There’s little doubt that the editors of the Times Travel section agonized over this—trust me, their souls are aching (particularly around the groin area) from the epic battle fought with their consciences—but in the end, the precise location and details about the security of the weekend homes of VP Cheney and Defense Secretary Rumsfeld needed to be divulged. For freedom.
OR ELSE THE TERRORISTS WILL HAVE WON!
Jesus. You think this is what the founders had in mind when they established a free press? More here and here (h/t Charles Martin).
****
update, July 3: If Rumsfeld gave permission for the photos to be published—and for security particulars to be revealed—that’s fine. And of course, that’s his choice. Same goes for Cheney.
And who knows? Maybe Cheney and Rumsfeld want people to know what’s happening inside their birdhouses.
Of course, that some people can’t tell the difference between willingly releasing such info and having such info released without one’s consent is par for the course these days.
For my part, I’ll say this: if the published material was confined to things both Cheney and Rumsfeld were comfortable with relative to their security, I apologize for jumping to the conclusion that Times was acting on its own dubious judgment in divulging information that either the Cheney or Rumsfeld families would have preferred remain private.
In my defense, however, I will note that the Times has shown a rather hotly-discussed propensity for disregarding calls by administration officials to keep certain information out of the public sphere.
Which I think has made many of us suspicious of its motives. And I’m not alone, it seems—though I’m far less of a “treason” guy than I am a “the Times has shown consistently questionable editorial judgment, and they continue to do so while pretending to an objectivity they simply don’t possess, no matter how many words Glenn Greenwald spills on vapid equivalencies that strain to argue otherwise” guy (h/t TPeters).
I believe very strongly in karma and strongly suspect this is all going to come back and bite them in the ass. On that day, I hope I have real good seats.
I guess now the Pandagonians will know which yards to roll.
Sign me up. I’ll be sure to have extra tomatoes…
I wonder how they would like it if their own personal lives were made public. Say on a blog somewhere.
The street address, type of security locks, the passcodes, et cetera.
Not that anyone would DO anything, of course, just to make it a part of the public debate.
Welcome to the fishbowl, boyeez…
TW: a totally exposed time was had by all…
1600 Pennsylvania Ave?
Yes, actus. Cheney and Rumsfeld and their families live a the white house.
A weekend sleepover party? I do agree though, st. michaels is going to be nicer for them. Or so said the post last year, and wikipedia too. But they did it patriotically.
Ok A-hole,
Where are you right now?
GPS coordinates, address, cross streets.
If you’re going to play your snide little “just asking” game, the one where you play the laconic douchebag, you’re going to have to put something on the table first.
If you’re going to prove you have the balls to play, fork over the info.
Where is your family right now?
Right now.
I don’t believe you have the stones to walk the walk. What’s more, you know you don’t.
So, try to show a little respect for the grownups. You don’t have the juice to play, so you get to stand in the back and shut your hole.
tw: He needs a thorough ass-kicking, just on “general” principle.
So, our favorite brain-dead troll demands anonymity so complete it won’t cop to a gender, yet sees no issue with leaking security information on high-ranking officials.
Now I actually love Keller. He’s on our side. All we need to ensure a sweeping Republican victory in November is another bin Laden tape threatening those of us who don’t vote Dem.
Al Qaeda and the Dems must have the same motivational coach. He or she tells them that when their strategies don’t work, they need to do more of the same, but crank it up further.
Revealing state secrets makes the public angry? Well, reveal some more! Blowing up civilians is turning people against you? Blow up even more, and with bigger bombs!
Genius.
Obligatory IGNORE ACTHOLE post. Remember the ROE guys….
Leaking? was this info from the inside?
You mean you can’t do a title search to find out where I own property?
Grow up. Its long overdue.
I want you to show some balls A-hole.
You’ve got your detached, bemused, oh-so-sophisticated schtick going 24/7.
Drop the facade and show me something.
Do you, or do you not have the courage of your convictions? Will you, or will you not make your specific location public knowledge?
