Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

'NYT' Veterans Frankel and Jones Defend Paper's Banking Story
Editior and Publisher ^ | 06/2806 | Joe Strupp

Posted on 06/28/2006 8:46:16 PM PDT by airedale

Two prominent former newsman for The New York Times, Max Frankel and Alex Jones, came out in defense of their old employer's recent disclosure of a secret bank monitoring program, saying the continued attacks on the paper are unfair and misplaced.

Frankel, who served as executive editor from 1986 to 1994 and held other posts in Washington and Moscow, called the recent criticism an "outburst of Agnewism," while Jones, a onetime press reporter for the paper and current director of the Shorenstein Center at Harvard University, said this was "an important moment for the watchdog press in wartime."

<>

Today, Congress is set to consider a resolution condemning the newspaper.

Frankel, who served as Washington bureau chief during Richard Nixon's first term, compared the attacks to then-Vice President Spiro Agnew's anti-press rants of the early 70s. He said going after the Times is part of an overall defensive mode the Bush administration and Republicans are currently stuck in because of problems that include the Iraq War.

"It is part of the stop-the-flag-burning [approach], the whole 'schmear'," Frankel said during a phone interview this morning. "They have dug themselves a deep trench, so they are all getting together to push all of the buttons. They know how to castigate the liberals and bring out their supporters." He added that "anytime the one, two, and three ranking officials of the government all come out talking off the same piece of paper, my propaganda antennae go up."

(Excerpt) Read more at editorandpublisher.com ...


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: leaks; nytimes; swift; waronterror
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-35 next last
Looks like they are feeling the heat and have more weak justifications. Now their complaint about the heat is: "It is part of the stop-the-flag-burning [approach], the whole 'schmear' Give me a break. I see they also have brought out the old liberal shibolth of Richard Nixon and Watergate and are comparing the reaction to the two events and making them equivalent. Of course that makes the underlying causes equivalent. That's really lame.

I really like the closing paragraphs: "Frankel said there is a danger that the public can become convinced that such moves by newspapers are based on efforts to oppose national interest rather than report the truth. But he believed that this incident would not have a long-term negative impact. "The people who think the New York Times is the enemy will continue to think so and those who believe this is the function of the press, even in wartime, will laugh it off."

Jones, commenting on the attacks by public officials, said "part of it is sincere and part of it is politics." But he added that the overwhelming issue to keep in mind is that "the public is far better served by more information than by more secrecy." "

If they really believe this it's good they are retired from the paper, but the fact that one of them heads the Shorenstein Center at Harvard doesn't bode well for what future journalist will disclose.

1 posted on 06/28/2006 8:46:19 PM PDT by airedale
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: airedale
Arrest them, have a trial, and if found guilty zap `em like the bugs that they are.

"The federal statute on treason, 18 USC 2381, provides in relevant part: "Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States ... adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less than five years and fined under this title but not less than $10,000."

2 posted on 06/28/2006 8:53:00 PM PDT by Screamname (Why the hell is Kathy Boudin out on parole??)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: airedale
Photobucket - Video and Image Hosting

3 posted on 06/28/2006 8:55:14 PM PDT by ATOMIC_PUNK ( have long feared that my sins would return to visit me and the cost would be more than I could bear)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: airedale
"He said going after the Times is part of an overall defensive mode the Bush administration and Republicans are currently stuck in because of problems that include the Iraq War."

The NYT is one of the reasons the Iraq war has been such a problem. They gave the insurgents a weapon to use against America - sympathy. Or perhaps empathy.

4 posted on 06/28/2006 8:57:21 PM PDT by sageb1 (This is the Final Crusade. There are only 2 sides. Pick one.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Screamname


So, two old irrelevant Schmucks with fond wet-dream memories of the NYT come out in defense to point the finger at an administration acting,, on the defensive.....


Sounds a bit hypocritical to me. The NYT is all about agenda. If it were about selling papers, they'd have apologized by now. Normal people may actually read them for that,,,if one is in a forgiving mood that is.

What a bunch of scum.


5 posted on 06/28/2006 8:58:08 PM PDT by austinaero
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: airedale

I am almost of the mind that the banking story was an attempt at blackmailing the administration into pulling off other leak investigations.


6 posted on 06/28/2006 8:58:32 PM PDT by gov_bean_ counter (There are only a few absolute truths in life, the rest are just opinion.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: gov_bean_ counter

It will be if they don't prosecute.


7 posted on 06/28/2006 9:03:10 PM PDT by spyone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: austinaero

Gee, lets ask another fair and balanced "Journalist",Dan Rather, what he thinks.Or, on second thought, who cares?


8 posted on 06/28/2006 9:03:49 PM PDT by bybybill (`IF THE RATS WIN, WE LOSE)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: sageb1
The controversy can be explained in the one paragraph below.

If we stop the money to the terrorists they become less effective. The New York Times has made it harder to stop the money. The money buys supplies and arms and influence for the terrorists. They use this to kill American troops. The New York Times has made it more likely that my son in Iraq could be injured or killed. If this is not treason, what the hell is?
9 posted on 06/28/2006 9:06:45 PM PDT by cpdiii (Socialism is popular with the ruling class. It gives legitimacy to tyranny and despotism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: airedale

"The people who think the New York Times is the enemy will continue to think so and those who believe this is the function of the press, even in wartime, will laugh it off."

Mr. Frankel,
The only ones laughing are the terrorists. You're a traitor, in addition to being an ***hole.


10 posted on 06/28/2006 9:06:51 PM PDT by LibSnubber (Liberal democrats are domestic terrorists)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: airedale

Why is it I know what these two think about the execution of the Rosenbergs?


