…Which, for those of you who’ve been following Bill Keller’s sanctimonious and self-important grandstanding (condensed version here), is a very peculiar conception of the “public good,” especially insofar as it doesn’t really take into account the wishes of the public—nor is it particularly deferential to the way the public votes, or to the laws public representatives (elected by members of the public) have passed. Like, say, laws against knowingly disclosing classified information.
Hot Air has video of President Bush’s reaction to the Times’ campaign to undermine US national security by publishing leaked secrets. Ace has posited that what this amounts to is a form a blackmail—the suggestion being that unless the US electorate wises up and begins voting for candidates the Grey Lady endorses, the Times is going to continue compromising our national interests until we begin seeing things the proper way. Me, I’m not sure I’d go that far—though I’d agree with Tom Maguire that Keller appears to be gauging the public good by “how many times he is lauded for his courage at cocktail parties in the Hamptons […],” or maybe by how many dozen roses Glenn Greenwald sends him.
Of course, the question, as always, is will there be any consequences for this kind of behavior? Rep. Peter King (R-NY) is calling on Alberto Gonzales to bring charges against the Times—a move that Editor and Publisher / AP (unsurprisingly) frames in partisan terms and characterizes as “the strongest denunciation to date” of the NYT’s decision to publish leaked classified information. Video here.
Hugh Hewitt has more. Meanwhile, Patterico looks at the LA Times side of things, posting a transcript of a radio interview given by one of the papers editors in which he explains and justifies the decision to run the leaked information.
And courtesy of Ace, a few of the more idiotic recent justifications for countenancing the institutionalized marginalization of media “responsibility” in the service this new idea of a public good that doesn’t much concern itself with the public. Or the good, for that matter—unless by “good” one means something like, “things Bill Keller thinks are good for us, even though they could very well wind end up killing us. Which, if that’s so, at least we’ll be dead for the right reasons. And anyway, it’s the thought that counts.”
Be sure to check out the astute rejoinders on Huffpo, too! (I particularly like the “we’re not at war” scoffs—coming from people who tell us daily we need to end the war we’re not in. Oh—and PLAME!)
****
update: Bonus video of Tony Snow speaking to the Times’ editorial judgment here.
****
update 2: AJ Strata emails that Jack Murtha, of all people—he of the mind-boggling patriotic suggestion that America is more dangerous to world peace than the nuclear threats of either North Korea or Iran—was among 3 lawmakers outside the administration who counseled the NYT not to run their latest leak. Hot Air has the video, via CNN.
See also: Powerline, who posts the John Snow letter to Keller.
****
It seems Murtha was misquoted—that he was citing some poll results rather than offering his own opinion. I’m happy to make the correction.
Probably little we can do to stop the scumbags. Let’s just feed as much false information as we can to them in hopes that no one accepts anything they say at face value any longer (not that anyone with half a brain does now).
What conclusion can one possible draw other than the Grey Lady is really a sick old man wearing women’s knickers to put citizens off our guard and mug us on the city streets?
Because the government officials who violated their oaths of secrecy have no cover of whistleblower status, the bluebearded gal should be dragged into court and forced to reveal her sources who acted criminally. The “lady” herself should be prosecuted as an accomplice in the divulging of classified information, but all of this not until after the fall elections to avoid exacerbating her already unprofessional and unconscionable level of self-serving partisan muckraking.
Surely Keller knows the NYT is less an exemplar of our American “free” press than it is a cross-dressing extension of the DNC.
T/W soviet. But of course.
We should trust the President. He will tell us what we need to know.
I trust him more than I trust the press right now.
Yeah. This whole idea of “classified” is just a gambit meant to keep the proles down, anyway.
GOD BLESS YOU NEW YORK TIMES FOR DECIDING WHAT WE NEED TO KNOW! BETTER YOU THAN SOME ELECTED OFFICIAL JUDE SUESS CAN’T STAND, GREY LADY!
So where’s the apology to Glenn Greenwald? And the admission that, once again, you were running around selling a pack of lies?
Any fucking time now, brownshirt… I’ll wait.
