Conffederate
Confederate

June 26, 2006

Another Blind Keller

New York Times editor Bill Keller has offered up a vapid dodge for his once great newspaper's repeated disclosures of anti-terror programs, blaming the messengers for how poorly his message was received:

I don't always have time to answer my mail as fully as etiquette demands, but our story about the government's surveillance of international banking records has generated some questions and concerns that I take very seriously. As the editor responsible for the difficult decision to publish that story, I'd like to offer a personal response.

Some of the incoming mail quotes the angry words of conservative bloggers and TV or radio pundits who say that drawing attention to the government's anti-terror measures is unpatriotic and dangerous. (I could ask, if that's the case, why they are drawing so much attention to the story themselves by yelling about it on the airwaves and the Internet.) Some comes from readers who have considered the story in question and wonder whether publishing such material is wise. And some comes from readers who are grateful for the information and think it is valuable to have a public debate about the lengths to which our government has gone in combatting [sic] the threat of terror.

You will note there is no link to Keller's excuse. My tiny contribution to their readership (and hence advertising revenue) is infinitesimal, but even that was too much. I will not link the NY Times again.

In any event, the Keller obfuscation satisfied very few people, including President Bush who lambasted the Times just a few moments ago:

"For people to leak that program and for a newspaper to publish it does great harm to the United States of America," Bush said. He said the disclosure of the program "makes it harder to win this war on terror."

[snip]

"Congress was briefed, and what we did was fully authorized under the law," Bush said, talking with reporters in the Roosevelt Room after meeting with groups that support U.S. troops in Iraq.
"We're at war with a bunch of people who want to hurt the United States of America," the president said. "What we were doing was the right thing."

Bill Keller is blind to this fact. "Right" doesn't matter, and it often seems, "right" is the enemy. Getting the President—hurting Bush, bringing down this Administration—seems to be the primary focus of the New York Times under Bill Keller's leadership.

The offending Times article publicized and hence destroyed an effective and legal way of tracking and disrupting those who finance Islamic terrorism, solely so that it could stick a thumb in the eye of George Bush.

Bill Keller has visions of a Bush Administration hobbled, embarrassed, and ineffective. What his newspaper's disclosures do to tip off terrorists and enable their success at the possible cost of American lives doesn't apparent enter into this blind man's view.

Posted by Confederate Yankee at June 26, 2006 11:38 AM | TrackBack
Comments

Keller assumes that the First Amendment was written solely to empower him and the NYT. The underlying theme throughout our constitution is power not specifically delineated to one of the branches of the government is retained by the people. The First Amendment states, “Congress shall make no law… abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press…” The constraint is placed upon Congress in that they cannot make laws abridging the freedom of the people to publish. I don’t recall any transference of that right to the NYT and Mr. Keller. The last I knew, the NYT is not freely elected by the people so as to be a representative of the people. I believe the NYT is beholding to its owners – the stockholders who comprise only a very small segment of the people.

As evidenced by the consistent actions of Mr. Keller and the NYT, the liberal elite intelligentsia believe it is their mission to replace the GOP administration with a socialist minded administration more in line with their vision for America. The disclosure of classified material and programs is only a means by which to effect the desired outcome. Most troubling is the lack of a resolve upon the administration’s part to prosecute those that unnecessarily jeopardize our soldier’s lives and our lives at home. If we are going to prosecute this war, we must be willing to prosecute those who would willingly enable the enemy.

Posted by: Old Soldier at June 26, 2006 12:57 PM