-
Global War on Terror Watch: New York and Los Angeles Times – “When Do We Publish a Secret?”
Graphic Courtesy of Darleen’s Place
New York Times: When Do We Publish a Secret?
SINCE Sept. 11, 2001, newspaper editors have faced excruciating choices in covering the government’s efforts to protect the country from terrorist agents. Each of us has, on a number of occasions, withheld information because we were convinced that publishing it could put lives at risk. On other occasions, each of us has decided to publish classified information over strong objections from our government.
Last week our newspapers disclosed a secret Bush administration program to monitor international banking transactions. We did so after appeals from senior administration officials to hold the story. Our reports — like earlier press disclosures of secret measures to combat terrorism — revived an emotional national debate, featuring angry calls of “treason” and proposals that journalists be jailed along with much genuine concern and confusion about the role of the press in times like these.
Bill Keller and Dean Baquet MUST be feeling the heat in order for these elitists to pen this response. Keller took the heat from a fellow MSM publication, the Wall Street Journal yesterday. Read the WSJ’s piece, Fit and Unfit to Print here.
The WSJ piece lays out in plain English the duties of the Press:
“Not everything is fit to print. There is to be regard for at least probable factual accuracy, for danger to innocent lives, for human decencies, and even, if cautiously, for nonpartisan considerations of the national interest.”
Fox News has a new poll which shows strong public support for the U.S. Treasury Department’s SWIFT Bank Data Anti-Terror Program:
The poll shows there is strong support for the Treasury Department program tracking financial transactions in search of terrorist funding. Seven of 10 Americans support the program, including majorities of Republicans (83 percent), independents (67 percent) and Democrats (58 percent).
And the same poll shows overwhelming belief that the New York and Los Angeles Times did more to help the terrorists by publishing information about the SWIFT Program than the public.
The Bush administration asked the New York Times not to publish information about the secret program, but the newspaper went ahead because it felt it was in the public interest to do so. By publishing the story, a 60 percent majority thinks the Times did more to help terrorist groups than the public (27 percent).
Allah has the graphics of the poll results here.
And the second poll – note well the Independent voter totals…..
The PDF of the poll is here.
Back to Keller’s and Baquet’s Op-Ed piece:
After paragraph upon paragraph about the Pentagon Papers, the right of the public to know, banal apologia, finally, this:
Finally, we weigh the merits of publishing against the risks of publishing. There is no magic formula, no neat metric for either the public’s interest or the dangers of publishing sensitive information. We make our best judgment…..
We understand that honorable people may disagree with any of these choices — to publish or not to publish. But making those decisions is the responsibility that falls to editors, a corollary to the great gift of our independence. It is not a responsibility we take lightly. And it is not one we can surrender to the government.
These jokers made a bad call to publish the information about the SWIFT Progam. The MSM and its bias makes biased/prejudiced calls all of the time and the public is getting sick of it – note the decrease in circulation of newspapers, particularly the Los Angeles Times.
The House of Representatives on Friday passed H. Res. 895 condemning the New York and Los Angeles Times, even though it did not mention them by name.
As long as Editors like Keller and Baquet put their OWN self-interests above that of the public, the public will vote with their feet and leave (with circulation and decreased advertising dollars).
Baquet and Keller are “rogue journalists” and the United States Department of Justice should open investigations into the government employees who leaked the information to their newspapers. Keller, Baquet, Risen, Lichtblau, McManus should be subpoenaed to reveal their sources.
And when they refuse, held in contempt of court.
For as the public knows, newspaper editors/reporters are NOT above the law.
Previous:
Michael Ramirez on the New York Times Publishing U.S. Anti-Terror Secrets
Global War on Terror Watch: House Resolution 895 Passes 227-183
Global War on Terror Watch: House Resolution 895 – The House Debates
Global War on Terror Watch: House Resolution 895 – Redux
Global War on Terror Watch: House Resolution 895
Global War on Terror Watch: Michael Gerson Shames Media for Revealing SWIFT Anti-Terror Program
Global War on Terror Watch: Piling on the New York Times?
