![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
----------
In article . net, Tankfixer wrote: If it were classified secret FAS would have been closed for publishing it to the web. Actually, that's not true. Are you saying one can post current classified publications on the net and not get in trouble ? Yes. Look up the example of the classified history of the CIA's involvement in the Iranian coup in the 1950s. Short story: the classified document was leaked and put on the web. The government did nothing. It is actually not illegal to publish classified information (with some very specific exceptions). Newspapers do it all the time. If you want other examples, next time you go to a big bookstore, look for books by Bill Gertz. Gertz (a reporter for the conservative newspaper The Washington Times) has published classified documents in the back of several of his books. He has never been charged with anything. If you're interested in learning about the subject, go to the FAS website and read multiple issues of Secrecy and Government Bulletin. You'll get a sense of the limitations concerning the press and classified information. D |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]() |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
----------
In article . net, Tankfixer wrote: Look up the example of the classified history of the CIA's involvement in the Iranian coup in the 1950s. Short story: the classified document was leaked and put on the web. The government did nothing. Depends who leaks it I supose.. ;') Not really. Publishing classified material is not illegal in the United States, with a finite exception--the names of covert intelligence officers currently based overseas. This is based upon long precedent and the belief in the United States that a functioning democracy requires a free press that can publish information that the government does not want released. It's a little more complicated for leaking classified information to the press. In general, that's not actually illegal--99.999% of people who do it get an administrative punishment (i.e. they get fired, fined, or lose their security clearance). They don't go to jail. Only one person has gone to jail for this, Samuel Loring Morrison, back in the 1980s. There is currently a case before the courts where the government is trying to convict two people for accepting classified information and making if public. Whether they will be convicted of that is an open question. Put it this way: Person A, a govt. employee, gives classified information to a foreign govt. He goes to jail for espionage. Person B, a govt. employee, gives classified information to a newspaper and gets caught. He gets fired or given an administrative punishment. It is highly unlikely that he will go to jail. (And it is worth remembering that top level officials leak classified information all the time. People in the White House leak information to newspapers to make the White House look better. That's how the game is played in Washington.) The newspaper publishes classified information. Nothing happens to them. If you're interested in learning about the subject, go to the FAS website and read multiple issues of Secrecy and Government Bulletin. You'll get a sense of the limitations concerning the press and classified information. I may give them a look. Read up on the AIPAC case. D |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "DDAY" wrote in message ink.net... ---------- In article . net, Tankfixer wrote: Look up the example of the classified history of the CIA's involvement in the Iranian coup in the 1950s. Short story: the classified document was leaked and put on the web. The government did nothing. Depends who leaks it I supose.. ;') Not really. Publishing classified material is not illegal in the United States, with a finite exception--the names of covert intelligence officers currently based overseas. This is based upon long precedent and the belief in the United States that a functioning democracy requires a free press that can publish information that the government does not want released. It's a little more complicated for leaking classified information to the press. In general, that's not actually illegal--99.999% of people who do it get an administrative punishment (i.e. they get fired, fined, or lose their security clearance). They don't go to jail. Only one person has gone to jail for this, Samuel Loring Morrison, back in the 1980s. There is currently a case before the courts where the government is trying to convict two people for accepting classified information and making if public. Whether they will be convicted of that is an open question. Put it this way: Person A, a govt. employee, gives classified information to a foreign govt. He goes to jail for espionage. Person B, a govt. employee, gives classified information to a newspaper and gets caught. He gets fired or given an administrative punishment. It is highly unlikely that he will go to jail. (And it is worth remembering that top level officials leak classified information all the time. People in the White House leak information to newspapers to make the White House look better. That's how the game is played in Washington.) The newspaper publishes classified information. Nothing happens to them. If you're interested in learning about the subject, go to the FAS website and read multiple issues of Secrecy and Government Bulletin. You'll get a sense of the limitations concerning the press and classified information. I may give them a look. Read up on the AIPAC case. If it's not on the Internet or it doesn't agree with Tinkerbelle then it's untrue. You are wasting your time with that low level troll. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Daryl Hunt wrote:
