How do you think the press will respond to this?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bill-press/the-war-on-journalists_b_16860.html
The War on Journalists by Bill Press
Fasten your seat belts. George Bush is starting another war.
As part of the war on terror, he's declared a war on reporters. According to the Washington Post, the Bush White House has dusted off an old 1917 law to haul into court any journalist who publishes a story based on classified information received through a leak.
They're doing so, says the Post, because they're upset at media reports on the network of secret CIA prisons and on Bush's warrantless phone taps. Bush says printing stories about the NSA's spy program was "a shameless act."
The White House declaring war on journalists? How Nixonian! How ironic! How hypocritical! How dangerous!
Isn't it ironic? Bush resurrects a 1917 law to go after journalists. Yet he said he couldn't obey a 1978 law requiring a court order before tapping our phones because it was "an old law."
Isn't it hypocritical? Somebody in the White House leaked the identity of an undercover CIA agent, yet Bush did nothing about it. Dick Cheney told Scooter Libby to leak classified information in order to help build the case for war in Iraq, and Bush did nothing about it. Yet now he wants to punish reporters who report on the leaks.
And isn't it dangerous - when the White House tries to silence the free press, our watchdog. They're just pissed because they got caught breaking the law.
Bush has it backwards. Media reports about secret prisons are not "shameless acts." The secret prisons themselves are shameless acts.
Stories about NSA spying are not shameless act. Spying on Americans is a shamless act.
If anybody deserves to be thrown in prison, it's not journalists who expose government wrong-doing - it's Bush and Cheney, the wrong-doers themselves.
WELL said, Judith!
Paz
Quidam, thanks but the article was cut and paste. Having said that, it could be very dangerous to turn against the press, but then again, they may cower in submission.
Posted by Judith at March 7, 2006 06:56 AMBush has been compaired to Woodrow Wilson before in his eagerness to wage wars of "idealism." This draconian 1917 law and the later Palmer raids both happened during the Wilson presidentcy.
Posted by herbal tee at March 7, 2006 08:01 AMHell, let's not stop at a 1917 law, let's go back and repeal a women's right to vote. While they are at it, maybe someone can introduce a bill to bring back slavery and public hangings. How about bringing back the quaint idea that women are chattel and must obey their white masters. Let's just throw out 230 years of our Democracy and bowdown to the fucks in this WH. Sorry for the rant, but the idea of Bush going back to a 1917 law is preposterous, beyond reason, or common sense. Oops, sorry, I forgot who I was writing about.
Posted by Judith at March 7, 2006 08:39 AM