Global War on Terror Watch: Eric Lichtblau of the New York Times Explains SWIFT Scoop
Los Angeles Times Watch: Patterico and Danziger Dump the Los Angeles Dog Trainer
Global War on Terror Watch: Dear Mr. Keller – Why?
Technorati Tags:LosAngelesTimes, NewYorkTimes, GlobalWaronTerror, SWIFT, BillKeller, DeanBaquet, JamesRisen, EricLichtblau, DoyleMcManus
-
Iran Nuclear Watch: United States Rejects Iran’s STALL in Response to P-5-plus-1 Proposal
US Undersecretary of State Nicholas Burns pictured here during a news conference in Moscow, in April 2006. The United States “expects” Iran to respond next week to an international offer to defuse the nuclear standoff between Tehran and the West, the number three in the US State Department said.
Reuters: U.S. rebuffs Iranian calls for time on nuclear reply
The United States rejected on Friday Iranian calls for more time to study an offer of incentives to curb its nuclear activities, insisting Tehran must respond by a G8 deadline next week.
The Group of Eight industrialised nations told Iran on Thursday they wanted a “clear
and substantive response” on July 5 to an offer of incentives to stop enriching uranium, but two Iranian officials immediately declared more time was needed.Speaking to reporters during a trip to Brussels, U.S. Undersecretary of State Nicholas Burns insisted the offer was “very straightforward” and Iran’s chief negotiator Ali Larijani should respond as requested by next Wednesday.
“There will be a meeting here in this city next week, where we expect and hope that Larijani will give us an answer … This is not ancomplicated offer,” Burns said.
“It is now high time, frankly, that we had a response from the Iranian government … We always said this was a process of weeks not months,” he told a news briefing.
Flap can clue Nicholas Burns into Iran’s answer:
STALL
The real answer is NO. But, Iran is in a diplomatic box with the only acceptable answer to halt uranium enrichment for the foreseeable future.
Time to refer Iran to the United Nations Security Council for sanctions – whatever good this will do.
Stay tuned……..
Discuss this blog post and MORE…. at the FullosseousFlap’s Dental Blogs, My Dental Forum.
Previous:
Iran Nuclear Watch: Iran Brushes Aside G-8 Deadline on P-5-plus-1 Proposal
Iran Nuclear Watch: G- 8 Tells Iran To Reply Next Week to P-5-plus-1 Proposal
Iran Nuclear Watch: Germany Can Accept Iranian Uranium Enrichment?
Iran Nuclear Watch: G-8 Foreign Ministers to Nudge Iran?
Iran Nuclear Watch: Britain to Iran – No Talks About Talks
Iran Nuclear Watch: Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei Says NO
Iran Nuclear Watch: Iran Faces Gas Rationing
Iran Nuclear Watch: Iran Urges Patience
Iran Nuclear Watch: Iran Repeats Threat to Use Oil As a Weapon
Iran Nuclear Watch: Uranium Enrichment Halt Not a Precondition to Negotiations And Not EVER
Iran Nuclear Watch: Uranium Enrichment Halt Not a Precondition to Negotiations
Iran Nuclear Watch: President Bush Rejects August Iranian Response to Big 6 Proposal
Iran Nuclear Watch: Iran Accuses the United States of Pushing Europe Away from Compromise
Iran Nuclear Watch: President Ahmadinejad – Big 6 Proposal a “Step Forwardâ€
Iran Nuclear Watch: Iran Would “Use Nuclear Defense†If Threatened
Iran Nuclear Watch: Iran Sends Mixed Signals on Big 6 Proposal?
Iran Nuclear Watch: Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei REJECTS Suspension of Uranium EnrichmentThe Natanz uranium enrichment complex in Natanz is pictured in this January 2, 2006 satellite image.
Technorati Tags: Iran, MahmoudAhmadinejad
-
Iraq War Watch:America More of a Threat to World Peace than Iran or North Korea – The Correction
Expose The Left: O’Reilly Notes Sun-Sentinel’s Misquotation of Murtha (VIDEO)
On Thursday night’s edition of The O’Reilly Factor, host Bill O’Reilly noted a correction on a Murtha misquotation.
