Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


- - - - -

Associated Press Blasts Feds


  • Please log in to reply
24 replies to this topic

#16    Taun

Taun

    A dashing moose about town...

  • Member
  • 5,397 posts
  • Joined:19 May 2010
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tornado Alley (Oklahoma)

Posted 14 May 2013 - 11:45 AM

I greatly mistrust (and generally despise) the media as it is today (ALL media - not just some networks, etc) but I'm not too sure they are not right in this...

I do believe that they should not have the right to withhold their sources - because it's way too easy for them to just invent something and then say "Sorry. I can't give you my source"... And to be frank I'm not sure I understand where that "right" came from... As in: Where does it specifically say they can withhold their sources?... I'm sure it does somewhere - I just don't know where... (I don't think the 1st Amendment specifically says that)...

Anyway... I agree that this should be handled in a courtroom or before an official committee rather than just a Justice Department demand...


#17    Ashotep

Ashotep

    Telekinetic

  • Member
  • 7,367 posts
  • Joined:10 May 2011
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:USA

  • Courage is being scared to death but saddling up anyway-John Wayne

Posted 14 May 2013 - 12:49 PM

They may of had a good reason to search their phone records but I think they should have to get a warrant to do this.  Too much is allowed without a warrant anymore.


#18    Ashotep

Ashotep

    Telekinetic

  • Member
  • 7,367 posts
  • Joined:10 May 2011
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:USA

  • Courage is being scared to death but saddling up anyway-John Wayne

Posted 14 May 2013 - 12:52 PM

View PostLeave Britney alone!, on 14 May 2013 - 04:46 AM, said:

If someone is leaking classified information they would be the target of the investigation. Checking up on the APs phone conversations could lead back to the leak. They were not being spied on just for the fun of it.
I hope they weren't being spied on just for fun but who knows anymore since they can do so much without a warrant.


#19    Kowalski

Kowalski

    The Original Penguin Conspiracy Theorist

  • Member
  • 4,102 posts
  • Joined:14 Mar 2013
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:* Madgascar *

  • It's All Some Kind Of Wacked Out Conspiracy....

Posted 14 May 2013 - 12:53 PM

View PostSir Wearer of Hats, on 14 May 2013 - 02:50 AM, said:

Whenever people say "for national security" I hear "Deuchland Deuchland ich bien alles...".
Journalists are protected by one of those vaunted Amendments you Americans hold in such regard until it's inconvenient. You either have a free press or you don't. Saying "we want to know where this leak came from, so we're going to piddle on your freedoms" isn't a free press.

The whole POINT of the founding fathers saying we had a free press was so we could keep a close eye on what the government was doing. NOT so they can do stuff like this. They can't pick and choose which parts of the Constitution they want to follow. It doesn't work like that....


#20    Babe Ruth

Babe Ruth

    Non-Corporeal Being

  • Member
  • 8,373 posts
  • Joined:23 Dec 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected
  • Location:27North 80West

Posted 14 May 2013 - 08:12 PM

View PostSir Wearer of Hats, on 14 May 2013 - 02:50 AM, said:

Whenever people say "for national security" I hear "Deuchland Deuchland ich bien alles...".
Journalists are protected by one of those vaunted Amendments you Americans hold in such regard until it's inconvenient. You either have a free press or you don't. Saying "we want to know where this leak came from, so we're going to piddle on your freedoms" isn't a free press.

Bravo!  That much better coming from somebody outside the country!

The irony is almost delicious, coming from the presstitute MSM.  Though I do consider AP to be more or less an exception to the rule regarding the presstitute media.  Julian Assange must be chuckling, there in his embassy prison.

For those of us who have been criticizing the illegal methods of government for all these years, this is a bittersweet vindication.

NYT, AT & Treason and many others enabled and covered up the government crimes, and now quickly the shoe is on the other foot.

Yes, we have the government we deserve.