Apology for what? Being 66.6 % correct? Oh yeah, that’s 100 % lies in loony leftist land.
Not so good at math, are you Dave?
There’s more than one e-mail involved.
Whoa, so let me get this strait, Pastezilla; this administration is wading through 6 trillion dollars a day of my bank account and of innocent people, people that get up in the morning on election day and don’t figure that they will vote for the dumbest candidates on the ticket and his shotgun-toting, lawyer-shooting puppet master.
Listen, I am a center-right libertarian and it scares me that the government has the power to check my wallet when it comes around singing, “Brother, can you spare a dime?” Singing and swinging that Louisville slugger.
Greenwald is right, as usual. Enough is enough.
I say “No to expansive government, no to intrusive politicians, no to the surveillance state and Christian-con chadors and chastity belts.” Only the good folk down at the IRS should be able to access our bank books.
You guys are not conservatives at all, but “false-consiousness cons”, or maybe “con-cons”! I look at you and think of only pity. You have thrown your birthrate away as ‘murkins for the gilded leaf of one night without wetting the bed.
Uh Oh. Someone left the gate to the asylum open again.
Friggin Michael Myers.
TV (Harry)
Apology to Greenwald?
Um, for what, exactly? Did he tell you I owed him one or something?
All I’ve ever said is that he’s trying to get us off the subject of a “people-powered” movement being run by a shadow cabal kicking out the talking points.
Greenwald is on that list. He should be apologizing to you, Dave… And both of you should be apologizing to me for your arrogant presumption that the people aren’t fit to govern without the manipulation of the message by their betters.
Key words missed bu Verc: “overseas” “bank transfers”
Nobody reads anymore.
sb: youre
welcome
By the way, nobody told me to post the above. I did it all on my own.
It helps if you’re literate, unlike the current crop of guest commenters.
By the way, Verc, nice screed. Now try addressing the subject at hand. Are you against monitoring overseas transfers of large dollar amounts between known terrorists and others, or not? What WOULD you be willing to do, say, if YOU were president?
You guys talk a good game, but it’s usually just slogans and rhymes. Try to come up with something concrete.
TV (Harry)
tw: Training these people ain’t for the faint of heart.
This morning on Rush, Gonzalez indeed didn’t comment—he cannot. But Meese did: Called for the NYT to be prosecuted.
Dammit mojo, I hate it when someone screws up a good diatribe.
Thanks for nothin.
1. Armstrong was a stock tout.
2. He used astrology for his “due diligence”.
3. He has tried to disappear the evidence.
4. There is an appearance of coordination between Armstrong and Kos (e.g. Hackett).
5. There is a heretofore secret email list of lefty bloggers and journos.
6. Kos has used that list to ask his buddies to “starve the story of oxygen” because it would “make [Kos’] life easier”.
7. Three emails have been produced as evidence that his, uh, correspondents weren’t particularly thrilled with being told to keep their mouths shut.
8. One of them appears to be fake.
And you want us to apologize? Go fuck yourself.
1. 12:54 comment addressed to “good ‘ol dave”.
2. Come on, folks, Verc is just spoofing again.
By the way, nobody told me to post the above. I did it all on my own.
That just means you’re not on the LIST man! I mean if Kos, Hamsher and Glenn have a list there must be one on “the other side”. It’s not like they’re smart enough to create a cabal all on their own so they had to get the idea from someone. I blame Rove!
BECAUSE OF THE SKULLDUGGERY!
So when the Times whines, “Bush didn’t do enough to protect us from 9/11,” they really mean, “Bush didn’t give us enough anti-terror programs to blow the cover of before 9/11.”
See, the great thing is, no matter whether Bush fights terrorism aggressively or not, the liberals get to whine either way! And that’s what really important to them.
Liberalism, the greatest TW: social disease.
Would Keller have gone with this story and that of the NSA “eavesdropping” had Billary been Prez and presiding over the same programs in a war on terror?
T/W probably, as in NOT
You write that as if you didn’t just post this to a blog. When you are waiting, do you stand around your computer, pacing 3 steps in either direction and frantically clicking the refresh button? Are there children crying in the background, suffering as Jeff fails to answer your wait?
