Posted on 06/30/2006 6:57:31 PM PDT by lancer
The battle of Midway Island was the turning point of the Pacific War. Victory at Midway was possible because the U.S. had broken the Japanese naval code. The Chicago Tribune spilled the beans in a story that ran under the headline: "NAVY HAD WORD OF JAP PLAN TO STRIKE AT SEA."
President Franklin Delano Roosevelt was furious. He knew that if the Japanese read the story, they'd suspect their codes were compromised, and change them.
The president "initially was disposed to send in the Marines to shut down Tribune tower," wrote Harry Evans. "He was talked out of that, then considered trying (Chicago Tribune publisher Robert) McCormick for treason, which carried a death penalty in wartime."
A grand jury was empanelled, but prosecution was dropped because the Japanese were still using the Purple code, evidently having missed the story. The publicity from a trial would clue them in.
So Col. McCormick escaped prosecution. But with what the Chicago Tribune had done in mind, Congress in 1950 added Section 798 to the Espionage Act of 1917. It reads in part:
"Whoever knowingly and willfully communicates, furnishes, transmits...or publishes ...any classified information...concerning the communications intelligence activities of the United States...shall be fined not more than $10,000 or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both."
Section 798 applies specifically to what the New York Times did last December, when it published a story revealing that the National Security Agency was listening in on calls from al Qaeda suspects abroad to people in the U.S.
Last week the New York Times struck again, revealing details about how the U.S. tracks terrorist financing through the SWIFT banking consortium in Belgium.
Because of the worldwide publicity these stories generated, there can be no doubt al Qaeda is aware of them, and will change its practices because of them.
"You have gravely endangered the lives of my soldiers," wrote Lt. Tom Cotton, an Army officer stationed in Iraq, in a letter to the Times. "The next time I hear that familiar explosion...I will wonder whether we could have stopped that bomb had you not instructed terrorists how to evade our financial surveillance."
"Without money, terrorism in Iraq would die because there would no longer be supplies for IEDs...and no motivation for people to abandon regular work in hopes of striking it rich after killing a soldier," wrote Army Sgt. T.F. Boggs in another indignant letter to the Times.
We spend tens of billions of dollars each year on (often not very good) intelligence. But all al Qaeda needs to buy is a subscription to the New York Times.
President Bush indicated in remarks Monday he is as angry at the Times as FDR was at the Chicago Tribune. The question is, will he do anything about it?
The reason why President Roosevelt dropped his prosecution of Col. McCormick doesn't apply. Al Qaeda can learn nothing more from the publicity of a trial than it knows already.
The administration has sound legal grounds for prosecuting the Times under the Espionage Act, Gabriel Schoenfeld argued in a lengthy essay in Commentary in March. Attorney General Alberto Gonzalez said last month this was a possibility.
Newsday columnist James Pinkerton thinks the Times should be prosecuted, but that the Bush administration lacks the political courage to do so.
For the sake of the nation's security, the Times must be prosecuted, most especially its Editor, Bill Keller. (Google "Bill Keller" + "treason" and you'll get close to 40,000 hits.)
Our policy of going only after the leakers (and fitfully at that) obviously hasn't worked.
Prosecuting the Times also could be good politics. Americans are, at best, ambivalent about the war in Iraq. But solid majorities support the steps the president has taken to protect us in the broader war on terror.
For instance, shortly after the Times exposed the NSA intercept program, a Rasmussen poll indicated 64 percent of Americans supported it. Only 23 percent were opposed.
Ordinary Americans are furious with the Times both for what it has done, and for its arrogance in doing it. And journalists don't have much popularity to lose. In a Harris survey in March, only 14 percent of respondents expressed a "great deal" of confidence in the press, while 34 percent had "hardly any."
In picking a fight with journalists over leaks, President Bush would be picking on one of the few groups in America less popular than he is, on the issue where he is on the firmest ground with the public.
Media uproar over prosecution of the Times would drown out other issues where the president is on shakier ground. This is a fight to be welcomed, not avoided.
Doesn't get much clearer than that. Do your duty, Mr. President!
The NYT has published the street addresses of Cheney and Rumsfeld's summer homes.
In the "Escapes" section of the June 30 edition, the N.Y. Times printed huge color photos of the vacation residences of Cheney and Rumsfeld, "identifying the small Maryland town where they live, showing their front driveways and, in Rumsfeld's case, actually pointing out the hidden security camera in case any hostile intruders should get careless," Horowitz writes.
Times Travel section writer Peter Kilborn even makes sure enemies of the two men will know such details as where Mrs. Rumsfeld shops in the eastern shore town of St. Michaels, Md. where the two administration officials have weekend retreats.
He even lets the curious know what street the Cheneys and Rumsfelds have to use to get to their own road.
It's all part of the war against President Bush, Horowitz charges.
10 years or $10,000?
Flush the traitors down the toilet.
If they don't fit, apply laws of physics in whatever way most suits the jury.
Google: Results 1 - 100 of about 218,000 English pages for bill keller treason. (0.33 seconds)
Hell, he needs to swing.
Yeah, and look again at the Left's relentless attacks on cutting the Intel's budget over the years! John F'n Kerry is always 100% to cut all Military & Intel funding.
And yet look how quickly the liberals/demonrats are quick to reflexively say "ITS BUSH'S FAULT" if something goes wrong: From hurricane Katrina devastating Louisiana to the farce of the many 9/11 investigations - its all Bush fault in their book.
But here we have (AGAIN) the NY Slimes in their latest & greatest war against Bush and the USA, and not strangely enough the Left is deafeningly silent!!!
Did anyone here notice that in the House that ONLY 8 democrats voted with the Republicans to Condemn the NY Slimes?? The remaining 188 all voted NO to not condemn the NY Slimes!!!
I would love to see The Prez push for the Times to be prosecuted but, it could be disastrous. He would always be remembered as the President who tried to destroy the First Amendment.
No he wouldn't. It has been attempted before...
Cool!
Please pass it on.
I disagree. Not only would it be the right thing to do, it would trample the Democrats. I don't see a downside.
What about the others? Their Fathers should be of like mind. I can't speak for them. I am responsible only for the one.They should be responsible for theirs.
The First Amendment does not- and never has- served as a shield to hide treason behind.
The issue before us is NOT a Frist Amendment issue. It might be if the Administration had taken legal steps to prevent the Times from publishing; that's prior restraint.
But, they DID publish, and publishing has consequences. In this case, if the President and his Attorney General will do their duties, the consequence will be prosecution and probable conviction on voilating the espionage act, and maybe treason.
Incidentally, the volation of the espionage act, a slam-dunk on the facts and law, exposes the Times to seizure of its assets. It time we put those seizure laws to some good use.
If we have to take them down one at a time, there is no better place to start than Jack Murtha.
Prayers for your son's safety and for the safety of all the troops.
"Whoever knowingly and willfully communicates, furnishes, transmits...or publishes ...any classified information...concerning the communications intelligence activities of the United States...shall be fined not more than $10,000 or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both."
Worth repeating till the chickens come home to roost!
He should be electrocuted. Give him the chair.
Or how about Churchills Operation Fish, when it used boats and securities (transferred to Canada when it appeared
that England might lose) which were known to all in banking in England?
You might try to act sharper than the dullest knife in the drawer.
I have had severe diarrhea with more integrity than Pinch Sulzberger, Bill Keller, Eric Lichtblau, and James Risen put together. Oh, and more valuable to the environment, as well.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.