This is the quote Keith Olbermann wetted his bed over and demanded a retraction from O’Reilly, even though several of his own MSNBC colleagues made the same mistake.Ian and Flap wonder if Olbermann will recognize O’Reilly for making the correction.
NOPE
VIDEO – .WMV
Flap made the correction and observes:
But, Murtha, continues to be a MORON…..and all of the other statements about him are correct.
Previous:
Iraq War Watch: America More of a Threat to World Peace than Iran or North Korea
Technorati Tags: Murtha, JohnMurtha, IraqWar, BillO’Reilly, JackMurtha
-
Illegal Immigration Watch: Only 483 National Guard Troops on Mexican Border
Pvt. Ashley Christopher, left, Border Patrol vehicle control officer Paul G. Franco III, center, and Sgt. 1st Class Raymond Wong, work on a Border Patrol vehicle Wednesday, June 21, 2006 at the Border Patrol garage in Yuma, Ariz. Arizona has been the nation’s busiest entry point for illegal crossings. More than 300 National Guardsmen from Arizona are expected to be in the state by month’s end to take over support jobs now requiring immigration agents to handle, or will work on such infrastructure improvements as fencing, lighting, roads or vehicle barriers while the Border Patrol recruits 6,000 more agents to beef up to about 18,000.
AP: Only 483 Guard Working on Mexican Border
On the deadline to have 2,500 troops along the Mexican border, the National Guard said Friday that only 483 were in position and working with the U.S. Border Patrol as the Bush administration had directed.
But Guard officials said more than 2,000 others were somewhere inside the four southwestern border states, training or helping plan the deployment. He and Bush administration officials argued Friday that the presence of troops in those states spelled success in the first stage of the mission.
Mr. President, you promised the American people you would send the National Guard to help secure the Mexican border.
Are you and the federal government committed to this project?
Tell California Governor Schwarzeneger to free up more California National Guard troops. His position of obstinance is unacceptable.
Lt. Gen. H. Steven Blum, chief of the National Guard Bureau, an arm of the Pentagon, had promised June 1 that by the end of the month 2,500 Guard troops would be working “on the border.”
“As defined by the operation, the National Guard has met and exceeded its goal of deploying 2,500 soldiers and airmen to the four Southwest border states,” said White House spokesman Blain Rethmeier. “Progress to date is real and the Guard’s efforts are making a positive difference in this national effort.”
As evidence, he said the early arrival of troops had allowed the Border Patrol to send 125 agents “back to the front lines,” and helped the Border Patrol catch nearly 200 illegal immigrants, seize 123 pounds of marijuana, 18 pounds of cocaine and seven vehicles.
Through initial pay requests filed with the Air Guard and orders filed with the Army Guard, the Guard bureau verified 2,547 troops were in the four border states for the mission, said Daniel Donohue, a spokesman for the National Guard Bureau.
Only 483 were physically on the border, he conceded.
Get the National Guard on the border, Mr. President.
Secure the border first!
Bush’s plan for stemming illegal immigration by using National Guardsmen in a support role called for 2,500 troops to be on the border by June 30, and 6,000 by the end of July.
Bush had said the mission would free up thousands of officers now on other duties to actively patrol the border. Guardsmen are expected to build fences, conduct routine surveillance and take care of other administrative duties for the border patrol.
GEt Busy…..
And, Mr.President, have the Justice Department start targeting large employers of illegal aliens in the Midwest for immigration law violations. Do you need some names?
Stay tuned……
Discuss this blog post and MORE…. at the FullosseousFlap’s Dental Blogs, My Dental Forum
A US Border Patrol officer patrols the fence at the US-Mexico border near Nogales, Arizona.
Previous:Illegal Immigration Watch: Senator Arlen Specter Supports “Borders First†Immigration Policy?
