View Full Version : In my opinoin...N.Y. Times are terrorists
06-26-2006, 12:57 AM
New York Times Refuses to Hold Surveillance Story
Rep. King Seeks Charges Against Papers Over Terror Reporting
I think these guys need to be lined up in NYC and beaten to death on live t.v.
:beat: :beat: :beat: :beat: :beat: :beat: :beat: :beat: :beat: :beat:
06-26-2006, 01:00 AM
Not terrorists...but traitors.
06-26-2006, 01:01 AM
I think they are both.
06-26-2006, 01:02 AM
Wow, that was a bloody fast response. chuckle...
06-26-2006, 01:04 AM
yeah the only time I can be on the computer without yelling at the kids :)
06-26-2006, 01:06 AM
can't you do both?
06-26-2006, 01:07 AM
Yeah, but then I get a headache.
06-27-2006, 10:26 PM
WMDs found in New York. Weapons of Mass Deception
06-27-2006, 10:32 PM
The NY Times and the political left in this country have taken sides and they have sided with AlQueda.
Find out who the advertisers are and let them know how you feel. Hit the Times in the bank account!
06-27-2006, 10:35 PM
Welcome to the forum Turtle.
06-29-2006, 10:51 PM
I guess I am the enemy *sigh*. I say that because I don't think that the NYT, Wall Street Journal and the LAT did anything wrong by publishing a story that was leaked to them. It isn't like they broke into an office and stole documents marked 'Top Secret." Nope, they were leaked a story from within the ranks of the U.S. Government about a program that isn't a huge secret to begin with. Maybe the details of how things got done were a little on the DL, but does it surpise anyone that the U.S. Government, with the help of companies outside of the United States, were tracking money as it changes hands, or is gathering information about individuals as they exchange goods? Heck, your bank does it. Safeway, and any other store that has "membership" cards does it. data mining is nothing new, and I don't think that it is a rebellious or treasonous act for a news outlet to publish the news, expecially when the Government evidently knew that they were going to publish.
From the Houston chronicle
I think the reaction by the president and other politicians to this was a little dramatic and overblown - nothing more than a childish attempt (albeit a semi-successful attempt) at garnering attention and diverting attention away from other, more important issues (I'll leave it to others to figure out what was going on between the 23rd of June and now).
06-30-2006, 08:21 AM
Letting secrets out gets people killed.
Loose lips sink ships is not quaint old saying. In WWII newspapers found out secrets and never published them.
The big dirty pile of stinking crap is that these leaks are not done for the greater good, but by political hacks in the state dept. left over from liberal administrations who will say or do anything to hurt the current Preasident
06-30-2006, 10:59 AM
It is simple to me, a secret is a secret. Expose the secret and potentially help the enemy.
All three newspapers and the perp need to be investigated, and prosecuted. The leak er is for sure a traitor as is, IMO, the newspapers that encourage and support this behavior.
Aiding the enemy, is aiding the enemy. A secret operation which was helping to gain information which would help protect our troops was made public. The enemy reads newspapers also. Enough said.
06-30-2006, 07:02 PM
The NYT, Wall Street Journal and the LAT are suppose to know the difference between right and wrong. IMO theY did it out of spite and hatefulness and no regard to the safety of our troops and our coUntry. Whom ever leaked it as well as these idiots should be tried and convicted of TREASON
06-30-2006, 07:28 PM
I'm not suprised at all by the NYT or LAT but the WSJ is usually better than that
07-01-2006, 01:55 AM
I just wish all the media would stop with putting all our secrets out in the open.
We all know from the past, that the news media knows more about how to fight a war than the military. They know more about medicine than the doctors. I wonder how many people have died because of injuries in war situations or medical situations because of the media?
07-03-2006, 06:22 PM
During 1989, a major environmental and health risk issue, the spraying of Alar on apples, created a furor among the American people. After hearing charges from the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) that eating Alar-laden apples significantly increased a child's risk of developing cancer, numbers of school districts dropped apples from their menus and parents poured apple juice down the drains. Apple sales plummeted. The NRDC's charges, which were disseminated by a well-planned and effective public relations campaign, brought counter-charges from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, which accused the NRDC of basing its study on poor data, among other things. The core of the dispute was in the risk figures and risk interpretations being used by each organization.
vBulletin v3.0.12, Copyright ©2000-2007, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.