Come on boy,er, whatever, here’s your chance to pick up some much needed street cred.
Show the world that you’re emitting more than just methane. Display your courage. Stand tall and show yourself.
Where are you right now?
tw: It’s smugness is a “function” of blogonymity.
I’ve given out addresses where I can be found on this blog. Go search. Don’t you think the press does their legwork?
“Bemused and oh-so-sophisticated?” Geez, it shows what I know. I always thought it was more of a “shallow and passive/agressive” schtick.
No thinking person has any doubts that there are neanderthals on both ends of the political spectrum who engage in this type of behavior. Note anti-abortion sites that list the names & addresses of doctors and other personnel who work at these clinics.
However, one of the big differences seems to be that on the right side of the political world, regardless of personal beliefs about abortion, or any other divisive and emotional issue, this is still condemned for what it is, vile behavior of the lowest sort that adds nothing of value and only serves to further polarize people and coarsen any real discussion.
On the left, this type of behavior is and has always been acceptable to the majority. This type of nuanced intimidation is nothing new. Anyone who has ever been the target of labor unions knows exactly what I’m talking about. Remember the Clinton administration’s use of the IRS to harass women (and others) who were outspoken critics. Witness how the MSM and feminists did rhetorical backflips to explain away that administration’s many problems. Remember back to 2004, where there was the widely publicized photo of a union goon taking a pro-Bush sign away from a 5 year old at a Kerry rally and ripping it up and making her cry. Let’s not forget the circus that was made of Paul Wellstone’s funereal. Remember the bullets that were shot into republican campaign offices in Florida and Kentucky in 2004. Oh and then there’s the pie in the face for public speakers. The examples of leftist thuggery could fill up a book easily.
While there are still decent, thoughtful people on the left, the fact remains that increasingly, intimidation, thuggery and criminal acts are the becoming more openly mainstream for them. What these acts demonstrate is that progressive/leftist ideas have long been proven failures and that they have no new ideas.
Regardless of how much you might or might not agree with republicans, the leftists have not been able to muster any new approaches to problems or any new ideas except being against whatever this administration is for. That they’re willing to talk about publicly anyway.
The big shift lately is that the hate-speech coming from the progressive community these days seems to come not from the lunatic fringe, but from its mainstream. So why should we be surprised at what is really just sniping of the most petty and mean-spirited. Anymore than we are surprised by trolls who come to sites like this, make snarky remarks, take quotes and information out of context, play fast and loose, but offer no coherent discription of what alternative view it is they support or believe in. Right Actus?
So when you finally arrive at your destination in the long and twisted journey to understand what passes for progressive/leftist thought today, you realize that there’s no there, there.
Are you smoking crack?
The information about Ballintober (Cheneys place) and Mount Misery (Rumsfelds place) have been public knowledge since they bought them. Or doesn’t google work were you live?
You think publishing these are treason?
7879 Fuller Road, St Michaels, MD 21663
23946 Mount Misery Rd, St Michaels, MD 21663
The manufactured outrage is stupid in the extreme.
And yes, this is exactly what the founders had in mind.
Did I say treason? And did you follow the link? Some people think disclosing things like the lens in the birdhouse is a bit too much of the public good.
We question not only the motives but the judgment and the timing, given what else the Times has been publishing.
But hey, flick your matches at straw men from the comfort of your anonymity, buddy. Makes me no nevermind.
What is “this”?
Oh, actus, there you are! I was afraid you’d been run over by a car or something…
There….I fixed that for you, ahem.
Which is why, to this day, schoolchildren memorize the part of the Declaration of Independence where Jefferson included the address to his vacation home.
The founders imagined a world where we would all have to go to the birdhouse, and see the lens for ourselves.
their souls are no doubt aching (particularly around the groin area)
O, the herniated humanity of Pinch and his minions.
Our putative free press has enslaved itself in service of partisan posturing and has even stooped to implied personal threats. Seems it’s only invasion of privacy when a bushie goes after terrorists or tells the truth about Wilson/Plame. “See the lens for ourselves”, indeed.
