'NY Times' Hits Back after Bush Criticizes Story

Editor and Publisher ^ | 12/18/05 | E&P Staff

[OKIEDOC]

I have sent at least 40 Emails to various news media and papers.

I am so disgusted with that dick-head who runs owns the New York Times. He is nothing more than a damn scumbag of the lowest level.

My thoughts are that it looks as though the New York Times would sacrifice America for an inane political agenda driven by payback. To say the Democrat party and it's wild eyed organs of misconception are bad for America, just does not quite cover the traitorous acts now being conjured up in the extreme fringe dens of the Times news room. The Times has morphed into a careless carrier of negative anti-American news. Thank God this president thinks more of his responsibilities than he does of being politically correct.

[OKIEDOC]

Like your thoughts.

[ez]

Right about now President Bush must be wondering exactly what to do about the American media.

He needs to prosecute someone.

[defenderSD]

I would be very surprised if the Bush Administration did anything illegal in this case. The terms, "secret order" are probably just NY Times spin to try to make this sound like an ominous decision. IIRC, Condi Rice made a statement yesterday that the Administration has followed all US and international laws in its counter-terrorism activities. As far as I know, this kind of domestic electronic surveillance is not new and the NSA has been doing this for decades along with intelligence agencies in Britain and Australia. It's really quite routine, despite the ominous tone of the NY Times article.

[Havoc]

A lot of people might be surprised, that isn't the point. Feelings on the matter are not the point. The legality of the matter is the issue. And that is what I inquired upon. To quote Reagan, "trust but verify". I don't trust these guys on either side any farther than I can throw them. And given their penchant for ignoring the law and constitution when they think it serves them, I'd rather verify. Thank you. Don't want an opinion as to feeling.. what's the law?

[defenderSD]

I'm sure we'll be reading all about the laws covering electronic surveillance in great detail over the next few weeks. I'd give it no more than a 2% chance that the Administration actually violated any laws. But I'm not a lawyer so I can't provide any details this morning.

[CheyennePress]

Can we go after these whackos for treason before they start with this impeachment nonsense?

Clean their clocks, take out their source, and don't stop there.

[JudgemAll]

The NYT, this PCing liberal vigilantism, conservativeneighbor surveillance and pogrom rumor mill nazi paper supporting arbitrary lawyers and judges is upset someone is looking into their thug methods or those of their informants.

[Baby Driver]

They should pay with their lives for their treason.
At least have their business license permanently
revoked, and every one of them put on a watch list.

But more than likely, and so incredibly sadly, these
vermin, will get away with their treason, scott free.

[American in Singapore]

"Let's be clear about this: illegal government spying on Americans is a violation of individual liberties, whether conditions are troubled or not," the Times editorial states."

Let's be clear about this: giving Aid and Comfort to the Enemies of the United States is Treason (Article 3 Section 3 of the U.S. Constitution)

[AmericanVictory]

Just like their allies, the Terrorists.

[RoadTest]

"secret spying program against Americans"

Nope. It's against anti-Americans. BIG difference

[Pietro]

"..this White House has cried wolf so many times on the urgency of national security threats that it has lost all credibility"

That's rich!

How about this; the NYT has been caught in so many fabrications that they have lost all credibility.

[Sal]

"Mr. Bush said he would not retract his secret directive or halt the illegal spying, so Congress should find a way to force him to do it. Perhaps the Congressional leaders who were told about the program could get the ball rolling."

ROTFLMSS! It's definitely time for a second bluff-calling vote. If they do any internal polls before voting, we'll get another 403 to 3...

They definitely are trying for impeachment, but with ever weakening ploys.

My guess is that the usual 20 to 30% hardcore lefty moonbats are already up for it; the broken glass Republicans are definitely against; and the ill-informed--but not necessarily stupid--"moderates" will decide how this issue carries or flops.

I'm betting that most moderates and independents figure it out that many terrorist events have happened across the world and damn few here by comparison after 9/11. They may even ask themselves why that would be. If they do, it's all over for the 'rats on this one.

[bert]

Well, the battle has been joined.

The rule says "Never go to war with someone who buys ink by the barrel."

The rule says "never leak secrets of a government that jails reporters who receive and publish leaks"

I can only hope W has the backbone to go after them will the full weight of his powers.

[jimbo123]

The NY Times have historically aligned themselves with Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, Castro, Ortega, Noriega, Khomeni, Hussein, etc. It's no surprise that they would lash out in order to protect their allies in Al Qaeda.

[Liberator]

"How can it be a secret order when members of Congress were briefed, and the legal counsels of the NSA, FBI, CIA, and DOJ were consulted before hand?"

Ha!

[MinuteGal]

Officially declare war and throw the evil owners and editors of the NYT permanently into Club Fed as the first traitors of WWIII.

Leni

[reformedliberal]

I cannot recall the last time a reporter was jailed for a leak. Nor a government staffer, for that matter.

These people are issuing a double-dog dare. If they were retaliated against by the Administration, they would be crying victim on every media outlet in the world.

I only watch FNC and even then, not as much as I used to. Yesterday, I caught Beckle and Terry Holt on Greg Jarret's segment debating this. Holt was energized and positive and he and Jarret made points that nothing was illegal, while Beckle, whose facial lines were all negative and down-turned, stammered and then made his point that "this was domestic".

Only some FNC anchors keep reminding viewers that FISA has been with us since Carter and that the POTUS has the War Powers Act behind him.

I am not clever enough to figure out what needs to be done at the Administration level, but, unfotunately, reacting punitively against the media won't get the job done.

Boycotting the legacy media, exposing the legacy media via blogs and forums on the Net, and most importantly not sitting out elections and working hard to elect real patriots is about all we have going for us. We need to get rid of some Senators, for starters. How we do that when the GOP backs RINOs or just sits out races they don't think they can win, is beyond me. Even then, I can understand the thinking that anyone w/an (R) after their name at least allows us to control the committees and the agenda is better than nothing. I don't like it, but I can understand it.

W knows his "new tone" failed. I heard him admit as much in his interviews last week. Yesterday, he was angrier than I ever seen him. I saw lines in his face that weren't there a week ago. He knows what his options are better than I do. IMO, he needs to stand up before the nation and read from the sign-in book/attendance record for the various secure briefings and call out the legislators who are now pulling this Rick's Place sh!t.

[bert]

.....reacting punitively against the media won't get the job done.......

You wrote an excellant piece. To react punatitively against the New York Times may be counterproductive however there must be some reaction.

I'll not tell the President what to do either and trust him to make the proper reaction. The passive ongoing decline is not adequate when the Times is blatently trying to bring down the government. Direct and effective action is required.

Draw the blood and let the public decide.