That's a tough question to answer. I think there needs to be some discretion on what is reported. On one hand I believe personal liberties need to be protected. On the other hand there needs to be things that the rest of the world not know when it comes to our National Security.
Government transparency is essential to a functioning democracy. A government that can hide behind secrecy in the name of national security is one that can abuse its power, as we've seen proven in the NSA leak case. I'm far more concerned about unchecked government power than I am about keeping secrets from AQ.
NSA is turning out to be some secret police force..Its one thing to spy on our ememies but this is to far reaching and its a good thing that journalists expose the NSA on who they are spying on..Now they claim that Obama wasn't aware at all of any of the spying on European leaders....Who controls this secret agency?..When the government can stop journalists from reporting facts that they have received we start losing more freedom ..Why is it wrong for the people to know what is going inside the government that we all pay for...Why do we need such a large data center in Utah ...
imo.....it's only a matter of time before the government will control the press....
as far as the NSA , we will never be able to stop it. there is way, way too much money involved. you can't even drive yourself to work without the police recording your license tag........soon you will do as the united nations tells you to do or you will be erased with no signs left behind.......... homeland, swat, drone, tsa, are for real.
Doug: Stopping the reporting is very easy. Study the history of the press in the Soviet Union, Nazi Germany, North Korea, Cuba, etc., etc.
More troubling, study the reports of harassment and threats made to reporters in this country in the last dozen years or so. Take a few minutes and read this article:
from the above article by kyle.....look at that number....50 billion...woo wee....... The “black budget” for the 16 U.S. intelligence agencies alone was more than $50 billion for the fiscal year 2013, according to an NSA document Edward Snowden gave to The Post.
I do think if, journalists discovered or received NSA information they need to evaluate the circumstances. If they are receiving such information they need to ask the following. Why were they given the information? Who does the information effect? How old is the information? What is the purpose behind the leak? Will it put our Armed Forces in further danger? Will it cause the death of informants, undercover operatives?
Most of those questions are purely speculative and asking journalists to gaze into a crystal ball and predict the future.
In situations such as this, it's the job of journalists to be watchdogs over government. Every leak that has come out via Snowden has shown the US government to be misbehaving. The government has an obligation to be transparent in its operations. When it doesn't, somebody needs to blow the whistle.
I am sorry Howard, but your statement that "EVERY leak that has come via Snowden has shown the government to be misbehaving" is wrong
Collecting data on US citizens is definitely wrong, with that I agree
Collecting data on foreign communications is not wrong, that is not anything that just began with the NSA, we have and other countries have on us, always have attempted to garner whatever information they could on friend or foe.
When the President meets with any world leader he is briefed and the information that he is briefed on comes from the CIA which is tasked with analyzing all information available. This has been happening way before electronic intelligence and even \before we became a nation.
You can bet, that Germany, Spain and most others are constantly attempting to garner whatever information they can by what ever means they can on us just as we do on them. The United States, The Russians, The British and the Chinese are just better at it than the rest of the world.
I spent most of my military career in intelligence, and intelligence by definition goes beyond the battlefield and is heavily involved in everything from when a foreign leader ties their shoe to what he/she has for breakfast. Foreign customs, weather patterns, spending habits and yes communications have always been essential in all countries collection efforts.
Whether or not the press uncovers or discloses something, is privy to someone leaking is fine and in a free society is prudent to report without fear of the government. That should never come into question, no matter who leaked the information or by whatever legal means it was obtained. About the only illegal means that I can see the press violating would be killing someone, hacking into a government computer or breaking in and stealing the information. It is incumbent on the agency to protect information , not the press.
As far as Snowden goes, had he released the information about collecting on Americans only, he would be a whistle blower, when he released what we do in collecting on foreign governments or individuals, he became a criminal. There is a distinct difference.
Not necessarily OK, prudence is always a consideration, but illegal? It is absolutely not illegal or extra constitutional, where as using those assets domestically on our own citizenry is.
If you think that things like this were not done in World War II or other conflicts, or in times of peace over our existence, you would be wrong. We have done it and they have done it over and over through out history.
Those who are allies today, where once enemies, those who are allies today can also become enemies over a whole range of issues later. Every country seeks an edge in time of war and time of peace, economically and strategically.
You can not just turn the intelligence apparatus on and off by flicking a switch and expect accuracy which is paramount.
All that said, should we be using those assets on friends when there is so much more going on, I question the motive, just not the legality.
The truth of international relations has been summed up repeatedly as the art of spying on both your enemies and your friends while remembering which is which and when to lie about it to who.
Just because some country is our ally doesn't mean they have our best interests in mind.
That's a tough question to
That's a tough question to answer. I think there needs to be some discretion on what is reported. On one hand I believe personal liberties need to be protected. On the other hand there needs to be things that the rest of the world not know when it comes to our National Security.
Should Journalists stop the
Should Journalists stop the government from leaking NSA secrets?
[video:/www.youtube.com/watch?v=hIbGyhzMF5s]
If secrets are leaked, I
If secrets are leaked, I don't see how reporting what's leaked could be stopped.
Absolutely not. We need
Absolutely not.
We need significantly more reporting of so called secret information, not less.