#21    Babe Ruth

Babe Ruth

    Non-Corporeal Being

  • Member
  • 8,373 posts
  • Joined:23 Dec 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected
  • Location:27North 80West

Posted 14 May 2013 - 08:16 PM

View PostHilander, on 14 May 2013 - 12:49 PM, said:

They may of had a good reason to search their phone records but I think they should have to get a warrant to do this.  Too much is allowed without a warrant anymore.

After 911 and the Unpatriot Act, warrants are sooo 1787, you know?

Rather like the specious notion of "embedded" journalism of the GWOT, and now those embedded are discovering that they might also be sodomized, figuratively.

ACLU and others warned that the Constitution was being gutted, but everybody rationalized it away.  Now they are discovering the reality of it.  Quite predictable, 10 years ago.


#22    Harte

Harte

    Supremely Educated Knower of Everything in Existence

  • Member
  • 8,920 posts
  • Joined:06 Aug 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Memphis

  • Skeptic

Posted 15 May 2013 - 02:31 AM

View Postshrooma, on 14 May 2013 - 03:49 AM, said:

.
y'know sir (and congrats on the recent knighthood btw) ...


I'd like to add my congratulations as well, Sir Wearer.  About time.  What took them so long?

Harte

I've consulted all the sages I could find in yellow pages but there aren't many of them. - The Alan Parsons Project
Most people would die sooner than think; in fact, they do so. - Bertrand Russell
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong. - Thomas Jefferson
Giorgio's dying Ancient Aliens internet forum

#23    xFelix

xFelix

    Astral Projection

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 653 posts
  • Joined:30 Dec 2011
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Florida

  • Yea I'm Pagan, oh no!

Posted 15 May 2013 - 02:54 AM

We're still not over the fact that our constitution doesn't mean anything anymore?

Wow you guys are late.

The Constitution is really The CON-stitution.

Our country is not what it should be. Security comes at the price of our freedoms, meanwhile we are being disarmed. Constitutional rights are constantly disregarded, and referred to as "obsolete doctrine". Americans are paying tax dollars to buy the equipment necessary to be spied on. The list really goes on and on, this stuff is no shock, the only shock is how the AP is so surprised that it's happening to them. I must have missed the part of the constitution that says AP has rights, but the people don't.. Oh wait that one don't exist, we all have rights.. They've all been trampled.

You guys aren't really surprised by this are you?

Edited by xFelix, 15 May 2013 - 02:59 AM.

My posts consist of my opinions, beliefs, and experiences, feel free to disagree in a respectful manner.

I have a right to my beleifs, just as you have a right to not agree with them.

So long as we respect each other's beliefs, we won't have a single problem.


#24    Babe Ruth

Babe Ruth

    Non-Corporeal Being

  • Member
  • 8,373 posts
  • Joined:23 Dec 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected
  • Location:27North 80West

Posted 15 May 2013 - 01:38 PM

Watching the TV news last night, the presstitute media has already rationalized away the government's illegal actions in this case.

Holder claimed that the american people were in real danger, and the govt simply HAD to violate the Fourth Amendment so that the leaker of certain things might be found.  And the presstitute media has now accepted that rationale.  A pretty sad state of affairs for this once great country.


#25    Kowalski

Kowalski

    The Original Penguin Conspiracy Theorist

  • Member
  • 4,102 posts
  • Joined:14 Mar 2013
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:* Madgascar *

  • It's All Some Kind Of Wacked Out Conspiracy....

Posted 15 May 2013 - 02:03 PM

View PostBabe Ruth, on 15 May 2013 - 01:38 PM, said:

Watching the TV news last night, the presstitute media has already rationalized away the government's illegal actions in this case.

Holder claimed that the american people were in real danger, and the govt simply HAD to violate the Fourth Amendment so that the leaker of certain things might be found.  And the presstitute media has now accepted that rationale.  A pretty sad state of affairs for this once great country.

I guess some people don't remember Watergate...






