Proof, if any were needed, that The New York Times's publication of details of classified defense programs is politically motivated:
The New York Times, 9/24/01
by Hugh Hewitt
The New York Times, editorializing a long time ago, when the Trade Center ruins were still burning:
The Bush administration is preparing new laws to help track terrorists through their money-laundering activity and is readying an executive order freezing the assets of known terrorists. Much more is needed, including stricter regulations, the recruitment of specialized investigators and greater cooperation with foreign banking authorities. There must also must be closer coordination among America's law enforcement, national security and financial regulatory agencies....If America is going to wage a new kind of war against terrorism, it must act on all fronts, including the financial one.
(HT: LegalXXX who posted this in June, 2004, and to e-mailer Mary Beth S. who pinged me as to the existence of the editorial, which she found on this FreeRepublic thread.)
What has changed since September 24, 2001? Only this: The New York Times has become ever more partisan -- so much so that the Times feels compelled to oppose and undermine the war on terror simply because Bush is commander-in-chief. How post-American.
ADDENDUM: From WorldwideStandard.com:
But why worry, if you're a post-American? The terrorists surely will spare the Times. Hah!Courtesy of The New York Times
From the International Herald Tribune:
BRUSSELS Prime Minister Guy Verhofstadt of Belgium has asked the Justice Ministry to investigate whether a banking consortium here broke the law when it aided the U.S. government's anti-terrorism activities by providing it with confidential information about international money transfers.
The group, known as the Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunications, or Swift, has come under scrutiny following a report last week by The New York Times….
Heather MacDonald and Gabriel Schoenfeld explain the recklessness of the New York Times here and here.
Posted by Daniel McKivergan on June 27, 2006 12:10 PM | Permalink