Me- I’m going to post this and then visit other websites. Then, I’ll finish my salad (which is not very good…and that makes me sad) and go to the bathroom. Then I’ll be back.
In their defense, Phil, I scared myself.
“a “people-powered†movement being run by a shadow cabal kicking out the talking points.”
Too much Klonopin in the drinking water? Yeah, Markos is the 133t secret master of teh Internets.
“there must be one on “the other side—
Yes, it’s called The Clownhouse List.
Jeff, I sent you an email instead of commenting, seeing as how it doesn’t exactly match the thrust of the thread. It’s also a bit long.
If you decide not to use any of it, let me know. I’ll post it on my semi-blog.
Regards,
Ric
tw: tax. It’s good to have that thing back on track.
““Bush didn’t give us enough anti-terror programs to blow the cover of before 9/11.—
Well, that would require some anti-terror programs existed BEFORE 9-11. See, that nasty Clinton administration held anti-terrorist meetings every week, and since Bush had to prove he was the anti-Clinton, there were NO anti-terrorist meetings at all. Until after 9-11.
Lo Ping, you’ve chosen the wrong rhetorical trope here. Your side on this matter emulates Sergeant Schultz:
“I know nussink, nussinkkkkkkkk….”
Thank God they had meetings. That sure stopped the terrorists!
By the way, did the New York Times report every word that was said in those meetings?
““I know nussink, nussinkkkkkkkk….— But that would be wrong. I am reality based, and I -do- know something, to wit: the idea that Markos of Dkos is somehow orchestrating “left blogistan” is incredibly stupid, and only people like Jeff Goldstein would believe it. Not for nothing did Atrios give him his nickname.
Wong as usual, I see
Well, that’s pretty easy when shit blows up every other week. Next…
“Thank God they had meetings. That sure stopped the terrorists!”
Yes, meetings, which means people were actively thinking about the problem. How many Americans were killed by terrorists on Bill Clinton’s watch?
My horoscope told me that Lo Ping would show up today and go off topic!!!
That gift just keeps on giving.
Anyways, since you brought it up, what did Clinton DO against terrorism?
“Lo Ping would show up today and go off topic!!!”
I know I’m off topic, but I’m holding my breath until Jeff gets around to correcting his errors on the whole Greenwald thing {Chortle}
that nasty Clinton administration held anti-terrorist meetings every week
Yes, but the ‘terrorists’ were female stalkers and hate radio talkers, remember? Bill’s administration had lots of damage control to coordinate.
Dumbass, their “thoughts” included suck strokes of genius as preventing the FBI from even talking to the foreign intelligence gathering services like CIA. The 9-11 hijackers were enabled directly by this deep thinking.
You are historically ignorant.
Hundreds.
How many Americans were killed by terrorists on Bill Clinton’s watch?
How old are you again?
what did Clinton DO against terrorism?
* In 1995, before the Oklahoma City bombing, Bill Clinton sent anti-terrorism legislation to the congress which after the attack, was beefed up even more. The legislation asked for one thousand more anti-terrorism officials; a new counter terrorism center under the authority of the FBI; approval to use military experts to help fight terrorism (which was at the time not allowed in issues considered to be domestic in nature); the authority to conduct surveillance on terrorists as they move, so multiple court orders are not needed; and increased penalties for knowingly providing terrorists with weapons which are used against federal employees and their families. The bill was held up in congress for a large amount of time as his opponents were reluctant to pass it.
*In June 1995, he signed “Presidential Decision Directive 39” which allocated responsibilities among various government agencies for preventing and dealing with attacks.
* He made terrorism a key top of the 1996 G-7 summit. At the meeting, he proposed steps which the international community could use to better combat terrorism, 40 of which were agreed to. Among them, speeding up the prosecution of terrorists, limiting their access to high tech equipment as much as possible, and increasing efforts to seize their resources.
*In late May of 1997, Clinton outlined an approach to deter attacks from terrorist networks like Al-Qaeda, including steps to prevent and defend against assaults on power systems, water supplies, medical services, financial services, computer networks and to train more state and local officials to respond to biological attacks.