Illegal Immigration Watch: GOP Congressional Leaders – Pathway to Citizenship Bill is DEAD
Illegal Immigration Watch: Pennsylvania City to “CRACKDOWN†on Illegal Immigration
Illegal Immigration Watch: Operation Return to Sender
Illegal Immigration Watch: Federal Immigration Agents Raid Dulles International Airport
Illegal Immigration Watch: Speaker of the House Dennis Hastert Wants “A LONG LOOK†at Senate Immigration Bill
Illegal Immigration Watch: Mexican Border Crossings Reduced Since National Guard Troops DeployedIllegal Immigration Watch: Arizona Court Upholds Immigration Smuggling Law
Illegal Immigration Watch: California Anti-illegal Immigration Billboards Go Up on Freeways
Illegal Immigration Watch: “Anchor†Babies Away
Illegal Immigration Watch: Dunkin’ Donuts Now Screening Employees For Work Status
Technorati Tags: illegalimmigration, illegalaliens
-
Canada Terror Watch: Hateful Chatter Behind the Veil
The Globe and Mail: Hateful chatter behind the veil
Key suspects’ wives held radical views, Web postings reveal
MISSISSAUGA — When it came time to write up the premarital agreement between Zakaria Amara and Nada Farooq, Ms. Farooq briefly considered adding a clause that would allow her to ask for a divorce.
She said that Mr. Amara (now accused of being a leader of the alleged terror plot that led to the arrests of 17 Muslim men early this month) had to aspire to take part in jihad.
“[And] if he ever refuses a clear opportunity to leave for jihad, then i want the choice of divorce,” she wrote in one of more than 6,000 Internet postings uncovered by The Globe and Mail.
Wives of four of the central figures arrested last month were among the most active on the website, sharing, among other things, their passion for holy war, disgust at virtually every aspect of non-Muslim society and a hatred of Canada. The posts were made on personal blogs belonging to both Mr. Amara and Ms. Farooq, as well as a semi-private forum founded by Ms. Farooq where dozens of teens in the Meadowvale Secondary School area chatted. The vast majority of the posts were made over a period of about 20 months, mostly in 2004, and the majority of those were made by the group’s female members.
This story is an interesting glimpse into the lives of young jihadists allowed in the multicultural world of Canada to derive their own radical Islamic culture and value systems.
Read the rest of the piece here.
A group of women identified as relatives of some of the men arrested last night on terrorism charges wait to be let in to the Brampton courthouse Saturday, June 3, 2006.
Captain Ed has Jihad — A Family Affair
The portrait painted by the G&M are of an angry subculture that praises oppression and opposes the freedoms that they exploit to pursue their recruitment to jihad. It also paints them as rather naive and foolish; they obviously never considered the trail they left behind them of missives and screeds that support the image of militant jihadis. They may not mind that image, but their husbands will find it very inconvenient when they come to trial.
So, are these wannabe jihadists or jihadists in training? Whichever, the Canadian authorities will soon deal harshly for a Canadian terrorist plot of Jihad.
More on the series on the Globe and Mail later and the Canadian culture of Jihad.
Stay tuned……
Previous:
Canada Terrorism Watch: Canada Slams Representative John Hostettler
Canada Terrorism Watch: Operation Badr – The Crown Synopsis
Canada Terrorism Watch: Second Arrest in the United Kingdom Tied to Canada Terrorist Round-Up
Canada Terrorist Watch: Muslim Leader Accuses Media of ‘Racism’
Canada Terrorist Watch: United States Links to Canada Terrorist Plot Investigated
Canada Terrorism Watch: Canadian Terror Probe Expands to 7 nations
Canada Terrorism Watch: Toronto Mosque Vandalized
Canada Terrorism Watch: Terrorists from “Broad Strata†of Society
Canada Terrorism Watch: Suspects Complain About Conditions and Demand Korans
Canada Terrorism Watch: 17 Canadians in Custody for Terrorist Plot to Use Explosives
Technorati Tags: Canada, terrorists, Toronto,Nada Farooq, Zakaria Amara
-
Day By Day by Chris Muir July 1, 2006
Discuss this blog post and MORE…. at the FullosseousFlap’s Dental Blogs, My Dental Forum