Prosecute New York Times

CCGirl

Resident Commie
Sep 21, 2005
9,271
563
Canada
✟27,370.00
Faith
Seeker
Marital Status
Married
Politics
CA-Others
nvxplorer said:
It's possible that Canada possesses the world's largest oil reserves in its shale fields. What does Satan have in store for Canadians? Since oil is Satan's handiwork, are we sinning by driving our cars?

In Canada, the Tar Sands (shale fields?) are considered a "Gift from God"!!:D At least most Albertans believe so!
 
Upvote 0

OhhJim

Often wrong, but never in doubt
Aug 19, 2004
4,483
287
66
Walnut Creek, CA
✟6,051.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Why on earth wouldn't the administration bring charges against the NYT, if they could make their case?

In other words, if the administration doesn't bring charges against the Times, it is an admission that they realize the Times didn't violate any laws.

Fish or cut bait. No more whining, let's see some action.
 
Upvote 0

MachZer0

Caught Between Barack and a Hard Place
Mar 9, 2005
61,058
2,302
✟79,109.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
OhhJim said:
Why on earth wouldn't the administration bring charges against the NYT, if they could make their case?

In other words, if the administration doesn't bring charges against the Times, it is an admission that they realize the Times didn't violate any laws.

Fish or cut bait. No more whining, let's see some action.
Not charging them does not prove that the Times did not violate the law, it merely reaffirms America's longstanding softness towards traitors.
 
Upvote 0

KenH

Christian
Aug 1, 2003
4,452
251
68
Arkansas
✟13,818.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
The New York Times should be saluted for reporting on the machinations of the Bush administration. I hope they keep it
up. :thumbsup:

If it comes to it, I would prefer that the news media report too much than too little. The news media needs to do so to make up for dropping the ball on the run up to the invasion of Iraq when it failed to report the poor intelligence that has led to the Iraq debacle.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

TheReasoner

Former christian, current teapot agnostic.
Mar 14, 2005
10,292
684
Norway
✟29,461.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
MachZer0 said:
Not charging them does not prove that the Times did not violate the law, it merely reaffirms America's longstanding softness towards traitors.
How on earth was it treason?
If they had prosecuted the NYT for treason - good grief it would have had repercussions.
As far as I go, it would prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that the USA is no longer a free country, and that freedom of speech is not something the US citizens and news have.

What Bush did, monitoring people that way - was of a very dubious nature. And the fact that his administration DID was a fact that once ANYONE knew it, it should have gone out in the news immediately, and IMHO it should be yet another reason to get Bush out of the seat he is in.
This monitoring may not be bad in itself. But once it is in place, it is very tempting to use it for other means than protecting against terrorism. The knowledge they get could be used to thwart all kinds of things. And not just bad things.

It, like the CIA atrocities should be publicly known, and the officials responsible should be held responsible.
 
Upvote 0

clirus

Well-Known Member
Jun 20, 2004
3,208
106
✟3,900.00
Faith
Baptist
KenH quote
If it comes to it, I would prefer that the news media report too much than too little. The news media needs to do so to make up for dropping the ball on the run up to the invasion of Iraq when it failed to report the poor intelligence that has led to the Iraq debacle.

Response
Then I would assume you would not have approved of the censorship of WW II. Without the censorship of WW II we could well be speaking German or Japanese.

Where was the media when there needed to be an investigation into the Pearl Harbor situation. Why was the radar signals ignored? Why were there a lot of battleships in Pearl Harbor and no aircraft carriers?

America should never enter into another war without there being a Declaration of War and total censorship of the news media.

My opinion is that the treason of the news media is not associated with war, but with the Atheistic lifestyle agenda the news media is promoting that requires they get democrats back in office.
 
Upvote 0

MachZer0

Caught Between Barack and a Hard Place
Mar 9, 2005
61,058
2,302
✟79,109.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
faith guardian said:
How on earth was it treason?
Providing classified information to the enemy during a time of war. Is that so hard to figure out?

If they had prosecuted the NYT for treason - good grief it would have had repercussions.
Yes, all positive repercussuions too. such as, insiders might stop leaking classified information to the press which in turn might stop priniting it in the interest of national security.
As far as I go, it would prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that the USA is no longer a free country, and that freedom of speech is not something the US citizens and news have.
Give us a break. the freedom of speech and of the press are not limitless. Liberals have proven that to us over and over again

What Bush did, monitoring people that way - was of a very dubious nature. And the fact that his administration DID was a fact that once ANYONE knew it, it should have gone out in the news immediately, and IMHO it should be yet another reason to get Bush out of the seat he is in.
This monitoring may not be bad in itself. But once it is in place, it is very tempting to use it for other means than protecting against terrorism. The knowledge they get could be used to thwart all kinds of things. And not just bad things.

