Congress and the Press Told to Hush

[Joann Raytar]

First the President told Congress to keep its lips sealed and restricted access to classified information. Now the networks have said they will begin censoring footage of Bin Laden's post attack speeches and conferring with the government for editorial support.

Do you think this is going to far or do you think this is necessary to limit security risks?

I do believe that the press has reported too much on certain things they shouldn't have but I'm not sure about the latest level censorship.

The US Constitution: http://www.usconstitution.net/const.txt

[chip anderson]

No censorship. Bush just told them that unless they straighten up they would not get any more information from him and underlings. Censorship is when there is some legal punishment for publishing. The press "right to report" and the "public's right to know" if there are such things do not include the right to aid and abet the enemies of the United States (or the Confederate States either for that matter).

As you no doubt heard, during the last administration, when the Seals were sent ashore in Somalia, they were greeted by movie lights from the press during the secret night time landing. We had bodies dragged thought the streets there. Someone did suggest that if the Seals had just wasted the press this practice would stop. But in any event the previous administration and the press treated secret military operations as a media event.

"Loose lips Sink Ships"

Chip: :finger:

Also remember that most of the press carries an ACLU (Anti-Christ Legal Underwriters) or American Communist Party card. Dey on de other side, hon.

[Joann Raytar]

I have to admit that the press running the story about 1,000 mountain troops leaving New York state and landing in the airport at Ubekistan was pretty idiotic on their part (unless it was an intended leak to draw the Taliban North); I am pretty sure one of our goals wasn't to meet the Taliban welcome wagon upon landing.

[Pete Hanlin]

I think drastic times call for drastic measures. This isn't George W. telling congress not to criticize his administration... This is the President telling a bunch of guys and gals that they are going to have to keep their mouths shut if they want to be kept abreast of sensitive developments.

Pete

[Cindy Hamlin]

Remember the Gulf War? There were camera crews on the ground waiting for them as the troops landed. We are in a different kind of war with a different enemy.

We need to keep quiet and catch them running! Not tell them what is happening and have them meet us! I think the press needs to back away in order to keep our personnel safe!

I agree with the President that we need to censor his transmissions in case he is speaking in code to his underlings. I can remember the day after we bombed Libya, seeing a reporter interview Momar Kahdafi (sp?)! I was incensed! Here our country had just tried to cripple him militarily and we put him on the screen to boo hoo about the devastation to his home. GIVE ME A BREAK!

~Cindy

[Joann Raytar]

True; the race for a story has overcome thoughtful reporting. What is making me uncomfortable are the civilian death reports. They know Americans have a soft spot for innocent people being killed or injured; we value life. I think I remember hearing that Hussein rounded up patients from multiple hospitals and put them in one to make it look like a US attack had injured many innocent civilians; I don't put it past the Taliban to use the same type of tactics. Stories like these will damage the resolve of the American people to keep going after terrorist. We definitely cannot have this happen.

Even if we stop our action in Afganistan, the terrorist are still going to target us. Bin Laden is a self serving power monger. He isn't going to call a truce because we walk away from Afganistan. Some folks think we should solve this some other way. Bin Laden isn't going to stop because we ask him to cut it out. The man is a tyrant and his attacks are getting worse. After looking at the series of events that led to 9/11, Osama is a serial killer in my mind. Profiles of serial killers all point in one direction; Bin Laden's attacks will only continue to get worse and worse until he is stopped.

[Cindy Hamlin]

Jo,
I do not think the American people will lose their resolve for this war! I think america is ******! We had innocent people killed doing their normal day to day activities. The leveled two icons of the 20th century-the trade towers. American people no longer feel safe. We always felt that war and tragedy was something for the rest of the world.

Look at the previous attacks in our country. Pearl Harbor, where the military was attacked by the Japanese on our shores and Oklahoma City, where they attacked the Federal Building. I am not attempting to lessen either of these events, but I feel they pale in regard to the World Trade Center. We MUST rid out any influence that keeps us from being the "Land of the free, the home of the brave"!

Who'd have thought you would see memorial services with ministers of various religions all speaking at. The American flag proudly displayed. The "Star Spangled Banner", "America" and "God Bless the USA" played on many of the major radio stations several times a day. We have united (The United States of America). If one good thing has happened out of all this it is that! People who never cared are saying God Bless America!

I believe the only thing that could derail this war is for the country to become crippled economically by the cost of it.

