Reply #6: What worries me is that this sends a message to reporters to "beware" [View All]

if you report something that can in any way be conceived as hindering Homeland Security or the War on Terrorism, you will have to be prepared
for court battles and to get the media you work for to defend you.

Who wants to get into that? Wouldn't most of us seeing this and the Plame Case, back off getting involved with reporting "certain information" because of fear of being dragged through litigation for years?

Whether or not a Reporter WINS a case these days...the WARNING is what will silence all but the most zealous well protected in the media. And, that means the Repugs will have unlimited access to the Issikoff's and Russerts and they will have no fear, because they will RULE..

I hate to be so cynical..but this is like going after "whistleblowers" which we have seen time and time again always ends up with the "whistleblower" losing their job, or access or status even if what they reported was verified and caused huge change for the good.

This case is very important, and I'm glad it was posted here. But, how many Americans out there really get the significance of it? Just us here, as ususal...:-( and maybe a few law clerks or 60's folks who haven't been corrupted and still remember what "civil liberties" are.