Did the New York Times Cross the Line Between a Free Press and Treason?
Liberal columnist Mort Kondracke* echoed the sentiments of many Americans: The New York Times leaked information about a top secret banking operation, which was aimed at stopping terrorist financing and money transfers, because of their hatred for President George W. Bush.
President Bush implored the Times not to run their story, but the editors decided to disregard the presidential request. (One cannot help but wonder: If President Bill Clinton were our Commander-in-Chief today, would the editors at the New York Times comply with his request to kill the story? Most probably.)
Americans following the aftermath of the Times leak knew that part of the news story.
However, what most didn’t know was that the co-chairmen of the 9-11 Commission — Tom Keane and Lee Thompson — also contacted the New York Times and told them disclosure of the Treasury Department’s counterterrorism operation would hurt national security. The editors at the Times couldn’t care less and disregarded their plea, as well.
“In the past, I believe the New York Times got too close to the line separating honest journalism and betrayal. Now I think they crossed that line,” said a former intelligence officer who now works as an undercover detective for a large city police department.
“I also don’t believe someone from the [Treasury Department] leaked the information to the Times. I believe one of the lawmakers — either in the House or Senate — who opposes the war on terrorism leaked the information,” he added.
As yet, there are no comments emanating from Washingtion, DC regarding a full investigation of the leak. One source says he hopes the Justice Department assigns a special prosecutor to look into the case.
“We wasted millions of dollars on the so-called CIA leak case; how about investigating a serious leak that actually does impact [upon] US national security?” he added.
So far, the most vocal member of the Bush Administration regarding the New York Times and Los Angeles Times stories is Vice President Dick Cheney. “These [were] good, solid, sound programs. They [were] conducted in accordance with the laws of the land,” Cheney said.
“They are carried out in a manner that is fully consistent with the constitutional authority of the president,” Mr. Cheney said. He also said that he found it “offensive” that newspapers would publicize the secret program.
“What I find most disturbing about these stories is the fact that some in the media take it upon themselves to disclose vital national security programs, thereby making it more difficult for us to prevent future attacks against the American people,” Cheney said with obvious anger in his voice.
The New York Times stood by its coverage saying editors had judged after careful deliberations that releasing the information served the public’s interest. They didn’t explain in what way the disclosure of top secret information served the public interest, unless they include terrorists, our homegrown insurgents in congress, left-wing Stalinist groups, and your garden variety Bush-haters.
It’s been said before: Al-Qaeda and other terrorist groups don’t need to spend money on intelligence gathering and analysis. Members of the US news media are de-facto intelligence agents for them.
RELATED:
Enemies Are Reading…
Austin Bay: “An Inadequate Apologie From The Axis of Abuse”
—
Read more by this author on our site here. (Scroll down)
Jim Kouri, CPP is currently fifth vice-president of the National Association of Chiefs of Police and he’s a staff writer for the New Media Alliance. He’s former chief at a New York City housing project in Washington Heights nicknamed “Crack City” by reporters covering the drug war in the 1980s. In addition, he served as director of public safety at a New Jersey university and director of security for several major organizations. He’s also served on the National Drug Task Force and trained police and security officers throughout the country. Kouri writes for many police and security magazines including Chief of Police, Police Times, The Narc Officer and others. He’s a news writer for TheConservativeVoice.Com. He’s also a columnist for AmericanDaily.Com, MensNewsDaily.Com, MichNews.Com, and he’s syndicated by AXcessNews.Com. He’s appeared as on-air commentator for over 100 TV and radio news and talk shows including Oprah, McLaughlin Report, CNN Headline News, MTV, Fox News, etc.
Technorati Tags: Homeland Security, NSA, Terrorism, NY Times
June 26th, 2006 at 11:38 am
This is inherent proof that we do not live in a police state. The next time someone starts with the Bush=Nazi meme, one need only point out that the Times violated our national security by revealing an important terrorist-fighting program (and rendering it ineffective) and the Times has not yet been shut down.
Lincoln would have thrown the publisher in jail–and he wan’t even trying to defend us from enemy attack, he was just trying to preserve the union.
In this case, the NYT has crossed the line to give aid and comfort to the enemy. The revealing of this particular program served no measurable public good, other than to put money in the pockets of the publishers and serve as an attempt to make the current administration look bad.
On the other hand, it did make our enemies accutely aware of the particular workings of a program that we had used to successfully fight terrorists worldwide.
June 26th, 2006 at 8:26 pm
How does the media justify such actions. If we are not to have a censored media then it must exercise good judgement and professionalism something it has demonstrated time after time it cannot do when faced with the spectre of a scoop. Therefore sending the publisher, editior and reporters to prision for ten years each would probably serve to remind the press that the Espionage Act remains and the lst amendment is not a get out of jail free card that trumps everything.
August 11th, 2006 at 3:41 pm
[...] “Once the RNC learned of this error we ceased distribution of the e-mail,” said Tracey Schmitt, a party spokeswoman. Too bad. It seems more timely and apropos than ever. In public relations, if major events coincide with your message, it’s called a victory. Democrats didn’t accept the explanation. What else is news? “The defeat of the London plot is a warning that we should redouble our efforts to defeat terrorism. It shouldn’t be used as a political defibrillator by Republicans on electoral life support,” said Phil Singer, a spokesman for the Senate Democrats’ campaign committee. You mean sorta like this press statement for the DNC? The day the Britain plot was foiled, Republicans and Democrats accused the other of doing too little to deter the threat of attack. But we know what party the New York Times subscribes to. We must implement the strong recommendations of the independent 9/11 commission to improve airport security screening at checkpoints,” said House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi, stressing one of the party’s principal campaign-year promises in its drive to gain control of Congress. Yeah, sure, Nancy. Just as long as it doesn’t infringe on any far-left, ACLU-litigated liberties, right? [...]