OTOH, the divulging and publication of very personal info on Repugs, not to mention the details of secret national security programs under those same Repugs, is a noble exercise of Freedom of Expression and the Public’s Right to Know… in a leftist totalitarian parallel universe that is the stuff of incompetent weak Sulzberger heir dreams. Effete and ineffectual Pinch is weak-kneed for America haters, when at least his father served our country in the US military.
actus is harmless. There is no need to suss him out, or to threaten his ass.
He’s just a wanna-be/soon-to-be lawyer trying out all his worst arguments on us. Play or don’t, but don’t sweat him. Feel flattered that he found this to be a tough “room”.
Just a little forensic digging unearths addresses and phone numbers for:
James Risen
Eric Lichtblau
Arthur O. Sulzberger
$39.95
I can find anyone.
Yup. Just go to your local data broker. They sell all sorts of info on people. Its just awful. In Europe, they have comprehensive privacy legislation. But not here.
This article divulges the “precise location” of Rumsfeld and Cheney’s vacation homes? Really? I’ve read the article and can’t figure the precise location out.
Maybe I’ve missed something, but it seems like you (and Malkin) are exaggerating this story to make it seem like something it isn’t.
Now as for outlets that have published the actual address of a major government officials (something not done in this NYT article), we have Newsmax that unnecessarily published the Clinton’s address in Chappaqua.
Guys, guys, guys, cool it.
The information is public, and it’s no more than any of the scandal sheets would do for any celebrity. It’s not only legal, it’s perfectly within their rights.
But how’s it gonna play in Peoria?
I suspect that a lot of people are going to wrinkle their noses and say something like, “Well, that’s just cheap.” Which it is.
Hey, if the New York Times is tired of being the Paper of Record and wants to get down and dirty with the Star and the Hollywood Intelligencer, who are we to complain? Water seeks its own level.
Regards,
Ric
Or the campaign offices that were mobbed and invaded, all on the same day, by “spontaneous” demonstrators.
Tim P,
In Massachusetts opponents of an effort to put an anti-gay marriage constitutional amendment of the ballot in 2008 have published the names, addresses and phone numbers of citizens who have signed the initiative petitions for that effort on the internet. They claim they are doing so to encourage “discussions” among neighbors about the issue.
Actus,
If you’re not on Jeff’s payroll, you should be.
OK, here’s the deal. I’m forming a new company, “Whack O Troll, LLC.” We provide inane commentary to up and coming bloggers, and guarantee a traffic increase, but we take a percentage of the ad revenues.
All it takes is a thick skin. Buddy, you were born for this.
Are you in?
P.S Jeff, you found it, so you get freebies for life. Sorry, dude.
Exactly. The damage to the Paper of Record done by its resorting to this frantic tit-for-tat smokescreen is equal to (or greater, and much more entertaining) than that’d befall it as a “journalistic” concern just for leftards.
That caption alone reminds one of the last time the moonbatpress inserted a caption that never got written. “[Insert BDS here]” or some such under a pic of McChimpyBurton halfway thru a French fry or something.
Brilliant journalism. Yawn.
Call it a win-win situation—somehow shooting oneself in the right temple, then calmly reaching around and putting a slug into the left.
Dick Cheney on Fox Sports at the Daytona 400 *swoon*
And as long as we’re so big on openness here, maybe our public informtation lefties want to look into this?
Its the Travel Section. Which of course, we have the highest expectations of.
Actus: “It’s in the Travel Section.”
SPEAKING PRESS POWER TO GOP TRUTH! Capitulate, Republican pigs, or we’ll help your enemies find and protest/hurt you however we can while feigning complete indifference as objective newsmen and paper fluff-filler-feature hacks.
Regards,
Bill, Pinch and fellow travel(er) writers
Yep. And you know what the best part is? I’d give even money, maybe three gets you five, that Pinch was blindsided by it.