It, like the CIA atrocities should be publicly known, and the officials responsible should be held responsible.
Using the same logic that has been used to prove that the NY Times did nothing illegal (they were not charged with a crime which to some means they were acting legally), nobody in the administration has been charged with anything, so they obviously haven't broken the law (except for the bizarre charge against Libby)
 
Upvote 0

clirus

Well-Known Member
Jun 20, 2004
3,208
106
✟3,900.00
Faith
Baptist
OhhJim quote
Why on earth wouldn't the administration bring charges against the NYT, if they could make their case?

In other words, if the administration doesn't bring charges against the Times, it is an admission that they realize the Times didn't violate any laws.

Fish or cut bait. No more whining, let's see some action.

Response
A very good statement. As a matter of principal, I would like to see a prosecution.

However, as a matter of reality, I doubt I would even bother. Christians, conservatives and Republicans have not faired well in the courts. The Bible says Christians should resolve differences without going to court.

Even lawyers will tell you that the courts come out with some weird rulings. I believe this is because they are a secular body. An example of this is the ruling that the president did not have authority to establish military tribunals. They said congress did have the authority, so that will probably be another opportunity for Republicans to prove democrats hate America (if Republican are in power). I considered this to be a trivial ruling, and several justices pointed out that this was just another impediment to the president providing security for Americans.

I particularly disliked the mention of the Geneva Convention. If there was ever a document that was stupid, the Geneva Convention would have to be that document. If the document had any validity or power it would have been used to eliminate the entire Islamic religion for supporting "martyrs that murder". The only use of the Geneva Convention has been to cripple the ability to wage war.

Atrocities are a part of war, not an acceptable part of war, but certainly not something to be used as a political weapon. Every war ever waged has had civilian deaths, rapes, murders, coverups, etc. The only reason they were not reported in WW II was that there was total censorship.

A special set of law called the Uniform Code of Military Justice exists in parallel to Civil Law to handle the special situation of war.

The Uniform Code of Military Justice does not give the Atheistic liberal news media and democrats a way to use the Iraq war as a political weapon so they use the Geneva Convention as a bases of how a war should be fought.

If anyone wants to state that America should never enter into any war, I will buy that. War is ugly and should never be entered into lightly but once entered into, it must be carried to completion.

Probably better to let the NYT Treason be tried in the court of public opinion than a courtroom.

What would be interesting would be a reading in congress of a list of mistakes and misrepresentation of the news media for the previous day. However, that would probably leave no time for other business. Whoa, that could be a good thing too (no time for other business).
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
Aug 29, 2005
33,542
10,830
✟181,068.00
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
Private
clirus said:
A very good statement. As a matter of principal, I would like to see a prosecution.

However, as a matter of reality, I doubt I would even bother. Christians, conservatives and Republicans have not faired well in the courts. The Bible says Christians should resolve differences without going to court.
Is this what they call a strawman argument? Republicans have not faired well in the courts? Didn't Bush win the 2000 election with the help of the greatest court in the land?

If you truly believe the bible passage you quoted, is Bush a non-Christian or did he just sin against the holy word of God, by taking the election into the courts?
 
Upvote 0

Nathan Poe

Well-Known Member
Sep 21, 2002
32,198
1,693
49
United States
✟41,319.00
Faith
Agnostic
Politics
US-Democrat
MachZer0 said:
In this regard yes, as have all administrations for many years

So this administration is too liberal for your liking.

(by the way, it's your administration too, like it or not)

I may not be particularly fond of them, but at least they know when a crime hasn't been committed... :thumbsup:
 
Upvote 0

Nathan Poe

Well-Known Member
Sep 21, 2002
32,198
1,693
49
United States
✟41,319.00
Faith
Agnostic
Politics
US-Democrat
clirus said:
A very good statement. As a matter of principal, I would like to see a prosecution.

That would require a crime.

However, as a matter of reality, I doubt I would even bother. Christians, conservatives and Republicans have not faired well in the courts. The Bible says Christians should resolve differences without going to court.

