GOP Rep wants prosecutions on domestic spying program...

[parrot 789]

of the NY Times for reporting it.

 

Peter King (R-NY) on FoxNews:

To me, the real question here is the conduct of the New York Times by disclosing this in time of war, they have compromised America’s anti-terrorist policies. This is a very effective policy. They have compromised it. This is the second time the New York Times has done this. And to me, no one elected the New York Times to do anything. And the New York Times is putting its own arrogant elitest left wing agenda before the interests of the American people, and I’m calling on the Attorney General to begin a criminal investigation and prosecution of the New York Times — its reporters, the editors who worked on this, and the publisher. We’re in a time of war, Chris, and what they’ve done has violated the Espionage Act, the COMINT act. The time has come for the American people to realize, and the New York Times to realize, we’re at war and they can’t be on their own deciding what to declassify, what to release.

 

 

The hits just keep coming.

[wiffleball 4,679]

Yeah! And they should kill anyone who reveals the names of CIA operatives in this crucial time too!!!

[torridjoe 10]

Will King go after Santorum and Hoekstra next? I found it odd that Santorum was on Fox holding a piece of paper and shouting "It's right here in this CLASSIFIED document!"

[parrot 789]

Yeah! And they should kill anyone who reveals the names of CIA operatives in this crucial time too!!!

No that's okay, because... ah.... er... IT JUST IS!

[Strike 4,093]

Bush weighed in today too. And, apparently it hurts the war on terror for a newspaper to reveal to the American people how much their own gov't is spying on them

[Soonerman 0]

Will King go after Santorum and Hoekstra next? I found it odd that Santorum was on Fox holding a piece of paper and shouting "It's right here in this CLASSIFIED document!"

 

 

http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/fe...ml?id=110008568

 

They were reading from declassified portions of the classified document. So the answer to your question would be "no".

 

HTH

[pimptastic69 0]

Right on NY Times.

 

I'm still irked about my grandfather not being made aware of the fact that the US had cracked the Germans' code detailing troop movement back in WWII. We would all have been better off knowing that.

[Isotopes 1]

Right on NY Times.

 

I'm still irked about my grandfather not being made aware of the fact that the US had cracked the Germans' code detailing troop movement back in WWII. We would all have been better off knowing that.

 

yeah because that and DOMESTIC spying are on the same level

[wiffleball 4,679]

Most of the talk like this (like most of the rhetoric these days) is fairly stupid. Let's begin, shall we:

 

 

 

1) Those that argue (including the President) that "revealing" that the US listens in on foreign phone calls somehow broke some major secret tend to forget one small detail: The FISA act of 1978 had public hearings, the act itself is public, and we've been doing this for 30 years! (actually, longer, but FISA made it official). The reason we had the FISA hearings and subsequent act was because we were already doing this. - No one exactly broke national security by revealing that we do this.

 

2) Domestic surveillance has gone on since they invented the phone tap. Anybody who's ever watched a two-bit cop show knows this. Do we really think the terrorists didn't think this was happening? Do we think they're actually sitting around going "Gee Achmed - I didn't know they could tap our phones!" What kind of infidel technology is this?

 

3) The same thing was said about the NYT revealing the program of "renditions" - flying bad guys to countries who aren't as bashful as we are in interrogation techniques. - This is new information? Well then somebody better prosecute Tom Clancy for "revealing" this tactic 15 years ago in one of his books (can't remember which one).

 

So, with any amount of common sense, I've yet to hear HOW exactly the things that have been revealed could possibly have informed all but the most ignorant raghead of our technological abilities and survellience processes in such a way as to "tip them off".

[Soonerman 0]

yeah because that and DOMESTIC spying are on the same level

 

So then, you are pretty much ignorant about the program under discussion, I take it?

[parrot 789]

I'm sure the terrorists had no idea we were trying to follow the money trail. This must have come as quite a shock to them.

[Red White and Blue 0]

So then, you are pretty much ignorant about the program under discussion, I take it?

 

I'm not surprised you support the prosecution of media outlets that report on illegal activities by our government. Fits well with your pro-secret detention and pro-torture positions. You'd have loved Soviet Russia.

