I am going to cite Raven's post on the Times treason for a 2nd time today, regarding one of the comments. It is similar to something that I have heard around the left-o-sphere a few times, namely, that the terrorists already knew we were involved in all types of intelligence programs, such as electronic surveillance and tracing illicit money.
Ah, but did they really know, or just suspect? Surely they knew that the United States would use all sorts of intelligence assets, CIA, FBI, DIA, military intelligence, Secret Service (remember, they are part of the Dept. Of Treasury, and are involved in money operations), etc. But they did not know details. Details which allow them to change tactics to stymie investigators.
Is the press, including the New York Times, above the law? Can they not be held liable for their actions?
Let's say the Times writes a story about you. They disclose your social security number, all your personal information, DOB, DL#, height, weight, that cute birthmark on your, well, you know, how much money you make, your bank account #, debit card #, and pin #. They tell us your credit card #, its expiration date, and CV#. They list what you have bought, including that vibra…..well, you know. They tell us all about your sex life. All your details.
Well, we suspected that you had a SS#, bank account, credit card, you might have a cute birthmark on your….well, you know. We suspect you make money working, and you have a sex life. But we didn't KNOW. We only suspected.
Was it OK for the Times to release your personal information to the masses? Are you a little pissed off? Ah. But who did it hurt? You, your family, maybe some friends and lovers. But, no one will be physically harmed, right?
What the Times did was put Americans, and people world wide in danger. Real danger. The type that causes physical harm up to and including death.
Before, on the goal line
After the penalties.
What you state is incorrect. It may be a smaller scale but the potential for physical danger and death is still there if they publish a persons personal information as you suggest.
Think of these ways:
The person hiding from a abusive husband/parent or former partner. They would could be put in danger.
A criminal could target you and your family with all the information given to break into your home for theft and assault crimes.
Identity would be stolen and restoring it can take years and a fortune.
The woman you were dating could be killed by her jealous husband and he could come after you and your family.
The homophobe next door could decide to use your head for batting practice thinking of all the times he was swimming with a gay next door.
These are just some examples.
It is still possible that someone can suffer physical danger and death from having the information blasted on a paper!
Sure it’s on a smaller scale and limited to your friends, family and partners not the entire nation but the potential still exists and in my opinion even 1 death is too many for a paper printing such information.
So, in essence, the example I gave was actually worse then I thought? I really hadn’t considered those implications at the time of writing.