Quote


George Will: Forgetting the lessons of Watergate



"He has, acting personally and through his subordinates and agents, endeavored to ... cause, in violation of the constitutional rights of citizens, income tax audits or other income tax investigations to be initiated or conducted in a discriminatory manner."
— Article 2, Section 1, Articles of Impeachment

— Adopted by the House Judiciary Committee July 29, 1974

The burglary occurred in 1972, the climax came in 1974, but 40 years ago this week — May 17, 1973 — the Senate Watergate hearings began exploring the nature of Richard Nixon's administration. Now the nature of Barack Obama's administration is being clarified as revelations about IRS targeting of conservative groups merge with myriad Benghazi mendacities.
This administration aggressively hawked the fiction that the Benghazi attack was just an excessively boisterous movie review. Now we are told that a few wayward souls in Cincinnati, with nary a trace of political purpose, targeted for harassment political groups with "tea party" and "patriot" in their titles. The Washington Post reported Monday that the IRS also targeted groups that "criticized the government and sought to educate Americans about the U.S. Constitution." Credit the IRS operatives with understanding who and what threatens the current regime.
Jay Carney, whose unenviable job is not to explain but to explain away what his employers say, calls the IRS' behavior "inappropriate." No, using the salad fork for the entree is inappropriate. Using the IRS for political purposes is a criminal offense.
It remains to be discovered whether the chief executive is guilty of more than an amazingly convenient failure to superintend the excesses of some executive branch employees beyond the Allegheny Mountains. Meanwhile, file this under "What a tangled web we weave":
The IRS official in charge of the division that makes politically sensitive allocations of tax-exempt status said last Friday that she learned of the targeting of conservatives from news reports. But a draft report by the IRS inspector general says this official was briefed on the matter two years ago.
An emerging liberal narrative is that this tempest is all the Supreme Court's fault: The Citizens United decision — that corporations, particularly nonprofit advocacy groups, have First Amendment rights — so burdened the IRS with making determinations about who deserves tax exempt status that some political innocents in Cincinnati inexplicably decided to begin by rummaging through the affairs of conservatives. Ere long, presumably, they would have gotten around to groups with "progressive" in their titles.
Remember, all campaign "reform" proposals regulate political speech. And all involve the IRS in allocating speech rights.

Liberals, whose unvarying agenda is enlargement of government, suggest, with no sense of cognitive dissonance, that this IRS scandal is nothing more sinister than typical government incompetence. Five days before the IRS story broke, Obama, sermonizing 109 miles northeast of Cincinnati, warned Ohio State graduates about "creeping cynicism" and "voices" that "warn that tyranny is ... around the corner." Well.
He stigmatizes as the vice of cynicism what actually is the virtue of skepticism about the myth that the tentacles of the regulatory state are administered by disinterested operatives. And the voices that annoy him are those of the Founders.
Time was, progressives like the President 100 years ago, Woodrow Wilson, had the virtue of candor: He explicitly rejected the Founders' fears of government. Modern enlightenment, he said, made it safe to concentrate power in Washington, and especially in disinterested executive branch agencies run by autonomous, high-minded experts. Today, however, progressivism's unambiguous insinuation is that Americans must be minutely regulated because they are so dimwitted they will swallow nonsense. Such as: There was no political motive in the IRS targeting political conservatives.
Episodes like this separate the meritorious liberals from the meretricious. When the IRS story broke, The Washington Post led the paper with it, and, with an institutional memory of Watergate, published a blistering editorial demanding an Obama apology. The New York Times consigned the story to page 11 (its Page One lead was the umpteenth story about the end of the world being nigh because of global warming). Through Monday, the Times had expressed no editorial thoughts about the IRS. The Times' Monday headline on the matter was: "IRS Focus on Conservatives Gives GOP an Issue to Seize On." So that is the danger.
If Republicans had controlled both houses of Congress in 1973, Nixon would have completed his term. If Democrats controlled both today, the Obama administration's lawlessness would go uninvestigated. Not even divided government is safe government, but it beats the alternative.

Taken from http://www.unionlead...9589&source=RSS

Edited by Kowalski, 15 May 2013 - 02:03 PM.





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users