Mike Ruppert speaks of civil war!

dissdnt

Junior Member
Messages
30
Mike Ruppert speaks of civil war!

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20041118/D.../D86EE5F00.html

This is the article about..

Reporter Convicted for Protecting Source

---

This is probably the worst thing that can happen compared to our own rights being taken away. If this continues leaks and other anonymous sources wont come foward about whats really going on and the gov will become more sinister.

This guy broke no laws and now he's going to jail, this is America right? Yeah..right..
 

Darkwolf

Active Member
Messages
713
Mike Ruppert speaks of civil war!

How much?


Pretty much full and complete through your insurance company. They can't ask your doctor directly, but anything that you have can be surmised. Thats sidestepping privelage, and that loophole needs to be closed.
 

icepick_lobotomy

Junior Member
Messages
46
Mike Ruppert speaks of civil war!

Originally posted by Darkwolf@Nov 18 2004, 08:29 PM
How much?


Pretty much full and complete through your insurance company. They can't ask your doctor directly, but anything that you have can be surmised. Thats sidestepping privelage, and that loophole needs to be closed.


So this means they can get ahold of my std records? :huh:
 

icepick_lobotomy

Junior Member
Messages
46
Mike Ruppert speaks of civil war!

Originally posted by dissdnt@Nov 18 2004, 08:02 PM
http://apnews.myway.com/article/20041118/D.../D86EE5F00.html



This guy broke no laws and now he's going to jail, this is America right? Yeah..right..


But that's a huge grey area man, this guy obviously doesn't have the rights say an unborn clump of cells / fetus or a fox news reporter does so who are we question fuhrer bush's perogative about enforcing his jesus mandate?
 

Darkwolf

Active Member
Messages
713
Mike Ruppert speaks of civil war!

But that's a huge grey area man, this guy obviously doesn't have the rights say an unborn clump of cells / fetus or a fox news reporter does so who are we question fuhrer bush's perogative about enforcing his jesus mandate?


You can be compelled to testify against anyone other than yourself, your spouse and your children in this country. The media has enjoyed some protection under the first ammendment, however, whoever released that tape did commit a crime, and not telling was impeding an investigation. That is a crime.
 

Timmy G

Member
Messages
167
Mike Ruppert speaks of civil war!

One of the traits that makes American society among the greatest in the world is its freedom of speech and of the press. The free flow of information has long been recognized as one of the hallmarks of a free society, and is essential to the proper functioning of a free press. Journalists' ability to keep sources of information private and confidential helps to obtain this free flow of information. Without this confidentiality, sources of information may decrease and the press would no longer be able to provide the same quality and quantity of information to the public. Because of the recognized importance of the free flow of information to the press, the privilege of confidentiality will only be overcome where a demonstrated, specific need for evidence presents a paramount interest to which the privilege must yield.

That said, there is no "Newsman's Privilege", and that fact was established unequivocally in the Supreme Court's 1972 Branzburg decision, which stated: The issue in (these type of) cases is whether requiring newsmen to appear and testify abridges the freedom of speech and press guaranteed by the First Amendment. We hold that it does not.

I suppose it all depends on if one feels that the information disclosed is 'important' or not. Who decides if it is pertinent information? When it comes to the article in question - who figured the information disclosed is important? Was is perhaps the guy who was running against the man in question?

....its all headed in a direction that stinks.. s'all i gotta say :huh:
 

Darkwolf

Active Member
Messages
713
Mike Ruppert speaks of civil war!

the privilege of confidentiality will only be overcome where a demonstrated, specific need for evidence presents a paramount interest to which the privilege must yield.

I think that the identity of a person who leaks classified or otherwise leagally protected information probably fits this bill. Notice that the newsman was in no trouble for airing the info once he had it. Freedom of the press is covered. Freedom to leak classified info or to cover for those who do is not.
 

Top