1: Since when did this become a "Christian" issue?
2: How then should Christians resolve such differences?

Even lawyers will tell you that the courts come out with some weird rulings. I believe this is because they are a secular body. An example of this is the ruling that the president did not have authority to establish military tribunals.They said congress did have the authority, so that will probably be another opportunity for Republicans to prove democrats hate America (if Republican are in power).

Unless Congress decided to actually do its job instead...

I considered this to be a trivial ruling, and several justices pointed out that this was just another impediment to the president providing security for Americans.

Security at what cost? The Constitution? It's never worth crawling through a sewer to catch a rat.

I particularly disliked the mention of the Geneva Convention. If there was ever a document that was stupid, the Geneva Convention would have to be that document. If the document had any validity or power it would have been used to eliminate the entire Islamic religion for supporting "martyrs that murder". The only use of the Geneva Convention has been to cripple the ability to wage war.

Rule Books usually have that effect. Sorry if it doesn't exterminate Islam.

Atrocities are a part of war, not an acceptable part of war, but certainly not something to be used as a political weapon. Every war ever waged has had civilian deaths, rapes, murders, coverups, etc. The only reason they were not reported in WW II was that there was total censorship.

And that makes censorship a good thing? And the artocities as well?

A special set of law called the Uniform Code of Military Justice exists in parallel to Civil Law to handle the special situation of war.

The Uniform Code of Military Justice does not give the Atheistic liberal news media and democrats a way to use the Iraq war as a political weapon so they use the Geneva Convention as a bases of how a war should be fought.

IIRC, the UCMJ is fine and dandy for disciplining our own troops and other armies, but the Administration has spent so much time muddying the waters with their "enemy combatant" rhetoric that whether or not they're actually "military" is questionable.

If anyone wants to state that America should never enter into any war, I will buy that. War is ugly and should never be entered into lightly but once entered into, it must be carried to completion.

But a line must be drawn somewhere, or else whatever we're fighting for isn't worth having.

Probably better to let the NYT Treason be tried in the court of public opinion than a courtroom.

Of course: when no crime exists, just smear political enemies instead.

What would be interesting would be a reading in congress of a list of mistakes and misrepresentation of the news media for the previous day. However, that would probably leave no time for other business. Whoa, that could be a good thing too (no time for other business).

What would be far more interesting is a list of accurate information about what goes on -- but the last people who tried that got accused of treason.
 
Upvote 0

KenH

Christian
Aug 1, 2003
4,452
251
68
Arkansas
✟13,818.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
clirus said:
1) Where was the media when there needed to be an investigation into the Pearl Harbor situation.

2) America should never enter into another war without there being a Declaration of War

1) A lot has been written about that over the years since 12/7/1941.

2) Congress has not declared war since World War II. That has resulted in the Vietnam quagmire and now the Iraq quagmire.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

clirus

Well-Known Member
Jun 20, 2004
3,208
106
✟3,900.00
Faith
Baptist
Nathan Poe quote
Security at what cost? The Constitution? It's never worth crawling through a sewer to catch a rat.

Response
If you do not crawl through the sewer, the rats win.

And you had better believe the rats know that.

Lots of people afraid to get there hands dirty stand around and criticize those that do crawl through the sewer. Those who criticize like to have a clean sewer, but don't want to pay the price. Instead of being a critic, it would be better to just keep quiet.

Soldiers are the shield that stand between the enemy and freedom in America, the war protestors are the ones that stand behind the shield and stab the soldiers in the back. War and marriage are a lot alike. War should not be entered into lightly, but once entered into the commitment must be, "for better or worse". In marriage, the statement before the wedding of, "speak now or forever hold your peace" is applicable to war also. The war protestors and the Atheistic liberal news media that promotes them has been and continues to be traitors because they have given encouragement to the enemy and prolonged the war thus causing more deaths. Too many people in America are expecting the benefits of war, but do not deserve these benefits because they are not paying the price for those benefits.

I do not consider the criticism of the Atheistic liberal news media and the democrats to be based on their concern about the Iraq war, but rather the Iraq war is being used by the Atheistic liberal news media and democrats to create discontent with President Bush and the Republicans. The Atheistic liberal news media and democrats want to get the Atheistic lifestyle agenda back on track by getting democrats back in control of the government.

That Atheistic lifestyle agenda is what makes the New York Times treason a religious issue.
 
Upvote 0