The puffery sections—Travel&Leisure, “Lifestyle”, restaurant reviews, etc. etc.—at any newspaper aren’t “live” news the way the front page and editorials are. They’re scheduled, written, and sometimes typeset days or weeks in advance. Once in a while they’re even printed in advance, to be stuffed with the rest of the paper in the folding machine. It evens out use of the printing presses. And nobody really pays a lot of attention to the contents except the reporters themselves, certainly not to the degree the news, editorials, and sports pages are supervised.
So I would give at least short odds that that piece was prepared well in advance, probably last week sometime, then loaded in the computer, possibly printed and stored, and forgotten about. The chances that the publisher knew about a celebrity piece in a puff section are slim to nil.
So here’s Pinch, playing high stakes poker with a guy who, by all accounts, is pretty good at it. George Bush has called, he’s looking at two pair, and the choices are spread ‘em, fold, or up the ante—and somebody else made the last choice for him. He might even approve. But if I were advising him, I wouldn’t.
Regards,
Ric
Then go there.
Well, don’t forget, the Nazi Brownshirts used to beat up their political enemie.
So it’s not a recent leftist innovation.
>In Europe, they have comprehensive privacy legislation. But not here.<
But hey, if you’ve got a fatwa out on you, and it’s depressing property values, then you’re going to be stripped of your citizenship. Unless you can prove that you’re Hamas material, I mean.
Whereas, back at the tabloid of record:
Anyone who has ever perused the pages of that august organ must needs come away with a sense of the strange incoherence of the articles, which talk of poverty and the social programs that could alleviate it, beside the advertisements for $5k watches and $200 perfumes and $50k automobiles, $5 million estates in the Hamptons, and the travel articles which tout $475 per night per person spas in the New Mexico highlands on account of their authenticity to the native artisanship.
It’s teh damage to the atmosphere, dummy!
So, now I’m in full rant mode. Here in the Peoples’ Republic of Vermont, there’s a rag called Seven Days, which used religiously at the holidays to run an advert for young women to go to NYC to party, and to be paid a prodigious sum. Oddly enough, one of these young vixens turned up dead in an apartment in the Big City, and still oddlier the same publication subsequently ran a story about poor misguided young Vermont women who were led astray to their misfortune by touts pitching the same scheme. But, you know, it would have been a-Constitutional not to have taken the money for the ads.
I think that was very wrong. I think that people that lie to get citizenship and asylum in first world countries should not be denied those benefits because they did what they had to do.
Whereas it’s clear that illegal immigrants from Mexico are lying to get asylum (except that the only reason they come here is economic consideration, according to the papers, not that people in Mexico are more afraid of the police than they are of criminals) only for convenience sake. And certainly like certain ex-Muslims in certain countries they are threatened (for their belief in “free enterprise”). And certainly all of them are willing to apply for working rights and to pay taxes into the system from which they derive said benefits (unlike the Guatemalans who cross the border betwixt Mexican machinegun emplacements, and later might be found engaging in civil rights activites contrary to the law of the United States of Mexico, which make it clear that any non-citizen engaging in such activities may be summarily expelled without right of appeal, but whose social service bureaucracies nevertheless think it right to send representatives to the United States of America (del Norte) to support the demonstrations of illegal aliens in that country). How do I know this shit? I lived in Mexico for a third of my life.
Umm, Dan, you are of course quite correct if, just possibly, a little incomplete, but let’s wait to discuss it some other time, hey? Maybe Jeff will do a thread tomorrow about the Mexican elections (hint, hint
) Meantime, don’t help actus hijack the thread topic.
Regards,
Ric
I came home from work and I couldn’t believe the look of dispair and hopelessness in my daughter’s face as she showed me the picture in the Times and wailed: “Daddy, why does Sec. Rumsfeld hate birds?”…
Hey Crack Pipe
Maybe this little story might jog your memory over why personal addresses of public figures are usually kept secret.
Indeed, in Cali any law enforcement employee – cop or employee of courts and da – can have their DMV record sealed and no resident address on their license.
