HYPOTHETICAL treason?

Ramtinxxl

Let's just say that a "'highly classified Pentagon order' authorizing Special Operations forces to hunt [an] al-Qaida leader [OBL] in mountains of Pakistan" were to be exposed by a well-known left-leaning newspaper, possibly endangering the lives of operatives engaged in that mission and potentially jeopardizing the success of said mission, would that newspaper publisher/reporter/management be subject to charges of treason?

Or would it be just another day in the death of America?

http://www.drudgereport.com/

fishkiller41

just another day in the death of America

dan kelly

they would most likely say its "freedom of the press" and demand their constitutional right to publish anything....seeing as they are left leaning.
sad, but true!

Kenthetoolman

Whoever exposed it to the press should be found, drug down to the basement of the pentagon and shot for treason.

watrulookinat

quote:Let's just say that a "'highly classified Pentagon order' authorizing Special Operations forces to hunt [an] al-Qaida leader [OBL] in mountains of Pakistan" were to be exposed by a well-known left-leaning newspaper, possibly endangering the lives of operatives engaged in that mission and potentially jeopardizing the success of said mission, would that newspaper publisher/reporter/management be subject to charges of treason?

Or would it be just another day in the death of America?

Do you collect military action figures?

ElMuertoMonkey

Someone had to leak it in the first place.

Treason would lie with the source, not the outlet.

Talking to a news source and expecting it to stay a secret is like peeing yourself and expecting to stay dry.

kristov

Treason? Come on. Anyone older than about 50 should be able to remember the Pentagon Papers, you know, that bothersome little (7000+ page) stolen government document that actually addmitted we were not really winning the war in Vietnam (even though we were told for years that we would win if we just sent in a few hundred thousand more troops and spent a few more years waiting for our South Vietnamese stooges to take care of themselves)! Pres. Nixon used his executive powers to try and bar the NY Times from publishing the document and when that failed he had AG John Mitchell (was that guy ever a crook) slap an injuction on the paper using the war time Espionage Act, which dated back to WWI. In a 6-3 ruling the SCOTUS told Nixon and his crew to pound sand, the Times printing presses started rolling, and we suddenly got an idea that things were no where near as rosey in Vietnam as we had been lead to believe. Strangly enough, after the papers were widely read by the US public, Pres. Nixon very soon announced that our troops would begin leaving Vietnam! The cat was out of the bag.

Now please, I know we have guys here with issues so please DO NOT take this post as spitting on anyone who served in Vietnam!

Allison9

quote:
Now please, I know we have guys here with issues so please DO NOT take this post as spitting on anyone who served in Vietnam!


we can however spit on tricky dicky can't we?

kristov

Looks like we have another new member of the Gun Broker Gang. Do they go out and actively recruit you guys?

I think that the US Supreme Court spit on Nixon and not me; not only on the Pentagon Papers but that little matter of the White House Tapes (remember those?). For the record I happen to like president Nixon, a poor boy from right here in Orange County, CA who put himself through law school and rose to the highest office in the land, but much of what he did when he got to the White House showed questionable judgement (that is being kind). I did call former AG John Mitchell a crook, are you a big fan of his? Since he was convicted of conspiracy, obstruction of justice, and perjury and sentenced to two and a half to eight years in prision (but served only about 18 months) I think that crook is a pretty accurate description.