new york times had said in an editorial that we need to follow the money shortly after 9/11. then we we are to try to stop the terrorists the tell on us to the enemy! also the chief editor came out and said the media is not biest on the war meanin they apose it and will do anything to help us loose. does this not count as treason?
2006-07-07 07:30:40 · 20 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
YES!!!! and all those that leaked the information too. heheeh... Send them to GTMO... >:-)
i still have friends down there that could make them feel welcome... LOL
2006-07-07 07:34:25 · answer #1 · answered by Eric B 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
President Bush promised in a speech two weeks after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks that federal officials would work with financial institutions to trace money transfers to terrorists. So the NY Times story is not new.
By the way, the Times was not the only paper releasing this story.
Opposing the war does not mean doing "anything to help us lose."
2006-07-07 07:38:12 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
First of all, it wasn't just the New York Times that ran the story. It was also the Wall Street Journal and the LA Times. Second, NO, they shouldn't be brought up on treason charges. That is ridiculous. Let's bring Cheney and Rove up on treason charges instead, for leaking the name of an undercover CIA agent to the press and threatening the security of our operations in Iran. Or better yet, let's charge W with treason, since he lied to the American people to send our troops into a war for oil.
2006-07-07 07:36:14 · answer #3 · answered by dmonstergirl 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No, I don't think that they should. They're are conservative and liberal news sources out there. If we were to go after every newpaper that wrote bad about the president (either republican or democrat) we'll end up going crazy. Its called freedom of press. They have every right to write what they want but its also their responsibility to do their jobs in an ethical manor. I think that the New York Times is only one of the news sources that writes bad about the war. Everyday I turn on the television and hear people talking about the war. They are not exactly saying that the war is going great, most of time they are telling us how many are dying in the war and how Iraq lives are being affected by the violence. Are we supposed to go after every news source that talks bad about the war?No. Its just stupid. We don't want to turn into a dictatorship.
2006-07-07 07:50:17 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
The editors and owners should be brought up on treason charges.
It seems that they are hellbent on doing what they can help us loose the war on terror. They are traitors.\they promote how many civilians are killed over there, but they won't say how many are saved. they won't do any articles about any positive thing going on over there. there has to be some good stuff.
The media in general is guilty of portraying everything in a negative light, they all suck!!!!!
2006-07-07 07:41:34 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes and no. partly yes because what the NY times did was in a sense treason. No, because there is no law against freedom of speech. The NY times should have be the straw that broke the camel's back. We see now that freedom of speech needs to be modified and should have very distinct regulations. We need a revision of the law basically, so something like this never happens again.
2006-07-07 07:41:01 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
The NYT didn't say anything the terrorists didn't already know and try to get around. They did not say how the Bush administration is following the money, only that they are and that for once something Bush did worked. They in fact made Bush look competent, something Bush seems incapable of doing himself. The administration is only attacking NYT because it is seen as a liberal newspaper and repeatedly makes Bush look bad (usually by just reporting the news, they usually don't even have to twist anything to make him look bad). Bush needs to quit his griping on this one and accept a good turn for once instead of trying to use it to get rid of a possible future whistleblower that may prevent his forming the empire Dick Cheney so desperately wants.
2006-07-07 07:34:51 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
No, but the free market may decide that this paper and others that reported the government program in question need fewer readers. At this point the damage is done and bringing up charges of treason is going to come across as crybaby whining.
2006-07-07 07:36:43 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
No they were given this information by the White House! Now all of a sudden they are crying foul! It is inevitable in this political climate that some Cons are calling for this. After all the press is the enemy. They tell the truth and who wants an informed peoples?? And not biased means they do NOT take sides. Not that they oppose it. (Just in case you're interested)
2006-07-07 07:36:54 · answer #9 · answered by olderandwiser 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I find it hard to believe that you were able to comprehend the Times. Please look at what you wrote - rewrite it so it makes sense and the words are correct. What does "apose" mean?
"biest"
"then we are to try to stop the terrorists the tell on us to the enemy"
"meanin they apose it and will do anything to help us loose" - I didn't know anything was TIGHT.
What are you trying to say - in English please....
2006-07-07 07:37:32 · answer #10 · answered by butterfliesRfree 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
America is a free nation. Thousands upon thousands of Americans have died or been wounded to keep it that way. No, it is not treason. Extremely irresponsible, but not treasonous. Trust me when I say you don't want to live in a country where it would be treason.
2006-07-07 07:43:40 · answer #11 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