*He signed “Presidential Decision Directive 62” which created a 10-point counter-terrorism initiative and established the post for “National Coordinator For Counter-terrorism and infrastructure protection†which would be filled Richard Clarke.
* At Clinton’s orders, cruise missiles were sent into Afghanistan, targeting a house where Bin Laden and other Al Qaeda figures were reportedly being held. Although Bin Laden was not killed, several people supposedly affiliated with Al Qaeda were. In the same set of military operations, he sent missiles to destroy a Sudanese chemical plant, which was successful.
*He also allocated an additional $300 million to the anti-terrorism budget in a single year. That was in addition to the $9 billion already requested. In the three years after the Oklahoma City bombing, he increased anti-terror funding a whopping 40%.
* And thanks in part to steps his administration did take, many terrorist attacks, including plots to blow up the Lincoln and Holland tunnels and multiple planes were prevented. Also thwarted were plans to detonate explosives during millennium celebrations, among others.
See my post above on that topic at 12:54, and take my advice therein, Lo. Imbecile.
How many Americans were killed by terrorists on Bill Clinton’s watch?
You do the math: WTC in ‘93, Khobar in ‘96, two embassies in ‘98, and the USS Cole in double-ought. A few score, I should think. And my little list probably doesn’t complete the reckoning.
But, HEY! Markie Post got to stay over at the White House, so Clinton’s was an administration of consequence.
Cordially…
TW: Hop Sing is sooooo full of it.
Gee, an awful lot of initiatives, Wong, but what did he DO again?
“How old are you again?”
Irrelevant, to be sure. Answer the question, and tell me if more or less were killed than during the Bush administration.
Fun Quotes by Bill Clinton:
“Terrorism is the major threat to the security of Americans.â€Â
“Terrorism has become an equal opportunity destroyer with no respect for borders.â€Â
“America must act and lead. Nowhere, is that responsibility more clear or more urgent than in the struggle against terrorism. “
“Terrorism is the enemy of our generation.â€Â
tw: true
And the sad? funny? part is…the more Dave runs around demanding on behalf of Greenwald he reiterates the point that Glenn’s Authoritarian Cult meme blew up in Glenn’s face.
Lo, the millenium bomber was caught by accident. Just plain old good police work did it. He looked hinky, so the customs agent pulled him aside, and he bolted.
If that happened these days, you’d scream about profiling. Seriously, fuck off.
“Wong, but what did he DO again?”
More than Bush.
I knew that was coming, heh.
So describe this masterful millenium operation again, where Clinton’s exquisite leadership and command really decided the day.
“Seriously, fuck off.”
You first, bedwetter.
You are SO right, Lo Ping Wong:
Clinton did as much in eight years as Bush did in nine months.
On the contrary, Lo Ping, a very relevant question, because it’s hard to believe anyone sentient and aware between Noon, January 20, 1993 and Noon, January 20, 2001 would have asked a question like ”How many Americans were killed by terrorists on Bill Clinton’s watch?” See Rick’s post above for details of why this is absurd.
I see that you’re arguing the death toll under Clinton was less – a curious metric, but if that’s your benchmark, then surely you’ll admit that Bush is an even greater Commander-in-Chief than Clinton, predicated on the fact that there have been to date zero major terror attacks on American soil since 9/11.
Jeez, considering that Jeff has, in the post just above this, the words of Clinton’s own FBI director regarding what he (Clinton) failed to do in the aftermath of the Khobar Towers bombing, it takes incredible chutzpah for a lib to be on this thread touting the bent one’s anti-terrorist credentials.
But then chutzpah is a peculiar lefty gift.
Silly Wong, it’s “1337.”
TW: They just hand us these, dontcha know.
We don’t have to prosecute the NYT or LAT, but I want to know who their sources are and if the NYT/LAT don’t provide them, then lock’em up until they do.
We don’t have to have a war with the press necessarily, but it’s long past time to prosecute the leakers.
Oh my, I’m cut to the quick. Whatever shall I do?
