Hope you enjoy your stay…

The article title is Court jails N.Y. Times reporter.

I read that and did a jig.

Here’s the gist as I understand it…

Two reporters–one from the N.Y. Times, one from Time magazine–have been under pressure from the government to reveal a source who leaked the identity of a covert, I’ll say that again, a covert CIA agent. Both have refused to name their source.

And now one, Judith Miller, is going to jail.

I say good.

This is the problem with fucking reporters. They feel like they can do whatever they want, then run and hide behind “freedom of the press” when they fuck up and print something that could endanger someone’s life.

No. It doesn’t work that way.

Freedom of the press doesn’t give you the right to print whatever you want without responsibility, you jackoffs.

Did you think it was okay to print the name of a covet CIA agent and not expect any repercussions? Honestly? How fucking stupid are you?

Cooper, one of the reporters pressured to talk, said her jailing “is a sad day not only for journalists, but for our country.”

Hey Coop, how did you manage that quote with your head up your ass? Talk to people outside of your field, numbnuts. Many, many people are supporting this. We are tired of this shit.

What if something happens to this lady because of your thoughtlessness? Oh, wait, it’s not your responsibility. Freedom of the press and all.

Well fuck you.

Hey Ms. Miller, I hope you enjoy your prison stay. Don’t think for one second you don’t deserve it.

18
Leave a Reply

avatar
18 Comment threads
0 Thread replies
0 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
0 Comment authors
RenaldoAceMaxineStewieFreak Magnet Recent comment authors

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

  Subscribe  
Notify of
fnordboy
Guest

This is a tough debate for me. While I understand the problems with this particular instance, I don’t think reporters should have to worry about what they will print as well as you don’t want the sources to dry up for fear of being narced out by scared reporters.

Someone’s life was now put in danger so that is a problem.. but the picture is worrisome.

Freak Magnet
Guest

Am I right in understanding someone from the Bush administration leaked the name?

I’m all for free press and protecting your sources, blah, blah, blah, but there has to be a line, and this crossed it.

I understand the way you feel, tho, Shiki, because I’m always concerned about starting a downside when it comes to allowing or outlawing certain things, but they’re putting someone’s life in danger. I want to kick that woman’s ass, personally.

Stewie
Guest

shiki – they crossed the line. I am the first to fight for freedom of the press, when it is reasonable. Freedom of the press doesn’t mean you can print whatever you want. It doesn’t mean you can put lives in danger and not have to be responsible. This case isn’t going to change the people’s right to a free press, but it will make reporters more leary of what they print, and I’m for that. Freak, yes, it was the bush admin that leaked it. From what I’ve been reading, it may be the result of the operative’s husband… Read more »

fnordboy
Guest

This case isn’t going to change the people’s right to a free press, but it will make reporters more leary of what they print, and I’m for that. Think about it. Sources will not want to give info that could potentially get them fired or in danger because they don’t know for sure now if the reporters will give up their names or not. What if Deep Throat would have been a little too scared to give the info he gave? I understand that this is an extreme case and better judgement should have been used by the reporters. This… Read more »

Stewie
Guest

Let me throw it at you this way…

If nothing is done about this, what’s to stop reporters from putting out the names of DEA agents, Narcs, FBI agents, spies?

fnordboy
Guest

I understand that.. just have to weigh which side is more important to you.

Anxiously awaits Hitman’s comments.

Stewie
Guest

For me, it’s a no brainer.

This isn’t even a black or white issue.

If sources become afraid to come forward due to this, you can’t blame the government. You have to put the blame on the right people.

The reporters and the source.

The source broke some heavy duty laws on this, and the reporters are accessories. They should be punished as such.

Stewie
Guest

Oops, I meant to delete that black or white issue line, because IMO, it IS black and white.

Maxine
Guest

Perhaps they put her in jail, to protect her from the angry mobs of regular folk seeking retribution for the CIA operative.

…but perhaps not, considering Mr. Cooper was free to go.

Ace
Guest

I can’t write about this without going into some length and detail, and I don’t want to clutter up the comment thread.

I’ll put it in my blog, instead.

Go read acerimrat.blogspot.com for my response.

Freak Magnet
Guest

Oh my.

There’s a word for what you just did, but I can’t think of it off the top of my head.

Stewie
Guest

maxine – that would actually be great if more people were angry about this. 🙂

ace – i read it and i don’t know where you stand. 🙁

freak – what can i say? 🙂

Freak Magnet
Guest

I felt like I was dancing when I read it.

Ace
Guest

Stewie… One of my points is that your argument in your post is flawed… I don’t think she should go to jail because she didn’t reveal the name of her source – she’s not jeopardizing the CIA agent’s life, and if I’m reading you right, you think she belongs in jail for jeopardizing the CIA agent’s life, which by my way of reading this, she didn’t do. So I disagree with half of what you’re saying – but I tend to agree with the idea that the White House leak, the one who ID’d the agent, belongs in jail for… Read more »

Stewie
Guest

I’m saying she should go to jail for not revealing her source. The argument is not flawed, you are just reading way to much into it. I’ll break it down. Mystery X tells reporter A and reporter B a CIA’s operative name. (I’m leaving out Reporter C because he’s not part of this discussion). I’m fairly certain what Mystery X is doing is against the law. Reporter A prints it. Reporter B sits on it. The government comes in and says you have information that you shouldn’t have. Who told you, that person must be punished? Reporter B refuses to… Read more »

Renaldo
Guest

WTFever, Mr. Hitler. When you begin to limit the freedom of the press, you begin to limit freedom. I’m fairly certain what Mystery X is doing is against the law. Nope, it’s not. To put another spin on it, these people have dangerous jobs, and the risk of being identified is something they signed up for. If their cover is blown, that was a risk they took when they took the job. There are already lots of websites that ID DEA, ATF and FBI agents. This isn’t something new. If you call the police because your neighbor is beating his… Read more »

Stewie
Guest

Nope, it’s not. To put another spin on it, these people have dangerous jobs, and the risk of being identified is something they signed up for. If their cover is blown, that was a risk they took when they took the job. There are already lots of websites that ID DEA, ATF and FBI agents. This isn’t something new. I don’t dispute they have dangerous jobs, and I don’t dispute they knew this going in. But we as a society have an obligation to protect these people while they are doing their jobs for the good of society. If that… Read more »

Ace
Guest

The problem with limiting the rights to protect your source is not so much the individual case, to me, as the precedent – there will be more cases where lives are at stake, in the converse position – where the anonymous source’s information saves lives, not jeopardizes them – and either people will fear to come forward because the reporter could be forced to tell who they are, or reporters will be reluctant to hear them out because of fear for their own well-being. (Think of the big tobacco whistleblowing case, that fellow was threatened with his life; Karen Silkwood… Read more »