Sulzberger Responds to 'WSJ' Editorial Slamming the 'NYT'

Editor & Publisher ^ | 6/30/06 | E&P Staff

[Biblebelter]

I subscribe to WSJ. I do so for business news. But they are globalist and NWO all the way. The first rate reporting that they do do is not by journalists who want to be stars or celebrities or in the case NYT reporters and editors who do not want to report the story as much as become the story. Obviously, the WSJ made a mistake going with story in the first place, but their biggest mistake was waiting a week gauging the political and commercial effects of their reporting before forcefully explaining themselves. It kinda of looked like a Kerry moment where they were for it before they were against it but now they are really against it. Character and integrity are not based on one's postion as so much the timing of the position.

[Gumlegs]

LOL

[Diogenesis]

President Washington: "I want Bill Keller and the jerk Sulzberger.
I'll hang those traitors if it's the last thing I do on God's earth."

[MitchCumstein]

As I have said before on an earlier thread, I find it very ironic that the NYT and Bill Keller have wrapped themselves in the First Amendment, the Pentegon Papers, and the "public's right to know" as a sort of license against any responsibility for potential harm they have caused to soldiers who have fought hard to preserve those First Amendment freedoms. I know many military personell who are livid. I don't know if they would win, but a group of soldiers who potentially could be sent to Iraq or Afghanistan could file a class action civil lawsuit against the Times and Bill Keller for reckless endangerment. The lawsuit wouldn't have to address the First Amendment issues, just the negligent decision making on the part of the Times for running the story after being warned it could be dangerous.

[Paperdoll]

>Frankly, no. Why not simply say what you mean?<

Because that could be very dangerous for me, but I ended up saying it anyway, didn't I? :o(

[Paperdoll]

Thank you for supplying that info. :o)

[Diogenesis]

The First Amendment does not protect against what the traitors have done.

As but one (1) example is the following:

18 U.S.C. §798. Disclosure of Classified Information.
(a) Whoever knowingly and willfully communicates, furnishes, transmits, or otherwise makes available to an unauthorized person, or publishes, or uses in any manner prejudicial to the safety or interest of the United States or for the benefit of any foreign government to the detriment of the United States any classified information—
(1) concerning the nature, preparation, or use of any code, cipher, or cryptographic system of the United States or any foreign government; or
(2) concerning the design, construction, use, maintenance, or repair of any device, apparatus, or appliance used or prepared or planned for use by the United States or any foreign government for cryptographic or communication intelligence purposes; or
(3) concerning the communication intelligence activities of the United States or any foreign government; or
(4) obtained by the processes of communication intelligence from the communications of any foreign government, knowing the same to have been obtained by such processes—Shall be fined not more than $10,000 or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both. (b) As used in this subsection (a) of this section—
The term “classified information” means information which, at the time of a violation of this section, is, for reasons of national security, specifically designated by a United States Government Agency for limited or restricted dissemination or distribution; .........
The term “communication intelligence” means all procedures and methods used in the interception of communications and the obtaining of information from such communications by other than the intended recipients;
The term “unauthorized person” means any person who, or agency which, is not authorized to receive information of the categories set forth in subsection (a) of this section, by the President, or by the head of a department or agency of the United States Government which is expressly designated by the President to engage in communication intelligence activities for the United States.

[dixiechick2000]

"On the right, the goal is to tar everyone in the "mainstream media."


No need in that.
They do an excellent job of proving their nonexistant patriotism, and
their goal of obstructing our war effort, every day...all by themselves.

Thank you for a GOOD post!

[bjc]

This is arrant nonsense. Please read their editorial. It explains exactly what prompted them to write the article. When a Treaury official comes to them, gives them the lead and assures them that it is unclassified and not a leak, they went ahead with the story.

What the heck is NWO? If you mean they urge responding to the realities of a Global Economy then I guess I must be too. If you mean they write news stories sympathetic to illegal immigrants and argue non-prosecution of those that hire them - then I need to see the evidence beyond that of pointing out the consequence of stopping the flow of cheap migrant workers.

To compare the WSJ to the NYT is simply ridiculous.

[Brytani]

Try to follow - that is what I'm saying. The fact that our government felt the need to declassify information because of the Time's decision to run the story is only the first of the problem.

The fact is that the Post, San Fran Chronicle and WSJ also went with the story - albeit after the Times went against the gov asking them not to.

[bjc]

Read the editiorial!!

[angelsonmyside]

BTTT

[Diogenesis]

If you believe ANYTHING they write to defend themselves
then you are not the sharpest knife in the drawer.

---

These are the companies that support the traitorous NEW YORK TIMES.

BOYCOTT THEM ALL and drive them into Bankrupcy.

[from the June 27, 2006 online edition of the New York Times]

50 Pine Street

About
American Express
Bankrate.com
Benzel-Busch Motor Car Corp.-
Brown Harris Stevens
C/Net
Canon
Chase
Citibank
Citi Habitats New York
Continental Airlines
Credit Protect X3
Crestor
Dell
E-Trade Financial
Eberhart Rentals
Edmunds.com
Elizabeth Seton Pediatric Center
Fidelity
Google
Halstead Property
Hewlett Packard
Houlihan Lawrence Real Estate Centers
K. Hovnanian's Builders
Lenovo
Manhattan Mortgage
Mercedes Benz Tri-State Dealers
Miller Samuel Real Estate Appraisers & Consultants
NY City Department of Education
Pair Networks
Quebec
Related Rentals
Rockrose Development Corp.
Samsung
Scottrade
State Farm
T Mobile

[PghBaldy]

I wondered why conservatives weren't going after the WSJ. Now I know - the cat was already out of the bag. BTW, Barack Obama said the NYT was just doing its job (on Hannity & Colmes, IIRC)... Well done editorial.

[el_texicano]

Hey, Sulzberger...put some ice on it, you treasonous POS.

[segis]

I have almost the same take regarding the WSJ. The NYT, on the other hand, is a joke, deserving to be mocked and ridiculed. Repeatedly. And treated with indifference.

In this current matter of national security, I am more concerned that some bureaucrat is leaking info to the press. That needs to be pursued doggedly.

[Biblebelter]

I read their editorial. They explained themselves very well. I argued with the timing, their explanation and criticism of the NYT, I welcome. I absolutely disagree with their position on illegal immigration. But beyond that I am probably not so much pro business particuarly multi-nationals but I am very very much pro stockholder which is to say too many companies are run for the benefit of those who run the company not the stockholders. I would like markets to be self-regulating unlike the Euroweenies. If that is to occur then the press must take the responsibilty to put light and heat on companies which are not operating in the best interest of stockholders. When it comes to questionable practices , the WSJ is usually late with the light and the heat.

[martin_fierro]

[GOPJ]

Thank you, thank you...

[gogeo]

The government wanted the WSJ to run the info...that's the difference. The story was going to get out, period...giving the info to the WSJ ensured the govt's side got out.

This is gamesmanship designed to lessen the incentive for the NYT to print the story. The heat the NYT is receiving has the same effect.