Ah, the exposure of the SWIFT program is still bearing fruit. As Wizbang's own Lorie Byrd reported, the Saturday, July 1st number of The New York Times contains a nervous op-ed by Dean Baquet and Bill Keller, respectively the editor of The Los Angeles Times and the executive editor of the Gray Lady. The question that serves as its title, "When Do We Publish a Secret?," seems pretty easy to answer: Whenever they see fit.
And, quite frankly, we think these media bigwigs protest a bit too much. It's getting a mite pathetic. For example, take a gander at this portion of the piece:
A few days ago, Treasury Secretary John Snow said he was scandalized by our decision to report on the bank-monitoring program. But in September 2003 the same Secretary Snow invited a group of reporters from our papers, The Wall Street Journal and others to travel with him and his aides on a military aircraft for a six-day tour to show off the department's efforts to track terrorist financing.
You can be darn sure you've lost the argument when you stoop to the level of "Oh, yeah, well this one time...." If Messrs. Baquet and Keller are capable of such silliness, why don't they join The Nation's Katrina vanden Heuvel, who can't even admit that this brouhaha pertains to national security? To the dimwitted Ms. vanden Heuvel, everything is simple: It's all about the evil Bush administration attempting to destroy our storied freedom of the press.
In the meantime, we feel as if some conservatives have gone a bit overboard in their criticism, suggesting that The New York Times hopes for Osama bin Laden to win the War on Terrorism. We think this is wrong: If the Islamists take over the US, it'll prove tough to sell lots of copies of the Paper of Record. We have the feeling that the imams won't really take to the sassy Maureen Dowd. That infidel.
Rather, we believe that the rationale in printing the SWIFT story is simple: The New York Times believes that the Bush administration is a greater threat to the United States than is Osama bin Laden. The staff at the Gray Lady doesn't pine for an Islamic caliphate, but it does fear Dick Cheney more than al Qaeda.
In the context of leftists' hysterical carpings about the Bush administration, it all makes a certain amount of sense. And some liberal commentators, who are currently--and ridiculously--making accusations of racism against critics of the Times for disliking a paper with the words "New York" in the title, ought to stand back for a moment and think things through.
After all, our friends on the political Left have shouted about the Patriot Act as the mark of a police state. They have donned "Bush Lied, Thousands Died" T-shirts, and clutched "Bush: The Real Terrorist" placards.
Nor has the Times been immune from this hyperbole. For example, they have offered hagiographical coverage of Cindy Sheehan, blithely overlooking her loony, anti-Semitic, Castro-loving ravings, and portraying her as a beacon of sanity. And Bob Herbert has composed the same column about the evils of George Bush's foreign policy around 3,456 times by now. To read the opinion pages of the Times, you'd think that President Bush isn't just wrong, he's the spawn of Satan.
It's no surprise, then, that the folks at The New York Times have concluded that the SWIFT story must be printed, even though they could not dredge up anything illegal about it. If the country is run by Chimpy McHitler, it follows that he should be allowed no secrets. Why can't Bill Keller simply admit this?
(Note: The crack young staff normally "weblog" over at "The Hatemonger's Quarterly," where they are currently printing secrets about Bill Keller's homosexual love trysts. They seriously considered the harm that the exposure of such secrets may bring, but decided to print them anyway. What the heck. At least they don't aid a mortal enemy of the US.)
Permalink | Linking Blogs | Sphere: Related Content | Digg this! | FARK It!
Filed under:
Comments (20)
gotta love the trolls, and ... (Below threshold)1. Posted by Justrand | July 2, 2006 12:56 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
gotta love the trolls, and the NYT/LAT cabal itself, claiming it was all no big deal! Nothing secret...so move alone, please.
Ah, but how does the NYT/LAT cabal PROCLAIM it to be nothing secret??? In a rebuttal editorial titled: "When Do We Publish a Secret?"
but, but...you just said it WASN'T???
Golly, logic only a Leftist moron (redundant) could understand!
1. Posted by Justrand | July 2, 2006 12:56 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 2, 2006 00:56
2. Posted by epador | July 2, 2006 1:05 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Hey, I went over to HQ and couldn't find any pictures with circles and arrows and a paragraph on the back of each about certain trysts. Did you actually comply after serious talks with Bill and decide not to publish?
2. Posted by epador | July 2, 2006 1:05 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 2, 2006 01:05
3. Posted by Mike G in Corvallis | July 2, 2006 2:36 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
"Bill Keller's homosexual love trysts" -- homosexual? You mean he's doing male sheep now?
3. Posted by Mike G in Corvallis | July 2, 2006 2:36 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 2, 2006 02:36
4. Posted by beth | July 2, 2006 3:34 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
"Bill Keller's homosexual love trysts"
The public has a right to know!
4. Posted by beth | July 2, 2006 3:34 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 2, 2006 03:34
5. Posted by jason | July 2, 2006 4:01 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
just finished reading "The Foutainhead" for the first time. granted, it's a work of fiction - a character study of sorts, but I have to wonder if you're wrong about the media's motives, even without taking into account the book's theme...
5. Posted by jason | July 2, 2006 4:01 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 2, 2006 04:01
6. Posted by Lee | July 2, 2006 5:48 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Nicely monged.
6. Posted by Lee | July 2, 2006 5:48 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 2, 2006 05:48
7. Posted by Mark L | July 2, 2006 7:51 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
The Times adds a whole new meaning to the term "SWIFT Boating."
