On 10/27/09 9:26 PM, Tosk wrote:
In ,
says...
On Tue, 27 Oct 2009 06:27:34 -0500,
wrote:
On Mon, 26 Oct 2009 15:18:04 -0400, John H. wrote:
Journalists who divulge classified information should be jailed.
On what charge? The First Amendment is very clear about freedom of the
press. Funny, in the entire Constitution I can't find anything in it
about "classified" information. There's a reason for that.
If you truly believe journalists should be jailed for publishing
classified information, you really should consider a more appropriate
country for your ideological bent. China, perhaps?
But it's OK to squelch Fox News for disagreeing with Obama?
Yes, I think journalists who divulge classified information should be
jailed. I should have said 'properly classified'. Information which,
if in the wrong hands, can be detrimental to our national security
should not be published just because it makes a 'good story'.
Amen.
It isn't even because it makes a good story, they do it just to support
a political agenda and hurt the opposition party. I was so proud of the
Bush administration for sitting back and taking the **** leaks and lies
based on classified info brought out by the likes of the New York Lies,
that knew Bush couldn't fight it without hurting American interest... In
the interest of our boys over there, Bush/Cheney just sat back and took
the kicks in the balls...
You dumb fool. Bush and Cheney didn't give a tinker's dam about "our
boys over there." They lied us into two wars over there because on 9/11
they had their hands on each other's dicks and didn't have a clue about
what to do next. Those wars were initiated to "show" the American people
we were "tough" on the 9/11 terrorists. We got and will get nothing for
our losses and efforts there.
You probably think there was some sort of real justification for our war
against Vietnam.
That war was bull****, too.