Government transparency is
Government transparency is essential to a functioning democracy. A government that can hide behind secrecy in the name of national security is one that can abuse its power, as we've seen proven in the NSA leak case. I'm far more concerned about unchecked government power than I am about keeping secrets from AQ.
NSA is turning out to be some
NSA is turning out to be some secret police force..Its one thing to spy on our ememies but this is to far reaching and its a good thing that journalists expose the NSA on who they are spying on..Now they claim that Obama wasn't aware at all of any of the spying on European leaders....Who controls this secret agency?..When the government can stop journalists from reporting facts that they have received we start losing more freedom ..Why is it wrong for the people to know what is going inside the government that we all pay for...Why do we need such a large data center in Utah ...
Isn't that like trying to put
Isn't that like trying to put toothpaste back into the tube?
imo.....it's only a matter of
imo.....it's only a matter of time before the government will control the press....
as far as the NSA , we will never be able to stop it. there is way, way too much money involved. you can't even drive yourself to work without the police recording your license tag........soon you will do as the united nations tells you to do or you will be erased with no signs left behind.......... homeland, swat, drone, tsa, are for real.
Doug: Stopping the reporting
Doug: Stopping the reporting is very easy. Study the history of the press in the Soviet Union, Nazi Germany, North Korea, Cuba, etc., etc.
More troubling, study the reports of harassment and threats made to reporters in this country in the last dozen years or so. Take a few minutes and read this article:
http://www.cpj.org/reports/2013/10/obama-and-the-press-us-leaks-surveil…
Stopping the reporting is depressingly easy.
realistically, the media is
realistically, the media is SUPPOSED to be the watchdog of the government for us..you know, 1st Amendment...freedom of the press...
from the above article by
from the above article by kyle.....look at that number....50 billion...woo wee....... The “black budget” for the 16 U.S. intelligence agencies alone was more than $50 billion for the fiscal year 2013, according to an NSA document Edward Snowden gave to The Post.
http://youtu.be/v3rhQc666Sg
http://youtu.be/v3rhQc666Sg
I do think if, journalists
I do think if, journalists discovered or received NSA information they need to evaluate the circumstances. If they are receiving such information they need to ask the following. Why were they given the information? Who does the information effect? How old is the information? What is the purpose behind the leak? Will it put our Armed Forces in further danger? Will it cause the death of informants, undercover operatives?
Most of those questions are
Most of those questions are purely speculative and asking journalists to gaze into a crystal ball and predict the future.
In situations such as this, it's the job of journalists to be watchdogs over government. Every leak that has come out via Snowden has shown the US government to be misbehaving. The government has an obligation to be transparent in its operations. When it doesn't, somebody needs to blow the whistle.
I am sorry Howard, but your
I am sorry Howard, but your statement that "EVERY leak that has come via Snowden has shown the government to be misbehaving" is wrong
Collecting data on US citizens is definitely wrong, with that I agree
Collecting data on foreign communications is not wrong, that is not anything that just began with the NSA, we have and other countries have on us, always have attempted to garner whatever information they could on friend or foe.
When the President meets with any world leader he is briefed and the information that he is briefed on comes from the CIA which is tasked with analyzing all information available. This has been happening way before electronic intelligence and even \before we became a nation.
You can bet, that Germany, Spain and most others are constantly attempting to garner whatever information they can by what ever means they can on us just as we do on them. The United States, The Russians, The British and the Chinese are just better at it than the rest of the world.
I spent most of my military career in intelligence, and intelligence by definition goes beyond the battlefield and is heavily involved in everything from when a foreign leader ties their shoe to what he/she has for breakfast. Foreign customs, weather patterns, spending habits and yes communications have always been essential in all countries collection efforts.
Whether or not the press uncovers or discloses something, is privy to someone leaking is fine and in a free society is prudent to report without fear of the government. That should never come into question, no matter who leaked the information or by whatever legal means it was obtained. About the only illegal means that I can see the press violating would be killing someone, hacking into a government computer or breaking in and stealing the information. It is incumbent on the agency to protect information , not the press.
As far as Snowden goes, had he released the information about collecting on Americans only, he would be a whistle blower, when he released what we do in collecting on foreign governments or individuals, he became a criminal. There is a distinct difference.
You think it's OK to spy on
You think it's OK to spy on our allies and their heads of state?
Not necessarily OK, prudence
Not necessarily OK, prudence is always a consideration, but illegal? It is absolutely not illegal or extra constitutional, where as using those assets domestically on our own citizenry is.
If you think that things like this were not done in World War II or other conflicts, or in times of peace over our existence, you would be wrong. We have done it and they have done it over and over through out history.
Those who are allies today, where once enemies, those who are allies today can also become enemies over a whole range of issues later. Every country seeks an edge in time of war and time of peace, economically and strategically.
You can not just turn the intelligence apparatus on and off by flicking a switch and expect accuracy which is paramount.
All that said, should we be using those assets on friends when there is so much more going on, I question the motive, just not the legality.
The truth of international
The truth of international relations has been summed up repeatedly as the art of spying on both your enemies and your friends while remembering which is which and when to lie about it to who.
Just because some country is our ally doesn't mean they have our best interests in mind.
Exactly Kyle
Exactly Kyle