7. Posted by Mark L | July 2, 2006 7:51 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 2, 2006 07:51
8. Posted by Faith+1 | July 2, 2006 8:07 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
As the author said I do think it's a bit much to say the NYT wants the terrorists to win. I believe their thinking is that they just want Bush to lose so badly they don't really care what the alternatives are.
I think they are just so obsessed with being anti-Bush they are even thinking what that means on those issues where Bush is on the right side.
Tell a few secrets that allow some terrorists to get away with their plot and a few more thousand people die? That's ok, because we got Bush's poll numbers down 3 points in the telling...
8. Posted by Faith+1 | July 2, 2006 8:07 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 2, 2006 08:07
9. Posted by pdq332 | July 2, 2006 8:22 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
I disagree on one point: the left does hope for a defeat of US forces. However, this does not mean they hope for a victory of Osama bin Laden. Rather they hope for a victory by the "forces" of liberalism through withdrawl of US forces from everywhere and appeasement.
9. Posted by pdq332 | July 2, 2006 8:22 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 2, 2006 08:22
10. Posted by DavidB | July 2, 2006 9:42 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Ah, another brilliant post from Lee containing facts and analysis to debunk them racist/homophobe republicans.
The only thing monged here Lee, is you.
Oh and BTW, still waiting for those responses with supporting facts. But I'm not holding my breath, you never have bothered to supply any to support your spews.
10. Posted by DavidB | July 2, 2006 9:42 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 2, 2006 09:42
11. Posted by lawhawk | July 2, 2006 10:23 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
And Keller will be on the Sunday morning talk show circuit defending the paper's decision to run the story.
First up - with Bob Sheiffer.
11. Posted by lawhawk | July 2, 2006 10:23 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 2, 2006 10:23
12. Posted by Big Mo | July 2, 2006 11:14 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Jut a simple question to ask these New York Slimes clowns: who died and made them president of the United States?
12. Posted by Big Mo | July 2, 2006 11:14 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 2, 2006 11:14
13. Posted by Big Mo | July 2, 2006 11:44 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Isn't this the same "BRAVE" New York Slimes that was too cowardly to publish the Mohammed cartoons?
13. Posted by Big Mo | July 2, 2006 11:44 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 2, 2006 11:44
14. Posted by Ari Tai | July 2, 2006 11:53 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
re: Sec. Snow hosting the press no different..
Talk about the Left being blind and stupid. This affair is as if the Israeli press (in Gulf-1) published articles that gave latitude-longitude targeting errors in SCUD launches. "Just a little more east, Mahmud, and we'll nail the Knesset." or "What was it Ha'aretz wrote? That all of our bombs are landing in Haifa Bay! Hmm. We can fix that."
14. Posted by Ari Tai | July 2, 2006 11:53 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 2, 2006 11:53
15. Posted by ted | July 2, 2006 12:42 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
From commenter on NRO OnLine re Meet the Press this Morning (get a load of this!!!):
"Meet the Press roundtable was simply breathtaking in it's self canonization. Wow. I was left almost speechless. Well, some expletives came to mind, of course, but shouting at the TV has long since lost it's soothing effect.
Can you believe the underhanded dig that Dana Priest took at Bill Bennet by using as an example that some people want to make "casino gambling" a crime? I don't know how he did it, but the self control Bennet displayed was Olympian. I'da popped her in the kisser. And hard, too."
15. Posted by ted | July 2, 2006 12:42 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 2, 2006 12:42
16. Posted by field-negro | July 2, 2006 1:46 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Your shameless reference to Bill Keller's sex life-not that there is anything wrong with that- Kinda reminds me of the old cross examination trick in legal circles "Just when did you stop beating your wife?" You didn't have to get into details or withdraw the story, it was already put out there.
Now what if I were to tell you about a long whispered story here in Philly about the real reason Bill Gray left congress? Something to do with the senior Bush and his alleged par-amour. Now I asm not going to get into details, because I can't prove whether it's true or not. And of course, it wouldn't be fair to Bush 41-or the good reverend for that matter- to just put a story like that out there without any proof now would it.
16. Posted by field-negro | July 2, 2006 1:46 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 2, 2006 13:46
17. Posted by epador | July 2, 2006 4:11 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
F N _ I take it you had your sense of humor extracted long ago?
17. Posted by epador | July 2, 2006 4:11 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 2, 2006 16:11
18. Posted by field-negro | July 2, 2006 4:54 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
If you think it's funny to make fun of someones sexual preference -true or not- in a public forum, you would be correct. Let's just say that I am not exactly rolling over with laughter at that one.
I do, however, find other things funny. Like the constant distractions from real issues in this country. (Gay marriage,flag burning,the NYT,the ten commandments in public buidlings, manufactured outrage over the MSM, and Fox News) Now those are jokes!
18. Posted by field-negro | July 2, 2006 4:54 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 2, 2006 16:54
19. Posted by SCSIwuzzy | July 2, 2006 5:33 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
I don't think Theo Huxtable ever had a sense of humor, epador.
19. Posted by SCSIwuzzy | July 2, 2006 5:33 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 2, 2006 17:33
20. Posted by MikeSC | July 2, 2006 9:27 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
I do, however, find other things funny. Like the constant distractions from real issues in this country. (Gay marriage,flag burning,the NYT,the ten commandments in public buidlings, manufactured outrage over the MSM, and Fox News) Now those are jokes!
...says a supporter of the side who went apeshit about Valerie Plame and Jeff Ganon.
-=Mike
20. Posted by MikeSC | July 2, 2006 9:27 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 2, 2006 21:27