Skip to comments.'NYT' Editorial Explains Difference Between Plame and NSA Spying Leaks
Posted on 01/03/2006 11:39:15 PM PST by Pikamax
'NYT' Editorial Explains Difference Between Plame and NSA Spying Leaks
By E&P Staff
Published: January 03, 2006 10:30 PM ET
NEW YORK Declaring that "this seems a good moment to try to clear away the fog around this issue," a New York Times editorial for Wednesday attempted to describe the difference between radically diffrent types of leaks.
Two of the newspaper's high-profile reporters, Judith Miller (who recently resigned) and James Risen, have been at the center of two very serious current leak probes.
"A democratic society cannot long survive if whistle- blowers are criminally punished for revealing what those in power don't want the public to know - especially if it's unethical, illegal or unconstitutional behavior by top officials," the newspaper declares. "Reporters need to be able to protect these sources, regardless of whether the sources are motivated by policy disputes or nagging consciences."
The editorial then examines the Plame/CIA leak, citing "a world of difference between that case and a current one in which the administration is trying to find the sources of a New York Times report that President Bush secretly authorized spying on American citizens without warrants. The spying report was a classic attempt to give the public information it deserves to have. The Valerie Wilson case began with a cynical effort by the administration to deflect public attention from hyped prewar intelligence on Iraq. ...
"When the government does not want the public to know what it is doing, it often cites national security as the reason for secrecy. The nation's safety is obviously a most serious issue, but that very fact has caused this administration and many others to use it as a catchall for any matter it wants to keep secret, even if the underlying reason for the secrecy is to prevent embarrassment to the White House. The White House has yet to show that national security was harmed by the report on electronic spying, which did not reveal the existence of such surveillance - only how it was being done in a way that seems outside the law."
Concluding by mentioning a third leak probe, regarding The Washington Post's revelations about secret prison camps for terror suspects, the Times observes, "Illegal spying and torture need to be investigated, not whistle-blowers and newspapers."
To the NYSlimes Benedict Arnold was merely a whistle-blower.
Explains should be in quotes.
Oh! I get it now! /sarc off
NSA is more serious. The only question to be answered is, how many Americans, Iraqis, and others will be murdered as a direct result of the Times' "whistle-blowing" on NSA? And these geopolitical morons find that to be a good thing?
OHHHHHHHHHHH, I see!
I'm guessing when they discussed this at the NYT they kept saying "Right?" after each attempt at phrasing it perfectly.
"A democratic society cannot long survive if whistle- blowers [LEAKERS] are criminally punished for revealing what those in power don't want the public to know"
SPIN, SPIN AND SPIN SOME MORE!!! Remember: DimocRat lies told often enough become truth to 48% of all Americans...
A democratic society cannot long survive with a fifth columnist media masquerading as the fount of impartial truth.
Wasn't the Plame issue a whistle blower telling the American people that Joe Wilson went to Niger with his mind already made up, and that he had a conflict of interest that sent him... His wife.
NY Times "Liberal Whistle blowers are good, Republican ones are bad!" Call the wahhmmmbulance!
Revealing to the terrorists secret programs that help our government to prevent my murder definitely blows. A whistle is something else altogether.
I wonder if they will change their tune when it finally comes out who leaked the Plame name?
Blah blah blah.... You just KNOW those sick scumbags at the NY Times are pretty irate about this mine disaster in WV because it steals the public's attention away from their big "scoop". They were really gonna get Bush this time.
Their story is already stale. The NY Times has failed again, miserably.
I have a gut feeling that Senator Jay Rockefeller (D-WV) is the guilty party!!!
I feel that all this BS and NYT stories is to sell newspapers and book deals, ONLY. The declining sells have caused them to do anything they can get away with, to stay in business.
Frantic yammering doesn't sell.
Somebody is keeping them in business.
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.