Do you think its right for the media to give out government secrets that may jeopardize our safety?

Question

The New York Post came out with an article telling everyone that the government was looking at financial records to see if anyone was funding terrorism. I believe this is a betrayal of our country. They care more about a good story and destroying the Bush administration rather than the safety of the American people.
Do you think they're right to uncover this?
Do you think there should be laws to stop them from endangering American citizens?
Does this effect your view of the New York post and are you going to do anything about it?

Ok so people are saying its a lot of the government's fault, but shouldn't the media care a little about our safety. Even if the government leaks it, wouldn't they keep it on the low anyway so everyone could stay safe... and no I'm not paranoid... I just get worried because my Dad works in DC.

Answer 1

It is not a media problem.. if the information is classified, proprietary or confidential, unless the media broke into the place where the information is kept, the media is not guilty. Why?

1. If the media was able to break in a place where they keep classified or sensitive information, then the people keeping the classified information are at fault, for not keeping up to security requirements.

2. If an individual safeguarding classified or sensitive information went to the media and leaked the information, then a closer look at who is allowed access to classified information should be taken. If an individual is trusted with classified information, and breaks that trust, I would report that person, because what if the information happens to be more sensitive and really cause damage.

3. If the information was not classified properly therefore it was subject to public release, then again, a review of security procedures should be conducted.

If the media has influence on how to obtain sensitive or classified information, its scary to think what could a foreign interest have access to, since it would be their job to get classified information.

Answer 2

I think they were absolutely right to uncover this. For three reasons.

First, it's not news to the terrorists. Any terrorist who is stupid enough to not realize that we're looking into their finances is not a threat. The US has had laws for over ten years now allowing them to seize terrorist assets, and have done so several times in the past five years. So, what's the big secret that we're looking at financial records?

Second, nothing in the news article was classified information. Everybody in the banking industry knows what clearing houses are used for international money transfers. The fact that the government is looking at those particular clearing houses is not only not secret to the terrorists, it's not a secret to anyone in the international banking industry. So, where's the harm?

Not to mention that the article was actually complimentary of the progress the government is making.

Finally, the laws regarding disclosures of this type have been well established for over half a century. The press cannot be peremptorily silenced, except in extreme cases where the information is almost certainly going to cause imminent loss of life. The classic examples are revealing the location of troops in the field, the names and photos of undercover agents or the status and location of military forces on the high seas. Nothing even close to that happened here. And the proof is that nothing has happened since the news report, so obvious the danger could not have been immediate or imminent.

The NYT can't just go around ignoring the laws. But neither can the government. In fact, there are laws that cover this type of thing. If the NYT actually released any information which was properly classified (and nothing actually printed in the news article was, as far as I've seen), then they are liable after the fact for publishing classified information. That's the law. But the law doesn't allow the government to silence them before the fact, absent a specific identifiable imminent threat to human life. Of which there was none.

The fact that the information might somehow someday make it slightly less efficient for the US government to track financial transactions is way way way below the legal threshold for censorship. The administration has to obey the laws too. And the laws say that what the NYT did was legal.

Answer 3

Your completely right. It is terrible that the new york post did what it did. They should be fined so much it would put them out of business. Its obvious why they did it too. That is a very liberal paper and we have a conservative president. The New York Post knew that many americans would disagree with it so they uncovered it. All they want is to turn the american people away from their own president. It is SO WRONG. I just can't believe it. I don't have a problem with the government going through financial records and its hard for me to see why anyone would.

There should definitly be laws to stop this. Now that everyone in the world knows our government is doing this. Terrorists are going to be less likely to transfer large amounts of money at a time and the whole plan is worthless.

This makes me never want to support the New York Post. When you think about it in the big picture, they were helping terrorists. I am not exactly sure what to do about it but if you want help doing something i'd be glad to help. You can email me at [e-mail].

Answer 4

It was the New York Times Not The Post. Now Bush himself said right after 9-11 that America would follow the money trail anyone caught helping the terror suspects will not be doing business with the U.S.A. He said this this on national TV He has repeated this many times over.What is troubling is the The Wall Street Journal also on the same day as the Times released the same story and nobody said anything about them giving out government secrets.The Times did nothing wrong. Bush should look at his own words and actions before pointing the finger and blaming the Times.

Answer 5

If our attempt to find out what terrorist are doing by tracking their movements of money are exposed to the public, then everyone knows what we are doing. The terrorists watch Fox News, CNN, BBC....etc. If they know what we are doing then they will change their methods of moving the money used to finance terror.

it will make it harder to track them down and prevent another 9/11.If the Times(Ny & L.A.) and the Journel had published that the U.S. had broken both the German and Japanese codes during the war the outcome may have been very different. Paris would have become New Berlin. London would have been Hitlers new villa.

Do we as average citizens need to know every detail of what our government is doing to fight terrorism? My belief is "no I don't". There is a certain amount of trust we must impart on our leadership. Whether, we agree politically is not important, we our safety and security in their hands and trust them with it. When a covert operation is exposed it puts all of us at risk. Had we had better intelligence through the 1990's we may have had the opportunity to prevent 9/11 from happening. We should have been more involved 35 years ago.

Answer 6

No they should not be prosecuted. Did the New York Post say who they are going to look after? This is the government's own fault for not being able to keep its own secret. If the media is able to find that information, the people who fund the terrorists will be able to get the intelligence as well. People funding the terrorists are rich and powerful, they got lots of sources. If we are able to prosecuted free speech, then we no longer live in a land of free. Just look back at how much power the government gain by passing patroit acts. No terrorists arrested, but bunch of others and checking some innocents. This type of laws should not be passed, ever.

Answer 7

There are several pieces of news footage that show Bush saying that "we're going to get 'em (terrorists) right where it hurts, in the bank account". This was said many months ago....on national TV. If you don't believe me...go look it up, I was watching it the other day.
Bush himself said they're going after the bank accounts!!! and now the Post says it and suddenly it's news??
Give me a freakin' break!
....so now he's got this smoke and mirrors thing going where he's making one American turn against another when the "real" enemy is not American citizens. I believe he/they do this so the average voter won't notice how screwed up this administration really is.
They ignore the economy, they ignore the environment, they ignore health care but they get all bent about the Post saying something Bush said himself a few months ago. I can't believe not one person on his staff reminded him of how he said they're going after the bank accounts just a few months ago.
Talk about the blind leading the blind!
Nice diversion Bushy...it'll work with some of your voters...but the smart ones (the ones who can read) will see right through it!

Answer 8

Not only the New York Post, but the Wall Street Journal and many other newspapers reported the same story. I believe it is important to keep the press free to report whatever they discover. (but liable if they fabricate a story). Free press helps keep people in power in check. I truly don't see how people even believe this was a secret. Bush prior to even going to war stated publicly he was going after the terrorists money. On principle I do believe the person that provided the secert could be at risk if in fact he/she holds a position that requires them to keep certain information secret. I wouldn't be surprised if this was a planed leak just to hurt free press and the New York Post. Don't blame the press, We need free open press.

Answer 9

Yes if the information disseminates into the media then under the first amendment they have the right to publish it. I think if the government is so concerned about information leaks they should crack down on the source of the leaks and not threaten to punish the media for doing what they have a legal and constitutional right to do.

Answer 10

Yes. And No. It's a judgement call. If the programs clearly violate the Constitution, then yes. People have the right now that. But, if the government is following the trail back to the organizations supporters, then there is nothing wrong with it. Because it starts with a known point. But data mining, like their attempts to go through our phone records with no starting point, is a violation.