"DDAY" wrote in message ink.net... ---------- In article . net, Tankfixer wrote: Look up the example of the classified history of the CIA's involvement in the Iranian coup in the 1950s. Short story: the classified document was leaked and put on the web. The government did nothing. Depends who leaks it I supose.. ;') Not really. Publishing classified material is not illegal in the United States, with a finite exception--the names of covert intelligence officers currently based overseas. This is based upon long precedent and the belief in the United States that a functioning democracy requires a free press that can publish information that the government does not want released. It's a little more complicated for leaking classified information to the press. In general, that's not actually illegal--99.999% of people who do it get an administrative punishment (i.e. they get fired, fined, or lose their security clearance). They don't go to jail. Only one person has gone to jail for this, Samuel Loring Morrison, back in the 1980s. There is currently a case before the courts where the government is trying to convict two people for accepting classified information and making if public. Whether they will be convicted of that is an open question. Put it this way: Person A, a govt. employee, gives classified information to a foreign govt. He goes to jail for espionage. Person B, a govt. employee, gives classified information to a newspaper and gets caught. He gets fired or given an administrative punishment. It is highly unlikely that he will go to jail. (And it is worth remembering that top level officials leak classified information all the time. People in the White House leak information to newspapers to make the White House look better. That's how the game is played in Washington.) The newspaper publishes classified information. Nothing happens to them. If you're interested in learning about the subject, go to the FAS website and read multiple issues of Secrecy and Government Bulletin. You'll get a sense of the limitations concerning the press and classified information. I may give them a look. Read up on the AIPAC case. If it's not on the Internet or it doesn't agree with Tinkerbelle then it's untrue. You are wasting your time with that low level troll. tell us again about the Air Force flying P-38's in the 1950's. redc1c4, then we'll get into the *real* howlers.... %-) -- "Enlisted men are stupid, but extremely cunning and sly, and bear considerable watching." Army Officer's Guide |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "redc1c4" wrote ... tell us again about the Air Force flying P-38's in the 1950's. I'd like to have seen them too. Unfortunately, both of my print sources claim "Neba Hachee", with one of them maintaining that P-38s, even a few scattered photo birds, were gone from active service long before 1950 (1946 withdrawn from squadron service), and were not assigned to Air Guard units. The reasons were twofold. 1. The P-51s, line dup in vast quantities on ramps around the world had equivalent range and performance (along with a lower accident rate). & 2. Even more important, those two turning made the Lighting an expensive gas hog, a real problem with post war cutbacks. P-51s remained in Air Guard Service into the mid50s, but the only P-38s around were a handful of privately owned Pylon racers and the dusty ones parked in boneyards like Davis Monathan. I guess I saw the last of the TB-25s used for navigator training at James Connally AFB, Texas, plus what must have been one of the last operational sorties by a P-47, Haitian AF, off Haiti's coast in 1963, plus later that year, Spanish versions of the He111 and a real Ju52 operating out of Palma, Majorca. In early 1942, when I was a little over 2, I am told a P-38 crashed across the street from our house on Pont Loma (overlooking the then empty flats of Mission Bay). I remember the excitement, but wasn't up on P-38s back then. My old friend and infrequent story teller, Paul Murphy of Clifton, TX, passed last year, one of those pilots who survived combat tours in P-39s and P-38s in the South Pacific. We still have an "operational" B-26 (not the old Marauder) and a TBF flying around here. On its rare flights, the B-26 takes off across the lake and passing over my ridgetop at less than 1000'. Loud! Prop-driven memories....The sound of a sortie of A1Hs flying off the deck of CVA-38. Sort of an ear-splitting stream if you had forgotten to close the hatch to the Port Wing and Vultures' Row. TMO |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "redc1c4" wrote in message ... Daryl Hunt wrote: "DDAY" wrote in message ink.net... ---------- In article . net, Tankfixer wrote: Look up the example of the classified history of the CIA's involvement in the Iranian coup in the 1950s. Short story: the classified document was leaked and put on the web. The government did nothing. Depends who leaks it I supose.. ;') Not really. Publishing classified material is not illegal in the United States, with a finite exception--the names of covert intelligence officers currently based overseas. This is based upon long precedent and the belief in the United States that a functioning democracy requires a free press that can publish information that the government does not want released. It's a little more complicated for leaking classified information to the press. In general, that's not actually illegal--99.999% of people who do it get an administrative punishment (i.e. they get fired, fined, or lose their security clearance). They don't go to jail. Only one person has gone to jail for this, Samuel Loring Morrison, back in the 1980s. There is currently a case before the courts where the government is trying to convict two people for accepting classified information and making if public. Whether they will be convicted of that is an open question. Put it this way: Person A, a govt. employee, gives classified information to a foreign govt. He goes to jail for espionage. Person B, a govt. employee, gives classified information to a newspaper and gets caught. He gets fired or given an administrative punishment. It is highly unlikely that he will go to jail. (And it is worth remembering that top level officials leak classified information all the time. People in the White House leak information to newspapers to make the White House look better. That's how the game is played in Washington.) The newspaper publishes classified information. Nothing happens to them. If you're interested in learning about the subject, go to the FAS website and read multiple issues of Secrecy and Government Bulletin. You'll get a sense of the limitations concerning the press and classified information. I may give them a look. Read up on the AIPAC case. If it's not on the Internet or it doesn't agree with Tinkerbelle then it's untrue. You are wasting your time with that low level troll. tell us again about the Air Force flying P-38's in the 1950's. redc1c4, then we'll get into the *real* howlers.... %-) You prove me wrong. You have yet to do that. You weren't even a twinkle in your daddy's eye in 53. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Well let's see......