11 posted on 06/28/2006 9:08:09 PM PDT by muawiyah (-)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cpdiii

Exactly! And may God protect your son...because the NYT certainly won't.


12 posted on 06/28/2006 9:09:00 PM PDT by sageb1 (This is the Final Crusade. There are only 2 sides. Pick one.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: bybybill

It's just a matter of time before an NYT is found at the site of some terrorist hideout. I HOPE the NYT keeps it up. The elitist snot-nosed journalism they churn out will very soon bite them in the a$$. They are getting more and more bold. I think the heat on them is great. I think the more pressure, the better. The LA Times too. I have yet to hear one journalist define what they mean when they say "public interest." They certainly can't be referring to the American public. That's laughable. The fact that other countries maybe be even more reluctant to help us out now is totally lost on the NYT. They believe in free speech without responsibility. What a bunch of freaks!


13 posted on 06/28/2006 9:09:20 PM PDT by austinaero
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: airedale; abb; Liz; Grampa Dave; weegee

14 posted on 06/28/2006 9:19:30 PM PDT by martin_fierro (< |:)~)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: airedale

THE NEW YORK TIMES DIDN'T MIND COVERING UP FOR KENNEDY BY SUPPRESSING THE NEWS!!!



While Frankel tries to give the impression that direct US involvement with the counter-revolution had come to an end after the Bay of Pigs fiasco, ex-classified documents contradict this. In Edward Lansdale's "Review of Operation Mongoose," dated July 25, 1962, we discover that the CIA was directly involved:


Frankel's portrait of John F. Kennedy is that of a chastised youth who has been caught with his hand in the cookie jar:


Perhaps Frankel's version of the Cuban Missile Crisis would be more credible if he had not admitted that the Times had participated in a cover-up at the time. Once Kennedy had decided to blockade Cuba, he needed to make sure that the Soviets were kept in the dark about his plans. This entailed lining up the NY Times (and the Washington Post) in a vow of secrecy. According to Frankel, who was listening to Kennedy and James Reston over an extension phone, Kennedy said, "If you reveal my plan, or print that we discovered their missiles in Cuba, Khrushchev could beat us to the draw." At first, Reston demurred: "You're asking us to suppress the news?" but soon came around to understanding Kennedy's "reasonable request" -- the news was indeed suppressed.


http://tinyurl.com/m4gq5



******



Alex Jones, former press reporter for The New York Times, is director of the Shorenstein Center on the Press, Politics and Public Policy at the Kennedy School of Government at Harvard. He is co-author, with Susan E. Tifft, of The Trust: The Private and Powerful Family Behind The New York Times.

Harvard media analyst Alex Jones

Max Frankel, his tennis partner Henry Kissinger


Max Frankel is a German Jew of Polish ancestry who arrived in the U.S. in 1940. In his 1999 memoir, The Times of My Life and My Life with the Times, he discussed the nature of his Judaism, his strong Zionist and “Jewish tribal” identity and, finally, his role as an outspoken “liberal” managing editor of the NYT.


15 posted on 06/28/2006 9:19:53 PM PDT by kcvl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: airedale

Circle the Dinosaurs, Treason Times.

Pray for W and Our Freedom Fighters


16 posted on 06/28/2006 9:28:57 PM PDT by bray (Hey Zaqueeri, say hello to Hitler, Stalin and Mohamhead)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: airedale
O.K......

Putting on my socialist tinfoil hat, to better think like the Times.

Kim Jong II fires his missile [to test it] towards us.We shoot it down and take great offense.

So he enlists his fellow nutjob socialists,Fidel Castro and Hugo Chavez, to write a letter to the U.N. siding with Kim Jong II's reasoning.

This is supposed to make Kim Jong right, and convince everyone else. RIIIIIIGHT.......

Wait; this is exactly how the Times and the U.N. both would reason.

Scary Sh#t. How did the state of some people's minds get to this point?

17 posted on 06/28/2006 9:30:49 PM PDT by builder (I don't want a piece of someone else's pie)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: martin_fierro
"The fact that they are chasing the money is not new," Frankel said of the anti-terrorist methods being used by the federal government. "For the last couple of years, the administration has been boasting about how they have cut off the money. I find it hard to believe that this information is of much use to the terrorists"

The loony left Kool Aid drinkers just keep spewing out these same dumbass talking point like zombies.

Petterico debunked this straw argument more clearly than most here:

"This is not the point, as I explained here. The issue is not that the stories told the terrorists we were watching financial transactions, but that the stories told them how.

Drug dealers know that police watch their transactions and sometimes send in undercover cops to buy from them. But I think the cops might still object, and the dealers might be very pleased indeed, if we pointed out the secret locations from which the cops conduct their surveillance, or if we gave them the names and full physical descriptions of all undercover officers working in their area.

Additionally, if the terrorists already knew all this, how did we catch so many of them with the program?

Terrorists are not supermen. They don’t know everything, and many of them clearly did not know about Swift. Now they do."

http://patterico.com/2006/06/28/4790/debunking-the-lefties-arguments-about-the-swift-program-in-one-convenient-post/
18 posted on 06/28/2006 9:31:39 PM PDT by Jameison
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: airedale

"an important moment for the watchdog press in wartime."

"Watchdog" is a self important term. The media actually believes it has all the power necessary to protect us.


19 posted on 06/28/2006 9:36:09 PM PDT by drierice
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: airedale

Who CARES what these creeps think about their traitorous ex-bosses.


20 posted on 06/28/2006 9:39:06 PM PDT by Suzy Quzy ("When Cabals Go Kaboom"....upcoming book on Mary McCarthy's Coup-Plotters.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-35 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson