Robert Cox, in his debut op/ed as a member of The Examiner’s blog board, says that Americans deserve better than what they have gotten from NYT’s Bill Keller.
This past Sunday, The Times’ executive editor published an open letter in which Keller incoherently weaves together disparate threads of past Times coverage of the run-up to the Iraq war, the Bay of Pigs invasion, administration criticism of media reporting of terror attacks in Iraq and other recent disclosures of covert intelligence operations appends a detailed critique of what purports to be the Bush administration’s case for holding off on the SWIFT story and ties up the entire package with the risible assertion that The Times decision was not borne of “any animus toward the current administration.” Nowhere does Keller address the particulars of why he felt it necessary to run the SWIFT story last Friday.
Americans deserve better.
—
It comes down to a matter of trust, something in short supply for most Americans when it comes to The New York Times. Since Sept. 11, The Times has published fabricated quotations (Maureen Dowd), fabricated datelines (Rick Bragg) and stories manufactured out of whole cloth (Jayson Blair). The Times, by many estimates, made the administration’s case for war by publishing now-discredited claims about Iraq’s WMD program (Judith Miller). Dan Rather may have made “fake but accurate” famous, but it was The New York Times that honed the practice to an art form. Maybe they could sell T-shirts?
Keller is a pathetic, self-justifying traitor to his country!
I’m curious- is there any program that the Times wouldn’t report on?
Serious question.
If they found out about a CIA mole in Al-Queda, would they report it?
Via the Captain. Will Lee condemn the NYT now?
http://www.captainsquartersblog.com/mt/archives/007341.php
This should put to rest the argument that “everyone knew we were tracking financial data” as an excuse for the actions of the New York Times. Of course everyone knew we tracked financial transactions in our efforts to defeat terrorism; we’ve talked about that from the start of the war. George Bush made that point in his September 20 speech. What the terrorists did not know — and what the Times revealed — were the specific tactics involved.
THe NYT sided with the terrorists & their sympathizers as shown by their actions. If the left doesn’t side with the terrorists, then I would expect wide and strong condemnation of the NYT. Actions speak louder than words.
From Michelle
http://michellemalkin.com/archives/005456.htm
THE TERRORIST-TIPPING TIMES
“is there any program the Times wouldn’t report on?”
Put a Democrat in office, and see how quickly “the public’s right to know” gets trumped by “we have to win the war by any means necessary (now that we’ll get the credit).”
Worthless, treasonous bastards, all of them. And somewhere Ann Coulter is shaking her head, saying “I told you so.”
But it doesn’t matter. SCOTUS just ruled that we have to tuck every terrorist in bed, give him a little plush Al-Zarqawi doll to cuddle and beg his forgiveness for being infidels. Then we’ll send them back out to murder more US soldiers.
“Why do they hate us?” Simple, lefties. Because they see how watery-weak and limp-wristed we are. I hope that before they saw my head off while screaming “allah akbar!” I have the pleasure of watching shock and terror in your eyes as you plead, “but – but – you CAN’T kill me! Bush is Hitler! The Jews are perfidious pigs! America is evil! I’m a good Democrat – I’M ON YOUR SIDE!”
I hate the New York Times. There. I said it.