Posted on 07/13/2005 10:05:07 PM PDT by CHARLITE
Judith Miller, the finest reporter over there at the New York Times, sits in jail, even as we speak, for reasons that are so obscure that I still can’t figure it out. The essential fact is that a federal grand jury demanded that she reveal the name of a confidential source, and standing on her First Amendment rights, she refused. True grit!
So they handcuffed her, and there she is, behind bars. She's Judy, as I like to call her, since I’ve been reading her for some two decades. Judy discovered “militant Islam” as Columbus discovered America. The rest of us paid scant attention to what was stirring within the veiled continent of the kaffiyeh, but she knew the score.
The scholar Abraham Heschel defined a prophet as someone “who knows what time it is.” Judy is no prophet but she sure knew what time it was.
She covered the Middle East for nearly 30 years as a Times’ correspondent based in Cairo. To anyone who would listen, and hardly anyone did, certainly not our intelligence services, she wrote articles and books warning about a combustible youth-motivated jihad that was coming to visit Israel and the West. She knew Al Qaeda and she knew Hamas before those words got into our encyclopedias and dictionaries.
Her proof? At the coming of this new millennium, the majority of Muslims would be restless kids and young adult males, all subject to incitements coming from the mosques. She prophesied the toxic consequences when indoctrination is seasoned with testosterone. So here we are, yesterday London, today Netanya, just as she imagined it, even 30 years ago. She predicted 9/11 and the Passover Massacre except for the exact date and moment.
Meanwhile, Judith Miller sits in jail; in my view, she is like the sacrificial goat sent into the wilderness to pay for the sins of her peers. She is doing our penance.
Why is she in jail and why not Dan Rather who through manipulation allegedly tried to fix the election against George W. Bush? And Mary Mapes, Dan Rather’s producer over there at CBS, the lady who allegedly fed him all that deceitful info, why isn’t she in the slammer?
Sure, I know, the legalities were fit to tie Judith Miller but not the rest. But beyond the legalities, into plain justice, why isn’t Gideon Levy behind bars for scoffing Ilan Ramon, Israel’s hero astronaut, in the pages of Haaretz, before the space shuttle Columbia took off, and even after it crashed? Why isn’t Amira Hass in jail for her slanted pro-Arab terrorist reporting in the same Haaretz?
But Judith Miller sits in jail, as fabricators like Jayson Blair of the New York Times and Stephen Glass of the New Republic walk free. Fired, but free.
They fed us lies, but among us they walk. They even write books and make movies. No jail.
American reporters who paint our entire brave military with the brush of Abu Ghraib deserve no jail, freedom of the press after all, but there ought to be some price for publishing half-truths that amount to propaganda. Israeli reporters and photographers who falsify and incite against religious Zionists--where is their comeuppance?
What of the sins of omission when newspapers like Britain’s The Sun (among so many others) catalogue victims of Islamic terror but forget to mention Israel?
How about “cycle of violence” when Israel merely retaliates?
The BBC loves its own fairness and objectivity (no “terrorists” here), so why is Barbara Plett still among the employed? This is the BBC reporter who wept for Arafat as he was being lifted from Ramallah to die in Paris. To quote: “When the helicopter carrying the frail old man rose above his ruined compound, I started to cry.” These are the people the BBC sends out to cover Israel, and the United States.
But Judith Miller sits in jail, and meanwhile Dave Brown wins awards. How soon we forget. Brown is the cartoonist who, back in November, 2002. showed us a naked and bloodthirsty Ariel Sharon devouring a Palestinian Arab baby. This made it to the editorial pages of London’s Independent newspaper.
Why isn’t Dave Brown in jail for incitement and anti-Semitism? Why isn’t the Independent in jail? This cartoon won first prize in Britain, awarded by the British Political Cartoon Society. Why aren’t all of them in the cooler, all those members of this Society? (For they are all honorable men.)
Why isn’t the Chicago Tribune in the clink? That cartoon in its pages, also back in 2003, gave us a giant hook-nosed Sharon barking orders to a tiny George W. Bush.
Why isn’t PBS in jail? Back in April, our part-federally-funded TV network gave us a “Frontline” report so lopsided that even anti-Semites gasped as they cheered.
Slanderers, scoffers, defamers against Israel, against America, all are within their legal rights.
Meanwhile, Judith Miller sits in jail.
About the Writer: Jack Engelhard is the author of the bestseller "Indecent Proposal," the award-winning "Escape from Mount Moriah," and the novel "The Days of the Bitter End," which is being prepared for movie production. Jack receives e-mail at viewopinion@aol.com.
It could be reasonably postulated that the Berger pilfer was not covering for the Clintons as is commonly thought, but that the Archives theft was to reinforce Berger's usefulness as candidate John Kerry's national security advisor---to get something to use against GWB.