And many times, most celebs put their property title in the names of corporations.
The REAL ID is going to force an end to this. Not even undercover cops get an exception.
Psilocybin. There’s just no other explanation for it. Well, maybe mezcal.
Twice a year I vacation right around the corner from Cheney’s other home, out west. Maybe the address is publicly available–I don’t know, but I would never disclose it in a public forum.
I don’t have any inside information, but over the years I’ve observed the Secret Service’s doings and Cheney’s comings and goings, and of course I know the neighborhood’s general security arrangements.
None of this is classified, but I would never publicize even the piddly stuff I know, because Cheney is not only a target of terrorists, but he also has many demented domestic predators. Why should I make their job any easier–just to make myself look cool or something? It’s just common sense, and common decency.
Well, yeah, stace, that’s the point. I’m not that far from Crawford—by Texas standards; a hundred miles or less—and I’m quite sure that if I wanted to I could find out pretty much anything I wanted to know about the security arrangements at Bush’s ranch. But I wouldn’t, and if I did learn something inadvertently I wouldn’t brag about it. It’s crass.
So, to recap: The NYT has made a huge huge deal out of revealing a secret program that intruded on Americans’ lives—except that the program wasn’t secret to anybody above IQ 85, it intruded minimally if at all on private lives and those intrusions were carefully monitored by Congress, and it was a useful intelligence source that the Times itself had recommended and has now destroyed. Way to look like heroes, eh?
Then they follow up with details of the private lives of Administration figures that are only just short of color-keyed icons on the map: red for sniper posts, blue for possible bomb placements, yellow for watchposts to avoid, etc. There’s no way in Hell you can spin that as in any way responsible, even though it isn’t actually illegal. (Note: I reckon the danger is real but minimal. Worst case, Dick and Rummy can move, but the Secret Service does pretty good security.)
Result: they end up looking like the worst possible version of the people they constantly diss, the paranoid sorehead with a Cause, a room-temperature IQ, and a stack of conspiracy theories, bragging about how bright they are. What’s that on your watch chain, Pinch? –It’s my amulet to keep elephants away. –There are no elephants in Manhattan. –Yeah. Works great, doesn’t it?
Couldn’t happen to a nicer bunch. More, please.
Regards,
Ric
In wish either of those were still as common as they were, back before Actus was born.
stace
sense and decency are words Bowdlerized out of the Leftist dictionary.
…now, common ….
Okay, everyone, remember this. Actus has (a) taken a clear position, and (b) managed not to make a mess of it.
Now, Charlie. actus often, in fact usually, takes a position and sticks with it.
It’s true that it’s generally a fuzzily expressed oversimplification of a complex subject—the word is sophomoric—and that it seems to spring forth from some stream-of-consciousness mechanism with extremely obscure trigger points, but the positions are there, and I’m sometimes a bit embarrassed when people start piling on something they’d likely agree with, or at least accept as valid if wrong argument, if they paused a bit to consider it.
I may have an advantage here. I have available a ten-year-old, blonde from tip to toenail, to listen to occasionally. It’s good practice.
And so to bed. Watch the Mexican elections tomorrow, folks. They’re important, and Señor Obrador isn’t as scary as he looks sometimes.
Regards,
Ric
Force an end to what?
Is this an internationalist perspective, or a transnationalist perspective?
Do you need a supoena to get this information?
Is this a reference to original intent in the constitution?
People, like judges or undercover cops, not having their addresses on their driver’s licenses.
No. Just go to your local county clerk and you can look at who owns the title to property.
Actus
People, like judges or undercover cops, not having their addresses on their driver’s licenses.
How? Why? The government agency will have their address, just the public document they carry will not.
you can look at who owns the title to property.
And no one has to hold title in their own personal name.
Nobody important,
You said,
And nobody here said that this type of crap was right, except the wackos that did it.
Whereas, you have the chairman of the democrat party saying, ““I hate the Republicans and everything they stand for,†in San Francisco last year.
