Should Journalist be force to give up their Sources in Govt. Secret Schemes. ( Archived) (22)

Ahhhh you little devil. There was some truth to what you said years ago about working in the darkness but you couldn't tell me about it. Yeah I know you said you didn't work for them but c'mon, you really did didn't ya

I love the mystery of intelligence and even applied to the CIA many moons ago. Application was 17 pages long

Now there's something that CS never knew about me

Clearly you didn't read what i posted, or cannot digest it.

I'll spell it out. If a journalist who isn't compromised in the first place, that hasn't has his source compromised by communication, gets picked up and gets his head blown off, or drowns in a car park, or suffocates with carbon monoxide poisoning, or fies in a random mugging, how many other people will provide intelligence to that journalist.

There will be non, unless they do not practice even the most minimalistic counter-intelligence and protect their source at all costs.

It's either that or people have accidents. Understand now?

I understand. This story was on 60 Minutes this past Sunday

He says he will go to jail before he reveals his source

The last application got i looked at like that was advertised and it was a liason between the Police and other branches of the Government. When i read the apllication form i rang the Police myself to tell the staff i thought the post was political, designed to point to at one person at a future date labelling intelligence failure and blaming this post.

I am not that stupid, and told them to shred my application. The forms had some really stupid questions, and clearly they wanted a clueless idiot direct from University. Whoever took that job is waiting to be blamed if a politician or the police screw up.

Take a look at the link I posted Robbie. You have to copy and paste it in your brower.

I'm pretty sure you will have a lot to say

Benny will too

I'll tell you exactly how it works. They will already have his communications, know everything they need to know, but do not want to reveal "Sources & Methods", because they will not have a legal warrant signed by a judge with permission to tap the journalists phone.

The journalist will know his constitutional rights, which will be infringed, so if you can get him to name his source, he can be dragged in front of the court, without the government revealing the "Sources & Methods".

Protecting those methods, and attracting scrutiny is more valuable than the source, unless its a source so valuable they would have grabbed him if deemed important enough, even via rendition.

Does this sound like i know a little about it. That's entirely coincidence!