Should the New York Times newspaper be censured for outing a top secret terror money tracking program?

Question

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,201011,00.html

Is it more important that this information be disclosed for its reading public?

Answer 1

Yes, but they won't be.

Answer 2

And that is only part of the reason that paper is now called "the New York Slimes". There is much more to it. They will do anything for a story, including inventing it.

No, it's not more important for the information to be disclosed to the reading public. It seems like some US newspapers are bent on getting president Bush to the point of idiocy and our own demise.

Answer 3

Living in a free society demands that we also live with certain risks. The Bush administration leaks information to the press when such information conveniently suits its agenda. But, if it's something the administration doesn't want revealed, then it believes it has the right to censure the press. Not so!

Terrorists KNEW their bank accounts were being watched; George Bush so much as told them so dozens of times in dozens of news conferences.

The Fourth Estate is one of America's most important freedoms. Without the press to serve as a guardian to the people, we might never had heard of Watergate, the IranContra affair, or Bill Clinton's sex life. As ugly or unsettling as it gets, the American public has a right to know even if it interferes with government's secret activity or clandestine pursuits. If you try to muffle the press on "matters of national security", it then becomes very easy to classify anything as a national security issue, and the people risk the danger of being uninformed.

The unfortunate component to all this is that most American citizens take freedom of the press so lightly. Unless it's got something to do with Britney Spears' love life or Jacko's pedophilia, they choose to stay uninformed - and that apathy breeds corruption and recklessness within our political system.

A free press is as imperative to our free society as is free expression (while flag-burning may be a despicable and cowardly act, it must be tolerated in a free country).

When the Constitution gives us the "right to bear arms", it doesn't mean we should be able to take a bazooka out and shoot someone on a whim. It was intended to afford us the absolute right to take up arms against an oppressive and tyrannical government.

Our founding fathers didn't intend 'free speech' to be a license to use all the vulgar four-letter words you choose to use; it was intended as an ultimate right to speak up against the government, report government activities or inactions, and keep the public informed. Unfortunately, we also have to take the good with the bad and accept the fact that to some lowlife pondscum weaklings, 'free speech' means being able to use dirty words and disgusting, profane language publicly.

The same goes for freedom of the press. If "we the people" are entitled to hear all the good news about the government, we must also be able to hear that news which is less 'good', or which the government would prefer to keep secret.

An open society means we must sometimes assume risks. The New York Times deserves to be commended for its courageous stand against the Bush administration's attempt at censure and strangulation of a free press. -RKO- 07/07/06

Answer 4

The New York Times should be censured for outing government secrets. They should also be self-censured for sloppiness, bias, and the fact that ALL of their crossword puzzles, except for Saturday, are way too easy.

They should single out the following for censure : Bill Keller; Momo Dowd; Pinch Sulzberger; and the inexplicably still-employed R.W. "I'm above doing research (unless it involves food)" Apple Jr. They've made a good start by cutting Sam Hall of their affiliated radio station loose--now it's time to do a bit more housecleaning.

Answer 5

No. It did the same thing with the Pentagon Papers back in '71. I trust the N.Y. Times for telling the truth on the President's top-secret money-tracking program. It's just another way of the media's uncovering of this secret nonsense that was first put into place in the wake of 9-11!

Answer 6

Some say It should not be it is a free press. So any thing is OK A reported finds out about a undercover cop and outs him he gets killed. Hey it is a free press. The press find out about a operation and give it out and troops get killed. Hey it is a free press.

This is not the first time this paper told about a secret program. The one truly to go after are the ones at the CIA.
Who is in charge in the CIA or do they think the CIA runs the government.

Answer 7

No-and the reason is that CNN showed soundbites last Thursday of King George mentioning in press conferences all the ways that they are tracking money trails of terrorists.
There were at least a dozen of the soundbites.
Just one more way for his administration to gather support for censorship.
Who really thinks that terrorists are so stupid that they don't know how they're being tracked?
The nightly news does more to expose our "secrets" than anyone else.

Answer 8

Ah yes, that same argument was used by the Nazi's prior to WWII. In fact, most totalitarian regimes begin by small measures, removing freedom of the press, disallowing public speech, taking away the right to expression (flag burning) ect...
That way, when the really big measures are implemented, the citizens are less likely to protest. Mostly because thier right to do so has been removed.
If you want to keep a free country, keep a free press. It's really that simple.

Answer 9

Not everything the government does as top secret has merit. If the people think something illegal is occurring, or the government is doing something against the will of the people-Then it should be leaked. Its not treason to tell the American people what the American government is doing.

Answer 10

i cannot see how my personal life is affected by the knowledge of kowing everything that the government does to kill loons.
remember hillary's "right wing conspiracy"?i don't know if there is a conspiracy or not but i think there is a lot of hatred among the press for this administration.they seem to want to do anything to harm it in spite of potential harm to the country.
if this had happened in the civil war or even WWII they would be looking out from behind bars by now.

Answer 11

The Times should never have had that information in the first place. The people that should be punished are the leakers. The Times should be punished if it fails to divulge the source.