Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Dale Baker who wrote (11625)	2/12/2006 4:06:55 PM
From: KLP	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 541041

Couple of things.... When I was working I too had a top secret clearance. For whatever that was worth. If you think that the media has every right to all classified info, then why do we have classified info in the first place? If we carry that extreme to the final resting place, why are we trying to protect the US and others against aggression of any kind? Maybe kumbaya is the way to go....literally. But, yes, I do think that: IF the law is that people with security clearances are not to leak info, and that IF the law is to give every leaker 20 years in prison, then YES they should be tried and given appropriate sentences. Otherwise, why have the law? IF the media finds out the info on its own, then OK...but IF they are found to have talked to a leaker, then they should have the same law applied to them as it is to everyone else. Change the law if you don't like the law. If you want to crack down on everyone with security clearances and make it impossible for them to leak, fine. If you want to prosecute every leaker with 20 years in prison, fine. But I would never punish the media for getting information and using it. And re your note here: I'm sure your next post will be how awful it could be for the wrong classified information to get into enemy hands. In fact, the top editors have a pretty good record for not printing troop movements and stuff like that. I know your partisan point of view will not let you concede that so spare me the whole emotional argument. You are spared. Yours is a total comment on your own bias. I don't have to comment further.