If you read what I said you see that I disapprove of this type of behavior on both ends of the political spectrum. Regardless of if they’re Fred Phelps’ crew, Code Pink.
The main distinction I was trying to make is that this type of behavior is far more acceptable on the left than on the right. It always has been.
The other point was that this specific example, though in my opinioin very petty, is illustrative of the more general predeliction for personal attacks by the left leaning MSM.
Yes it is a petty incident, but I don’t see the MSM publishing Michael Moore’s, John Kerry’s or the Breck Girl’s addresses as well as security specifics about their homes. I suspect that if they did, there would be quite a reaction. And if News Max did publish Clinton’s address (I don’t read News Max, so I don’t know)they were way out of line to do so.
What bothers me is that the democrat party’s surrender to it’s lunatic left fringe, who’s only idea seems to be seething hatred of all things republican, has made this type of behavior more mainstream and has thus helped lowered the level of discourse. Afterall, when you have no ideas, the last thing you want to discuss are any issues. Especially when name calling, sloganeering, equivalence coup counting, paranoid conspiricy theorizing and intimidation are so much easier.
I do not believe this was intended to be a first page expose on Rummy and Dick, as far as some revealing dirty conserative gottcha. I do belive that the lifestyle and home section was attempting to increase their left side of the street cred by continuing to follow the us vs them meme on how the right and powerful live… and oh how the people of truth sneer at such lavishness.
The left do love to pull such tricks. Mike Wallace, Michael Moore… as long as your invasion of privacy is for the common good or better ratings/ bigger box office, it is OK. And don’t you try it ReThuglican, because then it is obviously opression for my views.
TW Yeah… true dat.
So why would you tell the truth?
This brings up an interesting point. Just because information is in the public domain, is it OK to collate it and pubish it in a nice little package.
This reminds me of the months after 9-11. I was a regular on Free Republic (still am, but hardly ever post there anymore), and there started to appear post after post of real-time observations that “I just saw a flight of B-52s take off from ‘x’ AFB” or “I just past a convoy of trucks carrying armor on interstate ‘y’”. Eventually, the proprietor deleted all the threads and reminded people that, while the information is public, we shouldn’t be collecting it and broadcasting it. Why make it easy for someone to find all this information. Some might call it paranoia, others call it common sense.
Isn’t this the same thing, in principle, as the Israelis blowing up Hamas headquasrters?
You know, to send a message.
Lonetown,
Have Rummy & Cheney been launching rockets at the NYT and kidnapping their reporters?
Tim P, note that the tactic NI was referring to was undertaken by the opponents of an anti-gay marriage amendment. Double negative and all, but it is the left trying to combat homophobia by making “homophobes” fear for their personal safety.
Bottom line:
Reactionary leftists are thugs, from Lenin to Stalin to Hitler to Mao to Pol Pot to that poofy-haired bastard in North Korea.
Fear and intimidation are written into the leftist playbook, and they ain’t about to change it.
Certainly they’ve been launching rockets if you consider slanted propaganda as rockets. Who could deny that?
And your comparing their comments to acts of war? That’s not slanted propaganda?
STOP LAUNCHING YOUR RHETORICAL ROCKETS, LONETOWN! VIOLENCE ONLY BEGETS MORE SLANTED PROPAGANDA!!!
LEAVE THE NYT ALONE, RUMMY AND CHENEY!
[Tang apologizes for the all-caps – speaking truthiness to power requires them, apparently.]
and I thought I was just blowing smoke.
I guess Goldstein is right.
CEASE YOUR BLOWING OF SMOKE – FOR THE SAKE OF THE CHILDREN!
[Actually, Tang just wished to acknowledge that Mcgeehee had said it first, and better, in the posting above.]
ALL CAPS MEANS NEVER HAVING TO APOLOGIZE!!!
tw: believe
ya gotta
excalmation points are good too. three are better.
[And that should be “McGeehee” – sorry.]
TW “good” – The device approves of Tang!
Wait a minute. Isn’t treason an act of war? I know it’s got something to do with war, in a time of.