[Joann Raytar]

I know Cindy. It is just that there are a number of people out there who think that if we just talk to the Taliban they will hand Bin Laden over; this isn't going to happen. If we stop the military strikes against the Taliban, then we are letting a mass murderer and those who aid and abeit him get away. Cutting off the money supply may stop the Taliban from building up their official military units but it will not stop the terrorist strikes against us. I don't see any other way of stopping this other than what we are currently doing.

[Pete Hanlin]

I see George W. has pretty much declined the Taliban's latest "offer" to turn Bin Laden over to a third party "if" we stop our bombing. Thankfully, the administration has had the good sense to flatly regect thier empty and dubious proposal.

They'll turn him over. As Taliban members begin to perish (and they can't all hide), they will begin to reconsider the value of protecting their pet terrorist.

As for the media, they've proven their inability to be "Americans First" in past wars- so let them whine all they want! As long as we get to find out who, why, when, and how after the bombs are dropped, I for one am satisfied to be slightly "uninformed" for the present!

Pete

[Joann Raytar]

Pete,

I've noticed the American flag pins have started showing back up on press lapels since the events of last week.

[Pete Hanlin]

Yes, I've noticed the reappearance of American Flag pins, and ribbons lately as well... I don't suppose this has anything to do with the fact that some of the recent anthrax attacks have been targeted at the major media (suddenly, the issue becomes more than the "objective" reporting of events when the target is one's own self and colleagues)???

To be perfectly honest, I don't watch too much of the coverage anymore. I listen to CNN as I get ready for work in the morning, and even that tiny bit of "coverage" is enough to turn my stomach.

Its the same stuff every day! Let's see, this morning they were reading the transcripts between the towers and the doomed flights (like I really want to hear them?!?). Then a quick shot of the ruins and cue the blonde who grimaces and says "Yes, Bob, its just so hard to see those pictures."

THEN, we have the interview with a terrorist "expert" who is outlining some of the potentially worst targets the terrorists could hit. What is the point of this little excersize? Seems to me all it does is cause more anxiety (now I'm wondering exactly how severe an impact it would have on our economy if one of our refineries were hit- as the "expert" suggests it could be).

The only thing I make any effort to watch anymore are press conferences with Director Ascroft- or with any of the other key government officials working on a solution to this new threat. Other than that, I do exactly what we all should be doing- I go to my job, do the things I need to do, and pretty much don't think about the infintesimal chances of being involved in a terrorist attack.

Pete

[Steve Machol]

You're right Pete - the press is going overboard on it's repetitive reporting of these events. The latest thing that bothers me is how they're all trumping up the charge that Americans are 'gripped with fear'!

I don't know about you, but no one I know is 'gripped with fear'. People are concerned and cautious, of course, but no one is obsessing about this to the extent that the news media makes them out to be.

[Darris Chambless]

Pete's right,

When your own life may be at risk people tend to do what they can to save their own skin, especially people as weak minded and useless as most of the press are. They want the American people to be there for them so they've decided to start showing "patriotism." The sad part is that they're not showing patriotism, they're showing chickensh** selfishness! Also I don't see it as something to sit back and sigh "Finally they've come to their senses." about. I find it appauling and that "show of patriotism" makes me consider them even more of an enemy to American sensibility than I've thought of them in the past.

The Press. Don't trust them!

Darris "I just wish the Anthrax letter had found it's way to Peter Jenning desk instead of Tom Brokaw's" C.

[Joann Raytar]

I pretty much do the same thing you do Pete. I check CNN before work and for a few minutes when I get home. I agree; most folks I know aren't panicked at all by the latest news. I am surprised that there are folks out there that can't see through the ability of the press to sensationalize just about everything they cover.

I am glad about one thing. They are playing down the story about those aid workers on trial. What exactly did the press hope to accomplish with that one? They had that one gal's parents on everyday; after all of the folks who died in New York and Washington, did the press actually think the US Government was going to back off because of those folks?

[Pete Hanlin]

I have a friend who works with the Sheriff's Department... he was commenting on how silly it was of parents to rush to the local H.S. on 11 September after the terrorist strike. His observation was that over 75% of the parents carting their teens away didn't have them buckled up and thought "they have a far greater chance of being killed in an accident on their way home than they do from a terrorist strike on Lincoln High School!"

I think it is despicable that the press is failing to show any self-restraint while covering this event. There can be nothing more disgraceful to the memories of people killed and injured by these events than having their deaths used for a money-making media extravaganza!

I haven't even so much as thought about terrorism today- much less obsessed over whether my mail is tainted by anthrax! I'll admit I will probably feel a moment or two of unease while flying next weekend- but that's pretty normal anyway.

Good evening and good night!
Pete