Good Grief!

I missed the NYT's article while I was gone describing Rumsfeld and Cheney's vacation home and the location of his security cameras. After reading about that and more revelations regarding the NYT's articles on SWIFT and NSA programs, I can say without a doubt in my mind that the powers that be at the NYTs do not want us to win this war and they specifically published information to make winning more difficult and they published information to help terrorist target Rumsfield and Cheney. I know this sounds extreme, but how else can one explain this?

" * Exposed the NSA's warrantless Terrorist Surveillance Program (TSP), which secretly scrutinized international telephone conversations in which Islamofascists called into or out of the U.S." "The damage has been very severe to our capabilities to carry out our mission," then-CIA director Porter Goss told the Senate Intelligence Committee on February 2, referring to the Times's December 16 TSP story. "I use the words 'very severe' intentionally. And I think the evidence will show that." The Times's revelations, Goss testified, left intelligence sources "no longer viable or usable, or less effective by a large degree."

Concerning Swift:

"..the Times cannot hide behind the fact that the Wall Street Journal and the Los Angeles Times also published this story on June 23. The Times pursued SWIFT for weeks before any other news outlet had heard about SWIFT. As a lengthy Journal editorial explained last Friday, Treasury officials concluded The Times would spurn their pleas not to publish. So, the day before the story broke, they offered The Times several declassified talking points about SWIFT because, as Assistant Secretary Fratto put it, "They had 80 percent of the story, but they had about 30 percent of it wrong."

Concerning Rumfield and Cheney:

"* While it seemingly involved no classified information, the Times again displayed its contempt for public safety in a recent article on the summer homes of Vice President Dick Cheney and Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld. Both men are obvious terror targets. Nevertheless, this story provided driving directions to these two men's vacation getaways in rural Maryland. The Times identified the relevant highways, streets, and even turning instructions to these properties. Also named were several stores where Mrs. Rumsfeld shops. The article includes a photo of the Rumsfelds' home and, shockingly, pinpoints a well-concealed security camera on the premises.

What did this article accomplish but the endangerment of these two top officials? If the Times did not act with actual malice, it certainly exhibited a reckless disregard for Cheney, Rumsfeld, and their loved ones. To imagine what Islamic extremists could do with this particular Times dispatch, look no further than militant Muslim Mir Aimal Kasi's January 1993 fatal shooting of two intelligence officers at the driveway of CIA headquarters in Langley, Virginia."

This boggles the mind. It is one thing to have a leftist agenda, but to undermine our national security on a regular basis and target our Vice President and Sec. of Defense in such an obvious way is.....beyond anything anyone can justify as freedom of the press.

Sickening.

That is the only word to describe this. As the article says, if you have subscription to the Times you should cancel it. If you advertise in it, stop doing so. It is time to shut this anti-American monstrosity down. Freedom is one thing, helping the terrorists is something else entirely and cannot be justified.

via Cormac