[Soonerman 0]

I'm not surprised you support the prosecution of media outlets that report on illegal activities by our government. Fits well with your pro-secret detention and pro-torture positions. You'd have loved Soviet Russia.

 

Nice fact-free post, Doh-Duh.

[Recliner Pilot 61]

Will King go after Santorum and Hoekstra next? I found it odd that Santorum was on Fox holding a piece of paper and shouting "It's right here in this CLASSIFIED document!"

 

 

Would that be the document proving Saddam had the WMDs you said he didn't have?

[wiffleball 4,679]

Would that be the document proving Saddam had the WMDs you said he didn't have?

 

Wasn't this beaten to death last week. Horse.Dead.Shoot It Again.

[pimptastic69 0]

yeah because that and DOMESTIC spying are on the same level

 

 

No good reason for that to take place.

 

‘Homegrown terrorists’ arraigned in court

[Recliner Pilot 61]

Wasn't this beaten to death last week. Horse.Dead.Shoot It Again.

 

Dunno. I wasn't here last week. How did Turbin spin it?

[parrot 789]

Would that be the document proving Saddam had the WMDs you said he didn't have?

Actually those would be the ones that torrid said would be degraded to the point of being unusable if they did still exist.

[Isotopes 1]

No good reason for that to take place.

 

‘Homegrown terrorists’ arraigned in court

There may be good reason for the program, but there should be oversight. That is the whole argument with the program. They are just ignoring FISA.

[Patriotsfatboy1 1,432]

Dunno. I wasn't here last week. How did Turbin spin it?

Torrid wasn't there either

 

The chickenhawks took a major beating. The towel was thrown in during the 4th round. It was sort of like a car wreck. I did not want to look, but I just could not avert my eyes

[Soonerman 0]

There may be good reason for the program, but there should be oversight. That is the whole argument with the program. They are just ignoring FISA.

 

Do you get dumber with every post?

 

Before you embarass yourself any further, you might want to take a minute and actually read something about this program.

[Red White and Blue 0]

Nice fact-free post, Doh-Duh.

 

Doh-Duh? I thought I was Toro or MDC? Now I'm totally confused.

 

In the years I've been at FFT you have defended to the hilt everything the administration has ever done. I'm just not shocked that you have no problem with this - it's your MO.

[Isotopes 1]

Do you get dumber with every post?

 

Before you embarass yourself any further, you might want to take a minute and actually read something about this program.

 

So you are saying that they are not eavesdropping without warrants?

[wiffleball 4,679]

So you are saying that they are not eavesdropping without warrants?

 

 

I'm going to take a WAG at why he said that. You linked to the 'homegrown' terrorists, then referenced FISA. FISA is primarily aimed at foreign intelligence gathering - not domestic terrorists acting on their own soil.

 

 

...but I'm just guessing...

[Isotopes 1]

I'm going to take a WAG at why he said that. You linked to the 'homegrown' terrorists, then referenced FISA. FISA is primarily aimed at foreign intelligence gathering - not domestic terrorists acting on their own soil.

...but I'm just guessing...

 

I didn't link to anything

 

 

But they are justifying the domestic spying by saying that they are only listening to conversation that are made with someone overseas. Doesn't that fall under FISA?

[wiffleball 4,679]

I didn't link to anything

 

Okay, YOUR post included a link from ANOTHER person who DID link to HomeGrown Terrorists. Then you went on to reference FISA in the same post.

 

...better?....

[Soonerman 0]

So you are saying that they are not eavesdropping without warrants?

 

No, I'm saying that what Peter King wants the NYT prosecuted for (you know, the topic of this thread) has nothing to do with "domestic spying" or FISA, and there is oversight of the program. Other than that, you are without error.

[parrot 789]

No, I'm saying that what Peter King wants the NYT prosecuted for (you know, the topic of this thread) has nothing to do with "domestic spying" or FISA, and there is oversight of the program. Other than that, you are without error.

Domestic spying was my choice of words, and maybe not the best, but you're really just dragging around a red herring. King wants to prosecute the NY Times for factual reporting of certain activities of our government. That's the point, and that's pretty scary.