That possibility became more apparent when it was discovered that the US Pentagon traitor Lawrence Franklin gave US national security documents to AIPAC, and that candidate Kerry hired Steve Grossman, a past AIPAC president, as his key campaign advisor. Suspicions arose that candidate Kerry was being coached, and that somebody might have been leaking privileged national security information to Kerry in the effort to defeat President Bush.
Berger was serving as Kerry's national security consultant when he pilfered the classified US national security documents from the National Archives. So, the Berger theft may not be as originally suspected (a Clinton cover-up)----but an attempt to compromise the 2004 election to undermine George W Bush's reelection.
Americans ---that is to say the “little people”----need to know the extent of culpability engendered by these activities--- primarily whether our President was harmed ----and whether Sen Kerry and his advisors--- Steve Grossman and Sandy Berger---played any part in undercutting the reelection chances of President Bush through the use of stolen classified documents, and, of course, the degree to which spying impaired President Bush's ability to conduct US foreign policy. One of the most important questions Americans need to know about the connection between the Berger thievery, and the AIPAC-Pentagon treachery, is the degree to which these activities hurt President Bush and the president's 2004 campaign.
We should consider that Berger's thievery served several purposes:
(1) A coordinated attempt to coach Kerry----positioning Berger to get a Cabinet post if Kerry was elected, and if Hillary (gag) is elected.
(2) Covering up for the Clintons' pre-911 negligence.
(3) And finally, even after the Archives burglary, Berger was slithering around Washington involved in profiting from US government business in Iraq.
Berger's Firm to Aid Oil Interests in Iraq
By Judy Sarasohn
Washington Post Thursday, September 16, 2004; Page A29
Stonebridge International, the "global strategy firm" founded by Berger, has taken on an interesting client, Gulfsands Petroleum Ltd., a private Houston-based oil and gas company. Gulfsands, along with its larger partner Devon Energy Corp. of Oklahoma City, has oil and gas exploration and development interests in Syria. And now Gulfsands is looking to Iraq. "Stonebridge is assisting Gulfsands in organizing meetings in Washington with administration officials to discuss the company's business interests in Iraq and U.S. policy toward Syria," Stonebridge Vice Chairman H.P. Goldfield said in an e-mail response to written questions.
Remember, his Gulfsands office is the place where Berger cut up the classified Archives documents.
We should ponder this: when caught with the goods in his skivvies, Sandy Berger admitted to taking top secret documents the National Archives did not even know went missing. ....leading one to conclude, Berger took a lot more than he has been wont to reveal, a lot more than even the Archives knew about.
Berger's plea deal is conditioned on Berger's "cooperation." We need to make very certain that we, the people, got something in return for Berger's plea deal. Like for whose benefit the documents were being stolen, when was the order given, who was involved in the conspiracy, and who knew about it.
We demand to know:
(1) Have all the people who conspired with Berger been named and prosecuted?
(2) Did Berger actually destroy stolen docs--as he said---or are they being secreted for Berger's self-serving reasons: (a) for Hillary's campaign in exchange for Berger getting a political appointment, for (b) Berger's financial benefit in his oil consulting business, (c) to cover-up 9/11?
(3) Berger admitted to stealing documents the Archives did not list as missing .
(4) What did he do with them? Is his plea deal conditioned on Berger returning these as well?
(5) Who was in on the cover-up?
In an earlier public statement, Noel Hillman, chief of the Justice Department’s public integrity section, would not discuss Berger’s motivation, but said the former national security adviser understood the rules governing the handling of classified materials.
So why isn't the public allowed to share the info about Berger's motivation?? Why is Hillman holding this back? These compelling questions should be posed to the proper authorities.
Communicate your concerns about Berger's plea deal to the judge who wwas sent to sentence Berger July 8 (now postponed to September).
U.S. Magistrate Deborah Robinson
c/o US District Court
US Dept of Justice
Judiciary Center
555 4th Street NW
Washington, DC 20530
Phone (202) 514-6933
Caution: phone number listed is a prosecutor - keep messages short and civil.
HI CA,
I'm confused. In reply #8, you claimed that Judith Miller's source "signed a release".
The only person I am aware of having signed a release is Karl Rove, and yet in reply 29 you denied that you are "implying that Rove was her source."
My question is, then, how do you know that Miller's "source" signed a release, if the "source" is not Karl Rove? Was there a report that her "source" signed such a release that I missed? Thanks.
"Judith Miller's source "signed a release"
That's what the media was saying HER LAWYER HAD STATED. Also .. it was stated that Judith didn't accept the "release" because she believed it was coersed from her source.
Just think about it for a moment .. would a flaming liberal/democrat reporter who works for the NYT be the slighest bit worried if a Rove "release" was coersed ..?? I don't think so. That's why MILLER'S SOURCE CANNOT BE KARL ROVE!!!
CA, we are in complete agreement. There is no way that Miller is trying to protect Rove. I misunderstood your post.
Whether the release was coerced or not is not Miller's concern. And Rove's lawyer reassured everyone that Rove's release is real.
I wonder who she is protecting? Wilson? Miller herself? hmmm... this is going to get very interesting before it's over.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.