Did you notice how that comment at 10:06 AM was almost actus like in it’s incomprehensible brevity?
I think I’ve got it.
Pablo,
You said,
I understand that it was undertaken by opponents. What I meant to say, though I must not have said it very well, was that you don’t see most folks who post here, or who read/post on many center/right blogs approving of that kind of tactic. I think we’re smarter than that.
Honestly, yeah, klrfz1, you’ve got all the ingredients there, especially the gnomic obliqueness.
If, as current theory holds, actus comes here to practice his lawyering skills, you have to wonder if he intends to employ his unique style of delivery in the courtroom. Or drafting legal instruments? The mind shudders….
Would you prefer incomprehensible loquaciousness?
I know actus, acctus, and you sir are no actus.
They did this kind of expose’ on the Clinton home when they got a new one once out of office. I don’t recall them giving security details, however.
Thats the sort of thing the REAL ID Act is going to end. A Driver’s license will have to have a person’s residence’s address and name on it. I know, its stupid, but the immigration and homeland security nutcases were on board, so they got this into an omnibus bill wihtout holding hearings or anything.
Of course not. You can hold title in some other name, and that business organization would also be registered with your state’s secretary of state, and you’d find out who that is.
I suppose that the NY Times wanted to assassinate the Clintons as well.
AJB – see above comment by Mr. taylor for the difference between an odd piece of “hey, lookie here” and slobbering admiration.
Speaking of, where is de la Vega?
TomB:
In the military, this is known as “operational security”. It’s one reason why milbloggers are monitored.
At the start of OIF, when Coalition troops were mobilizing in Kuwait, my agency sent people there in support. In this age of digital cameras and e-mail, we started getting lots of “having-a-wonderful-time-wish-you-were-here” missives with photos.
More than once, I had to hit REPLY ALL, and admonish people about sending de facto intelligence reports around the world. Names, dates, locations, vehicle types, missions, wounded, you name it, it was sent on unclassified e-mail. No one message was a significant intell source, but clearly this was a viable intelligence source for terrorists.
It took a couple of years, but this sort of behavior stopped. Partly due to familiarity, but also because OPSEC got beat into their heads. Hard to do when senior staff violate and OPSEC (happened more than once).
Common sense is usually not common. Unfortunately. Especially in the case of the NYT, whether this latest bit of twittery was intentional or not.
Well, we already know you got the incomprehensible ephemerality down.
tw: twenty, as in why use twenty words when ten will convey my ignorance?
We question not only the motives but the judgment and the timing
What do you mean?
I mean the timing.
By the way, catch the Times’ “news” coverage of Hamdan? It was embarrassing, frankly.
Taranto’s take here (h/t Terry Hastings)
Is there any information which you guys actually would like to know about your government or the people in it? Why, e.g., does the President insist on releasing the actual names of his cabinet members, not to mention allowing photos of them to be printed?
Have another shovel, brooksfoe. I’ll sharpen that one while you get on with it.
Regards,
Ric
What about the timeing? Why is it suspicious?
jesus christ, ‘timing’
Because of the conspiracy. Amd Karl Rove, of course.
No; they simply make the job of protection of our government that much harder. And if you are trying to do that, then congratulations, you’ve succeeded.
But to declare it something other than what it is—the petulant actions of a newspaper finding itself in hot water over divulging what may very well BE classified information, and for no discernable purpose except to flip off the administration—is your own peevish tantrum.
Wow, I thought this was one of your satire pieces until I clicked the links.
Of course, if International ANSWER starts marching down those streets singing do-waddi-diddi-diddi-dum-diddi-do, do ya think the Times will be interested in covering it?
Is it possible to get the ephemeral “down?” Can the incorporeal have a location?
Whaddya mean no new approaches? If we give the Dems Congress, they’re going to increase the minimum wage! So that’ll take care of poverty right there. And then they’re going to fix gas prices by “cracking down on price gouging.” Problem solved! I mean, what more can you ask from a governing party?