Should Journalists and Reporters Be Eligible for the DEATH PENALTY due to Committing Treason?

a reply to: WeMustCare

Are you prosecuting them for being implicated in the attacks or for only being a journalist?

Being a journalist implicated in an attack is the same as anyone else being implicated.

There is no special status for being a journalist nor is there a penalty for being a bad one legally.

originally posted by: watchitburn
a reply to: WeMustCare

I think it would depend on if the "journalist" was an Israeli citizen.

If not, than it's not treason. Though I'm sure an excuse for execution could be come up with.

In general, it's probably not a good practice unless blatant collusion with the terrorists is established.

Good point. Then Marwat Al-Azza is most likely labeled as a "terrorist".

She's Palestinian: www.westernjournal.com...
☠🚨

a reply to: MoreCoyoteAngels

I challenge you to find one post on ATS where death of innocents are celebrated.

*yawn*

Wake me when it's ten.

Link

Maybe stop reading Gateway pundit...that website is widely known to post far right hoaxes.

Everyone should know many journalists have been killed by Israel.

Complicit is complicit. Prosecute accordingly.

a reply to: kwaka

You consider that 'celebration'?

originally posted by: Zanti Misfit
a reply to: WeMustCare

Hmm... I Vote for Slow and Painful . On the Other Side , the Lord can Handle the Rest,,,,,,,

For deterrent purposes, slow/painful/televised (closed circuit) is likely the best way to keep others from following in a traitor or terrorist's footsteps.

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: WeMustCare

Why should we let ANYONE live who has committed treason?

The definition is too broad to warrant a death penalty for every treasonist.

Treason defined: www.merriam-webster.com...

originally posted by: Kaiju666
Complicit is complicit. Prosecute accordingly.

Complicit because of unreleased social media posts?

I’ll bite. Let’s say she was absolutely disgusting and celebrated the October 7th attacks. Was it just speech? Because pick any conflict and we can find people supporting both sides and saying hyperbolic things online.

Should we just start killing people for typing on a keyboard? Is it an opinion or did they actually help plan it?

That’s a slippery slope my friend. We keep going down that road and you might start getting killed for being perceived as a Russian apologist, Palestinian apologist, and give it five years and fill in the blank.

My posts have leaned towards Israel, but this rhetoric is very reminiscent of Iraq.

The only way you protect your own rights is defending those of people you find unpalatable.

Should self proclaimed Nazis be able to walk down a street as long as they’re non violent? Jewish people who founded the ACLU think so.

Why is that? Are they self hating Jews, or do they realize the best weapon against bad speech is allowing a forum to expose it for how despicable it is.

If we give the western governments the power to kill people for speech, maybe it takes out undesirables for a time, but that pendulum is going to swing and all of a sudden you’re going to realize the power you gave an institution can work in different ways.

I swear this world is filled with goldfish with absolutely no memory past the last news cycle.

a reply to: marg6043

Spying emulates movies, like James Bond 007, or are the movies made to emulate the real spy world?

originally posted by: VermiIion

How about the curious case of Hassan Eslaiah…

Hired by cnn and other big media.
Infiltrated Israel with the terrorists.
Initially had a press vest on.
He filmed himself riding on the back of a terrorist motorcycle.
Problem is he filmed himself holding a grenade, and streamed it.
Now he gets the hamas treatment.

Yes...Very Interesting and Thread Relevant: www.timesofisrael.com...

CNN had a hired operative at the Jan 6, 2021 Protest attempting to make it violent.

I wonder if we can legally label a News ORGANIZATION as a "Traitor"?

a reply to: MoreCoyoteAngels

You consider that 'celebration'?

Perhaps more indifference while the tide of war is on his side. It does portray an acceptance to the Gaza carpark plan. DB ain't the only one on these boards looking for any excess to disregard the toll of innocence. It might be easy for some to justify such actions at this time, not everyone is there. I don't see this approach solving any real problems, just making more.

a reply to: CriticalStinker

Easy extrapolation; lets say that the DoJ did what they wanted to do with J6. Everyone across the nation who supported it and commented in the affirmative on it would be facing charges.


This isn't a difficult question.

Journalism is legal and a pinnacle of democracy. Terrorism is illegal and antithetical to democracy. There is no mixing of the two.

a reply to: JinMI

If we allow journalist to get the death penalty for their writings, than forget the protesters on J6, they can go after people who support them online too.

Either speech is absolutely free or it isn’t. If you allow speech to be governed by democracy, you get the likes of Canada where it’s regulated to pronouns.

And there absolutely is a difference between being complicit with a crime and having an unpalatable opinion.

Could someone point out to me again evidence this journalist was complicit in a crime past having a bad journalistic opinion? I’ll eat crow if I see it, I read the article and only saw this is all based off of four unreleased social media posts.

a reply to: CriticalStinker

IDK if its this one or another one but there was a journalist who was posing with grenades in hand at the beginning of the attacks on Oct, 7.

a reply to: JinMI

Journalism is legal and a pinnacle of democracy.

It is on the back foot these days as it contends with the National Security act. How did the journalism of Julian Assange when he got some Podesta emails? Geoengineering is national security while the public gets some goy slop climate change garbage. Where are all the government-corporate contracts as the jab came out?

Journalism used to be the 4th pier of democracy, keeping an eye on the others. Now it is protecting some well financed agendas. Social media is picking up some of line, some are doing better than others.

originally posted by: JinMI
a reply to: WeMustCare

Are you prosecuting them for being implicated in the attacks or for only being a journalist?

Being a journalist implicated in an attack is the same as anyone else being implicated.

There is no special status for being a journalist nor is there a penalty for being a bad one legally.

We'll see how Israel views them. Maybe call in the NBC News boss for that Region and find out what he knows.

a reply to: CriticalStinker

Isn't a Gag-Muzzle order the same as limiting "free speech"?

originally posted by: kwaka
When it comes to inciting terrorism and applauding the massacre of innocence, how many are guilty on this site?

Erm, we are not journalists. Most of us here don't get paid. It's our own opinion and hence different from supposing to report to whole countries via news media.
If any paid shills do it here, meh, I can tell their agenda, but newd reporters or journalists who betray their own country during war are part of the war machine and must not cause more trouble by lying.

Maybe not the death penalty but yes, they should be charged and punished. Does neutral reporting not exist anymore?

No.

Proper ethical journalism (only a handful of US journalists sill do this) requires being objective, uncovering corruption and interviewing or being embedded with ''enemy forces' to provide as unbiased and accurate an account of evens as possible - this practice uncovered major war crimes by US and Australian troops during iraq and Afghanistan.

This doesn't appear to be ethical journalism and appears to gloryfy terrorism if we go off the unreleased transcripts and should be treated as such.

Introducing the death penalty is a massive slippery slope and giving government even more totalitarian control as the job of journalists is to uncover crimes and corruption, inform the public and hold governments to account so advanced democracies can exist.

Governments have a habit of falsely claiming that real ethical journalism such as Wikileaks releasing footage of war crimes in Iraq is a treasonous act and in the case of the US they whitewash and sanatise war via the practice of embedding journalists with troops and totally controlling the areas journalists are allowed to film and 61 journalists were killed in the war if they didn't adopt that practice.

EDIT: The claim by NBC that they weren't aware of her social media posts is complete BS as such htins are very heavilly screened before hiring andvery closely monitored if someone is freelance or working for the organisaion - primarilly to protect the media outlets reputation and avoid loss of income but also to keep an eye on objectiviy and accuracy.