If we accept that the Phantom ever carried a designation "FB-4", then there must have been a collateral "FB-105"....(and I sure never heard of that bird). Now, there was that short lived F4H..... TMO |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Apr 27, 2:54 am, redc1c4 wrote:
Daryl Hunt wrote: "DDAY" wrote in message link.net... ---------- In article . net, Tankfixer wrote: Look up the example of the classified history of the CIA's involvement in the Iranian coup in the 1950s. Short story: the classified document was leaked and put on the web. The government did nothing. Depends who leaks it I supose.. ;') Not really. Publishing classified material is not illegal in the United States, with a finite exception--the names of covert intelligence officers currently based overseas. This is based upon long precedent and the belief in the United States that a functioning democracy requires a free press that can publish information that the government does not want released. It's a little more complicated for leaking classified information to the press. In general, that's not actually illegal--99.999% of people who do it get an administrative punishment (i.e. they get fired, fined, or lose their security clearance). They don't go to jail. Only one person has gone to jail for this, Samuel Loring Morrison, back in the 1980s. There is currently a case before the courts where the government is trying to convict two people for accepting classified information and making if public. Whether they will be convicted of that is an open question. Put it this way: Person A, a govt. employee, gives classified information to a foreign govt. He goes to jail for espionage. Person B, a govt. employee, gives classified information to a newspaper and gets caught. He gets fired or given an administrative punishment. It is highly unlikely that he will go to jail. (And it is worth remembering that top level officials leak classified information all the time. People in the White House leak information to newspapers to make the White House look better. That's how the game is played in Washington.) The newspaper publishes classified information. Nothing happens to them. If you're interested in learning about the subject, go to the FAS website and read multiple issues of Secrecy and Government Bulletin. You'll get a sense of the limitations concerning the press and classified information. I may give them a look. Read up on the AIPAC case. If it's not on the Internet or it doesn't agree with Tinkerbelle then it's untrue. You are wasting your time with that low level troll. tell us again about the Air Force flying P-38's in the 1950's. redc1c4, then we'll get into the *real* howlers.... %-) -- "Enlisted men are stupid, but extremely cunning and sly, and bear considerable watching." Army Officer's Guide Don't know about Air Force but this site says "late 50s" and I seem to remember some P/F-38 camera or collection aircraft associated with the JTF-8 nuke tests in the 1962 era. The Wiki cites F-4 and F-5 designations for the camera and recce version. http://library.thinkquest.org/13831/p-38.html http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P-38_Lightning |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Jack Linthicum" wrote in message oups.com... On Apr 27, 2:54 am, redc1c4 wrote: Daryl Hunt wrote: "DDAY" wrote in message link.net... ---------- In article . net, Tankfixer wrote: Look up the example of the classified history of the CIA's involvement in the Iranian coup in the 1950s. Short story: the classified document was leaked and put on the web. The government did nothing. Depends who leaks it I supose.. ;') Not really. Publishing classified material is not illegal in the United States, with a finite exception--the names of covert intelligence officers currently based overseas. This is based upon long precedent and the belief in the United States that a functioning democracy requires a free press that can publish information that the government does not want released. It's a little more complicated for leaking classified information to the press. In general, that's not actually illegal--99.999% of people who do it get an administrative punishment (i.e. they get fired, fined, or lose their security clearance). They don't go to jail. Only one person has gone to jail for this, Samuel Loring Morrison, back in the 1980s. There is currently a case before the courts where the government is trying to convict two people for accepting classified information and making if public. Whether they will be convicted of that is an open question. Put it this way: Person A, a govt. employee, gives classified information to a foreign govt. He goes to jail for espionage. Person B, a govt. employee, gives classified information to a newspaper and gets caught. He gets fired or given an administrative punishment. It is highly unlikely that he will go to jail. (And it is worth remembering that top level officials leak classified information all the time. People in the White House leak information to newspapers to make the White House look better. That's how the game is played in Washington.) The newspaper publishes classified information. Nothing happens to them. If you're interested in learning about the subject, go to the FAS website and read multiple issues of Secrecy and Government Bulletin. You'll get a sense of the limitations concerning the press and classified information. I may give them a look. Read up on the AIPAC case. If it's not on the Internet or it doesn't agree with Tinkerbelle then it's untrue. You are wasting your time with that low level troll. tell us again about the Air Force flying P-38's in the 1950's. redc1c4, then we'll get into the *real* howlers.... %-) -- "Enlisted men are stupid, but extremely cunning and sly, and bear considerable watching." Army Officer's Guide Don't know about Air Force but this site says "late 50s" and I seem to remember some P/F-38 camera or collection aircraft associated with the JTF-8 nuke tests in the 1962 era. The Wiki cites F-4 and F-5 designations for the camera and recce version. http://library.thinkquest.org/13831/p-38.html http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P-38_Lightning My Gawd, Jack, don't you DARE bring in any facts or information that disagrees with the 404thk00ks. It's just plain unnatural. |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
US aviation hero receives RP recognition | [email protected] | General Aviation | 0 | November 30th 06 01:14 AM |
"Going for the Visual" | O. Sami Saydjari | Instrument Flight Rules | 101 | May 18th 04 05:08 AM |
Face-recognition on UAV's | Eric Moore | Military Aviation | 3 | April 15th 04 03:18 PM |
Visual Appr. | Stuart King | Instrument Flight Rules | 15 | September 17th 03 08:36 PM |
Qn: Casein Glue recognition | Vassilios Mazis | Soaring | 0 | August 20th 03 10:00 PM |