We have seen evidence of their carelessness with national security, now David Horowitz has a piece at Front Page Mag about the New York Times publishing information that could endanger the Vice President and Secretary of Defense. The NYT article is in their travel section and not a political piece, but still, are they really that clueless? This reminded me of when Michelle Malkin’s address and phone number were posted by liberal bloggers, but even they didn’t give out information about where security cameras were located. Completely clueless.
In an apparent retaliation for criticism of its disclosure of classified intelligence to America’s enemies, the New York Times June 30th edition has printed huge color photos of the vacation residences of Vice President Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld, identifying the small Maryland town where they live, showing the front driveway and in Rumsfeld’s case actually pointing out the hidden security camera in case any hostile intruders should get careless.
I don’t agree that this is apparent retaliation, but the absolute cluelessness (I know, I am stuck on that word) about security matters just amazes me and does make me at least wonder.
Update: Michelle Malkin and others have now picked up on this story. Michelle, as I mentioned above, has some personal experience in this area. She has a really good post discussing some scary examples I have not seen reported.
Kevin adds: It turns out there’s substantially less to this story than meets the eye. Sometimes a travel piece is just a travel piece…
UPDATE (Lorie): Thanks to Kevin for posting the update. I did not see the new information until I read Kevin’s post. That is the reason I did not post an update here, and after Kevin did, I did not see a need to post a duplicate one. Several readers have asked why I didn’t update the post so that is why I am updating this now.
I already commented on this in Kevin’s thread, but will repeat one question I still have here. In all the update stories I read I did not see that the Secret Service, or even anyone speaking for Rumsfeld, okayed the inclusion of the location of the security cameras in the story. I wonder if that was approved and if it was I question whether it should have been. I guess it is possible that a visible camera is used as a deterrent and that other cameras that are not so visible are located in other areas (I hope so anyway). I was just surprised that information (whether or not the camera location was intended by the Secret Service to be disclosed) was not included in the followups. The NYT’s past judgment on matters of security is what made so many view the disclosure of this information as (in my words) clueless. I never went as far as some others did to ascribe any malicious intent, but just do not trust the judgment of the NYT anymore — especially when it comes to matters of security.