Correct. If the justice department decides to prosecute the times reporters and editors then they won’t be able to compel them to divulge their sources due to 5th amendment protections. If they are not in jeopardy and are given immunity they can be compelled to divulge their sources and can be jailed if they refuse.
J*s*s Verc you scared hell out of me. I thought the luney left had come up with pod people to replace the good guys with.
heh, RC, I thought the strait for straight and birthrate for birthright were good klues, but, somehow I still feel dirtier…
Greenwald?
…
“Screw him.”
Have a nice wait.
So you disagree with the lefty meme that global terrorism is a false threat used by the neo-cons to get all of us pissing our pants in fear?
“I did not have sexual relations with that woman, Miss Lewinsky.”
“It depends on what your definition of ‘is’ is.”
“I think I raised your taxes too much too.”
Wow, this is fun.
I dunno, BMoe – are you scared of terrorists?
I know I’m not, particularly. In relation to, say, dying of cancer, they’re a small threat to me personally. Cowardly, insane back-stabbers and woman-beaters, in my NSHO. There’s a million bloody assholes like ‘em everywhere – but they have a media arm, so they make the papers, y’know?
But I don’t like them. At all. Their very existance offends me. So please go kill them for me, US Military. Use whatever means and methods present themselves, feel free. I won’t mind.
Thanks.
SB: walked
a mile in his clown shoes
The left’s chalkboard years! Write and erase at will.
That’s true.
All Bush did was free an ENTIRE FRIGGIN COUNTRY from a Terrorist Regime.
What did Clinton do? Besides letting several Terrorist attacks go basically unchallenged, he didn’t put the mechanisms in place that might have prevented 9-11.
Clinton represented the epitome of the modern Democratic Party, all talk, no do.
Oh wait, Clinton DID do one thing. He ran away in Somalia, thereby emboldening Osama. Osama himself has stated this.
Where’s Roosevelt and Truman when you need them? The modern Democratic Party can’t hold even a candle to those guys.
Idiot.
Lo:
You’re forgetting the 2900 at the WTC who might have been saved if Jamie hadn’t been so busy breaking connections between the various intelligence agencies.
Nice socks you got there. Cashmere?
And the NYT should definitely be prosecuted. I doubt Keller’s “agonizing” can hold a candle to that of the soldiers whose lives he’s endangered. M-F’er.
hey, don’t forget that whole Bosnia/Kosovo thing, I mean, we’re still there, and I think there are muslims involved….
TW: research, I won’t be doing any serious research while i’m riding the exercycle.
Why am I reading protein wisdom, when I could be reading somebody who’s on the list?
a) They don’t have dancing armadillos.
b) The comments.
c) actus. (Hey, Boys in the Hall was funny too.)
d) all of the above
Lo Ping:
Answer: more died from terrorist activities during Bush’s administration.
Now for you:
1)Did more Americans die from Japanese attacks during the FDR administration or the previous Hoover administration?
2) Did more Americans die from war during the Lincoln administration or the previous Buchanan administration?
3)Are all your questions really this pointless?
Me personally, no. I’m a mean old bastard who has lived a more than full life, so bring ‘em on if they want a piece of me. But I do fear for the younger innocents they would most likely target if given the chance.
I mostly want to know why Lo Ping never speaks up when his butt-buddies over at SadlyNyet start mouthing off about how there is no terrorist threat.
Silly Lo.
Everyone knows Bush invented terrorism.
From your friends @ Tbogg:
JIMMY GURULE: We’re able to track money from donors to bank accounts, from bank accounts to the Holy Land Foundation back to the Holy Land Foundation to schools that support terrorist activities.
We do this through the use of the Bank Secrecy Act, the database that is administered by the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network, which is an agency within the Treasury Department.
We are able to do this through the Foreign Asset Tracking Center, which is an agency within the Treasury Department as well, so there are several vehicles, several mechanisms that we use in order to track terrorist assets.
From December 4, 2001
The modern Democratic Party can’t hold even a candle to those guys.
Yes, but they can throw really awesome candlelight vigils for Peace, Grievance and Gaia.
