Comments on: What was James Rosen thinking? http://blogs.reuters.com/jackshafer/2013/05/20/what-was-james-rosen-thinking/ Tue, 10 Feb 2015 19:54:39 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=4.2.5 By: Megapril http://blogs.reuters.com/jackshafer/2013/05/20/what-was-james-rosen-thinking/#comment-14269 Fri, 31 May 2013 02:47:49 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/jackshafer/?p=1621#comment-14269 Funny you should rip on Rosen when I’ve never even heard your name before…

]]>
By: RIGDUM http://blogs.reuters.com/jackshafer/2013/05/20/what-was-james-rosen-thinking/#comment-14267 Thu, 30 May 2013 20:44:09 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/jackshafer/?p=1621#comment-14267 how bad was his technique: well, he got the story and nobody else did. DOJ is now saying well, we knew he wasn’t a criminal but we had to say this to get a judge [on the third try]to let us go through all his calls, his parents calls, papers and the whole thing. This was, from the beginning, an attempt to intimidate Rosen and to attack Fox News more broadly, which Dem pols were talking about doing, including Obama. Where is the big surprise that they did what they said they said they were going to do?

]]>
By: JL4 http://blogs.reuters.com/jackshafer/2013/05/20/what-was-james-rosen-thinking/#comment-14254 Wed, 22 May 2013 22:01:51 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/jackshafer/?p=1621#comment-14254 @ertdfg, If I understand your sarcasm, which is unnecessary by the way, please understand that I’m not a fan of The Patriot Act. You are aware that Congress, under GW Bush, passed it into law giving the government a pretty-much free pass to do exactly the kind of unconstitutional search and seizure under the name of “National Security” and terrorism, right? All they have to do is word their reasoning right, and they can do what they want against the press, you, me, anyone they deem “a threat”.

So,

a) it’s legal, and
b) it’s a Republican constructed law

My question was this: Why hasn’t the press attempted to sway public opinion with their power to influence (another good thing; I appreciate it every day) for a public outcry against The Patriot Act? Were they not aware? Of course they were. Did they just think it wouldn’t affect them since they have the 1st Amendment on their side (which they should)? And is the author’s point not taken? Rosen was a moron (my words, not the author’s).

Has anyone even READ the Patriot Act? Oh, it’s all about indignant hatred so no information necessary.

]]>
By: AlkalineState http://blogs.reuters.com/jackshafer/2013/05/20/what-was-james-rosen-thinking/#comment-14253 Wed, 22 May 2013 19:51:08 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/jackshafer/?p=1621#comment-14253 Is Julian Assange (from Wikileaks)…. press? Recall that he does not hack. He simply bundles and disseminates leaked classified information to the public. So does that constitute press? What about bloggers who just re-package news. Press? If so, are they immune from surveillance if knowingly handling classified information? We keep talking about ‘the press’ as though we agree on what that even is any more. Like it’s some guy in a Clark Kent hat.

]]>
By: ertdfg http://blogs.reuters.com/jackshafer/2013/05/20/what-was-james-rosen-thinking/#comment-14252 Wed, 22 May 2013 17:34:31 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/jackshafer/?p=1621#comment-14252 This is an awesome precedent, and one we should use now before they change it again.

Accuse Lois Lerner of being a “co-conspirator” so we can investigate her fully (pleading the 5th, like that matters)… then drop the charges so we didn’t “really” do anything wrong.

Then we’ll know what’s up with the whole IRS scandal; once we invade her privacy, bug her phone and hack her computers I’m sure we’ll find something to make this worthwhile.

“Rosen has not been prevented from publishing his findings, nor has he been prosecuted.”

See, it’s totally cool as long as you don’t prosecute them for a trumped up charge; you can violate their rights and privacy without limitation and it’s totally cool with everybody.

We should really do a lot more of this… that whole “Constitutional Rights” thing gets int he way of FAR too many investigations.

Think what we could find out if nobody had any rights? It would be great… right JL4?

]]>
By: gene108 http://blogs.reuters.com/jackshafer/2013/05/20/what-was-james-rosen-thinking/#comment-14251 Wed, 22 May 2013 14:02:10 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/jackshafer/?p=1621#comment-14251 How’s the USA PATRIOT Acts I & II working out for you now, you Bush & Co. lackeys in the media?

Hahahahahahahahahahahahaha………………..

]]>
By: TCinLA http://blogs.reuters.com/jackshafer/2013/05/20/what-was-james-rosen-thinking/#comment-14249 Wed, 22 May 2013 04:28:51 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/jackshafer/?p=1621#comment-14249 I agree with the commenter above that there appears to have been a legitimate interest in not publicizing the fact that there was someone in the North Korean government (who’s likely been dead these past four years once they learned of his existence and hunted him down, thank you very much Mr. Rosen) providing us information. That fits in with operational intelligence, which should be something reporters go out of their way to protect, as they claim they do (but certainly didn’t here). The Washington Press Corpse swats at a mote in the government’s eyes while avoiding the beams in their own as they play suck-up to the people they should be exposing.

]]>
By: ludmill http://blogs.reuters.com/jackshafer/2013/05/20/what-was-james-rosen-thinking/#comment-14248 Wed, 22 May 2013 02:54:09 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/jackshafer/?p=1621#comment-14248 “Since when is it okay for anyone in any profession to leak dangerous government information to the public?”

Since The Bay of Pigs, Watergate, The Pentagon Papers, Iran Contra, Iraq WMDs, Abu Grahib, CIA black sites & rendition, Torture, NSA warrantless surveillance… all of those were technically classified and if you used the same standards Obama is using, all of those reporters could have been named ‘conspirators’ and prosecuted, and we wouldn’t know about any of those things.

Reuters running this editorial is embarassing. Their first message was about the outcome of a battle – theoretically that could have been declared classified too.

]]>
By: thelars http://blogs.reuters.com/jackshafer/2013/05/20/what-was-james-rosen-thinking/#comment-14245 Wed, 22 May 2013 02:24:27 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/jackshafer/?p=1621#comment-14245 If your main problem with the AP fiasco is with Rosen’s lacking of journalistic common sense – I have a patriot act to sell you.

]]>
By: gbatherton http://blogs.reuters.com/jackshafer/2013/05/20/what-was-james-rosen-thinking/#comment-14241 Tue, 21 May 2013 23:46:43 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/jackshafer/?p=1621#comment-14241 Before I chanced upon this article I was unaware of ‘Jack Schafer’ I was however,aware of James Rosen, who I tho/ught think w/as is a good reporter.

I am English, but I have always appreciated the origins and history, of the USA, and have great admiration for the philosophy of the founding fathers, they were amazing people.

The current administration, however, to destroy the greatest and purest nation that the we have ever seen.
Pure in that the wealth they created was based on trade and innovation.

]]>