paper is called the Cleveland Plain Dealer and is the largest in NE Ohio. Fucking rag, morally and financially bankrupt is it ? I guessed so years ago, but for some reason........just never brought it up. So just keep throwing out the baby with the bathwater, or the chicken with the feathers if you prefer a different analogy. <sarcasm>I'm sure you'll be well informed.</sarcasm>. T

kittinSol -> RE: Well it ain't covert anymore (1/11/2009 4:36:38 PM)
If you can show me that the Times somehow went over their journalistic duty and published something they shouldn't have, I might start sharing your indignation. If, like I suspect, this story was the result of a leak, or even somehow sanctioned by the White House, I will continue to believe that your indignation is a reflex at the source of the news... and that you just wanted an excuse to bash the NYT (my very FAVE sunday paper, incidentally ;-) . It's a treat, with a long leisurely brunch.)

Page: [1] 2 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.03125