<g> On 6/30/05, Ken Ketsdever <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Do you have Sam's credit info? > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Dana [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Thursday, June 30, 2005 11:13 AM > To: CF-Community > Subject: Re: Reporters Will Reveal Sources > > Yes. Even though I would call that poor judgement on the reporter's > part. > > By the way, I just glanced over a news story on this, and the TIME > reporter was not involved in the leak; he merely wrote a story about > it. > > Dana > > On 6/30/05, Ken Ketsdever <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > So I have access to your credit information and pass it on to a > reporter > > who prints it as part of a story on how easy it is to access people's > > credit information. I have just ruined your credit by providing that > > information to millions of people. Some of whom will use it for > illegal > > purposes. Should I be protected? Even though the information I > provided > > was private and could possibly ruin you financially. > > > > Especially if I did this as a vendetta against you. > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Dana [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: Thursday, June 30, 2005 10:56 AM > > To: CF-Community > > Subject: Re: Reporters Will Reveal Sources > > > > I have blocked out the details of the Plame case but in general the > > confidentiality of sources is valuable for its potential to shed the > > light of day on government wrongdoing. That is worth protecting, kind > > of like freedom of speech is worth protecting even if it's Nazis doing > > the talking. > > > > As I recall the name of an undercover agen was leaked in retaliation > > for the actions of her husband... that's the one we are talking about? > > Seems to me an example of the say that hard cases make bad law. > > > > Dana > > > > > > On 6/30/05, Gruss Gott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > NEW YORK - Time Inc. said Thursday it would comply with a court > order > > > to deliver the notes of a reporter threatened with jail in the > > > investigation of the leak of an undercover > > > CIA officer's name. > > > > > > In a statement, Time said it believes "the Supreme Court has limited > > > press freedom in ways that will have a chilling effect on our work > and > > > that may damage the free flow of information that is so necessary in > a > > > democratic society." ' > > > --------------------- > > > > > > I'm not sure I agree with that. The reporters essentially helped a > > > source commit a federal crime and I don't believe freedom of the > press > > > extends that far. That is, I don't think the law permits reporters > to > > > assist in a federal crime. > > > > > > For example, let's say a reporter has a mob source. Even though the > > > source is committing crimes, the reporter isn't helping, they're > just > > > reporting on the activity. Or take Watergate, while it was a crime > to > > > release the Deepthroat info, the reporters were reporting on another > > > crime committed by gov't. > > > > > > In this case, the reporters were revealing the identity of a CIA > agent > > > not because of gov't wrong doing, but to explain why Mr. Bush chose > an > > > envoy. And the revelation was not in support of abuse of power but > > > was actually abusing power. The reporters essentially assisted a > > > gov't official commit a federal crime and the beneficiary was the > > > gov't. > > > > > > Why should the constitution protect government publicity? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Find out how CFTicket can increase your company's customer support efficiency by 100% http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=49 Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:162565 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