[torridjoe 10]

http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/fe...ml?id=110008568

 

They were reading from declassified portions of the classified document. So the answer to your question would be "no".

 

HTH

 

...material which was declassified at Santorum's request, for political gain. Just because you have the power to get classified material unclassified for you, doesn't mean you're not publicizing classified information.

 

The administration and GOP long ago lost any moral high ground when it comes to leaking classified information.

[Soonerman 0]

Domestic spying was my choice of words, and maybe not the best, but you're really just dragging around a red herring. King wants to prosecute the NY Times for factual reporting of certain activities of our government. That's the point, and that's pretty scary.

 

Only if you take the extremist position that there should never be any punishment for publishing any secret that strikes anyones fancy.

[torridjoe 10]

Only if you take the extremist position that there should never be any punishment for publishing any secret that strikes anyones fancy.

 

Another classic torrid malaprop. When they film the "Yogi Berra Story", you should audition. You'd be a natural.

 

you know exactly what I'm saying here. When "liberals" report on supposedly secret activities and information, it's treason. When the government does it, it's just passing along stuff we need to know.

[wiffleball 4,679]

Just because you have the power to get classified material unclassified for you, doesn't mean you're not publicizing classified information.

 

 

 

in other words: Just because you're reading unclassified information, doesn't mean you're not reading classified materials.

 

 

 

Sorry, I know (and agree with what you're saying) just had to. Missed the illegal immigrant discussion...

[Soonerman 0]

...material which was declassified at Santorum's request, for political gain. Just because you have the power to get classified material unclassified for you, doesn't mean you're not publicizing classified information.

 

 

Another classic torrid malaprop. When they film the "Yogi Berra Story", you should audition. You'd be a natural.

[parrot 789]

Only if you take the extremist position that there should never be any punishment for publishing any secret that strikes anyones fancy.

Following up the red herring with a lovely straw-man. Well played.

 

Whatever you do, don't debate the merits of this actual case, be sure and jump directly to gross generalizations and absolutes.

[Soonerman 0]

Following up the red herring with a lovely straw-man. Well played.

 

Whatever you do, don't debate the merits of this actual case, be sure and jump directly to gross generalizations and absolutes.

 

What's to debate? No illegality is alleged. There is congressional oversight. The program has been useful in finding terrorists. There was no conceivable reason to publish this story, except pique against the Bush admin, for which the American people might pay the price.

[parrot 789]

What's to debate? No illegality is alleged. There is congressional oversight. The program has been useful in finding terrorists. There was no conceivable reason to publish this story, except pique against the Bush admin, for which the American people might pay the price.

What is to debate is whether the reporting of it comes close to meeting the definition of treason or whether GOP assbags are now just throwing around this accusation like it's jaywalking to smear anyone who dares question them or disagree with them.

[Soonerman 0]

What is to debate is whether the reporting of it comes close to meeting the definition of treason or whether GOP assbags are now just throwing around this accusation like it's jaywalking to smear anyone who dares question them or disagree with them.

 

So let's put them on trial, and let a court decide if they violated the Espionage Act.

 

You, me, and Rep. King can argue all day about it, but the only way to be sure is bring charges.

[Uh-huh 0]

Nice fact-free post, Doh-Duh.

Wrong again, Soonerpuppy.

[fastfish 0]

What's to debate? No illegality is alleged. There is congressional oversight. The program has been useful in finding terrorists. There was no conceivable reason to publish this story, except pique against the Bush admin, for which the American people might pay the price.

 

This is the ONLY point worth talking about. The "public's right to know" does not mean "the enemy's right to also know" Americans understand this but libs don't.

 

See ya at polls in November Dem-losers...and if, God forbid, America is attacked between now and then, the NYT folk had better have their passports to Canada in order 'cause the lynch mob will rightly be surrounding their building.

[parrot 789]

So let's put them on trial, and let a court decide if they violated the Espionage Act.

 

You, me, and Rep. King can argue all day about it, but the only way to be sure is bring charges.

Right after they bring charges against Rove, I'm all for it.