T/W attack, as in cool, if it’s against us/US
NOTE TO SELF:
Get smarter friends.
What you guys don’t seem to understand is that the Bush Administration has been just a little too good at stopping terror attacks in the United States – to the detriment of The Times.
You see, the Times feeds on news. It profits when news is made. And lately, no news is getting made. So, what better way to goose circulation than to give the dumbass terrorists a helping hand? God knows they need all the help they can get.
So, once you understand the framework that Bill Keller and his ilk live in, it becomes quite easy to understand why they are in league with the Islamofascists. They both share the same goal: headlines.
Zing! heh
I mostly want to know why Lo Ping never speaks up when his butt-buddies over at SadlyNyet start mouthing off about how there is no terrorist threat.
True dat – but have you noticed that one of the commenters over there calls himself “Islamofascist”? I do not want to do the whole Nietzsche-gazing-into-the-abyss type of profiling that would allow me to see why that would be considered an amusing screen handle.
Why be deferential if there isn’t really yet a good argument that they have broken the law?
But maybe it is progress that we elect what is to be said, and not be said, and have everyone follow that. Including, maybe, belgian bankers.
Thomas Jefferson quote:
Sho’ nuff: they be no more action fum dem Mohammedans after that asscapping I served them in Tripoli. Deys. Done. Foh-evah. Now, my man Lo Ping Wong, let’s grab Sally and have ourselves a par-tay, if’n you know wud I mean….
When did that become your standard?
Is this Lo Ping Wong character for real? He IS very funny, if so.
All Lo Ping Wong has proved so far is that Bill Clinton was more of an anti-terrorist as President than any present day Democrat. THAN ANY PRESENT DAY DEMOCRAT.
But at least he changed the subject away from the traitors at the NY Times.
THE TRAITORS AT THE NY TIMES.
tw: feel
Can you FEEL the burn?
Iowahawk’s latest, re: the smug, self-congratulatory (and, needless to say, self-appointed) Bill Keller: ”Slavish Handmaiden to Truthiness—!”
Lo Ping really ought to seek out the lap of a friendly and obliging Big Person, and see if they wouldn’t mind reading it to him.
Slowly.
Because its not that clear what law says they’re supposed to be deferential to.
It seems to me if they’re claiming to be serving the public good, maybe they ought to be deferential to the public’s idea of what is good.
I know that may be more complicated than Mr. Mxyzptlk can comprehend, but it’s as simple as I can make it for him.
Their failure to send the editors of the various Timeses on whirlwind tours of Mesopotamian scrotum-electrification spas once again proves the Republicans’ “Party of Lincoln” rhetoric hollow.
Racists.
Makes sense: whats good is what the government does.
Makes sense: whats good is what the government does.
That seems to sum up the left’s argument against reforming/rescuing Social Security.
Cordially…
Actus, you’re not even trying now. Where are the old non-sequitur-within-an-absurdity-tucked-into-an-irrelevancy-couched-within-a-fallacy posts that used to be your trademark?
Holy cow! Clinton signed some stuff that had to do with terrorism, and jawed about it a bit, too. And I thought his entire administration’s contribution to fighting terrorists was Gorelick’s obstructionism, fleeing in Somalia, and Tomahawking a camel or two. Oh, and incinerating a few religious nuts down in Waco.
Well, Verc, you certainly had me.
I’m so embarrassed.
TV (Harry)
Lo Ping Wong must be Asian for “Actus”.
BTW, obligatory “ignore Acthole” comment.
Turing: must, as in must hold back histerical laughter at the trolls.
BoZ-o, is your irony excessively nuanced, or did you skip your medication? Hard to tell…
I like it.
No, it’s actually very easy to tell, if you’re not delusional.
Oh. Government didn’t make social security.
Oh. Government didn’t make social security.
Santa Claus did.
Actus, I’ve been meaning to reply to some of your missives. Should I just speak directly to Kos himself?
What makes what the NYT did any worse than what Julius and Ethel Rosenberg did?
What would he have to say? Or are you still on this weird idea that Kos tells people what to say, like some PR executive in an corporate or other hierarchy?
Some things go boom.