[flumpcakes]

This seems reasonable to me? If a western press were outside missile factories saying "this is the only place our super missiles are built!" I would expect the department of defence to block that information from being published...

[SauciestGNU]

That's unlawful in the United States, whose values Israel purportedly represents. It's called "prior restraint".

[vundercind]

It’s very much legal in wartime, for exactly those sorts of purposes. Though I’m not sure we’ve tested the legality of it in this modern world where nobody actually formally declares war anymore—I don’t think it’s been attempted.

(Please don’t flame thinking I’m hardcore in support of a particular side in this war due to this post—you’ve very likely gotten the wrong impression. I’m commenting only on the narrow point that the US in fact can censor, including with prior restraint in certain circumstances, during war.)

[everybodyknows]

> during war

The United States's last declaration of war was 83 years ago. Since then it's been all "police actions" or some such. What meaning does "during war" carry in the world of today?

[flumpcakes]

Are you saying the United States would not block something being reported by the media? Because that is certainly false.

[mhuffman]

My understanding is that they put a lot of pressure to block things and sometimes offer quid pro quo and sometimes even implant operatives in certain media positions, but legally they can't just come in and shut it down.

[SauciestGNU]

There is not legal mechanism for that to occur unless the writer is a government employee

[feedforward]

Well the parent said there are no restrictions and there are restrictions.