Last week, it was the Washington Post spilling the beans on the nation’s post-9/11 top-secret infrastructure.
The Times tries not to break its collective arm patting itself on the back for its valiant struggle to publish the documents. As if it could resist.
Remember: From September 11, 2001 to the present, the terror-tipping blabbermouths of the New York Times have repeatedly undermined national security by disclosing sensitive/classified information about many key counterrorism programs. The paper has gone to court to force the government to release such information. The paper has shown reckless disregard for the consequences of disclosure.
The only time it has shown any restraint is when disclosure would endanger one of its own reporters.
The Fishwrap of Record: Our enemies’ favorite rag.
Commenter corkie quotes from the NYTimes’ disclaimer:
Information that is marked “secret” has been determined to be information or material that the unauthorized disclosure of which reasonably could be expected to cause “serious damage” to the national security.
So the New York Times is freely admitting that they don’t concern themselves with risking serious damage to national security.
The fact that this information wasn’t marked Top Secret allows the Times to pretend that they wouldn’t have published material that has been determined to cause “exceptionally grave damage” to the national security. It’s nice to see that they deny contributing to exceptionally grave damage while being complicit in contributing to serious damage.
HA affiliate Sanctuary Bryan:
Supreme Court to NYTimes: Buzz off
Terrorist-tipping NYTimes wants Ruth Ginsburg’s help
Blabbermouth damage, again
When blabbermouths lie: question the timing
The newspaper of wreckage
How about a nice big glass of…
The terrorist-tipping Times
More blabbermouth posters
Messages for the blabbermouths
Backlash against the blabbermouths
NYTimes blabbermouths strike again
January 23, 2014 01:59 PM by Doug Powers
January 8, 2014 12:31 PM by Doug Powers
January 5, 2014 04:00 PM by Doug Powers
NYT editor responds to accusations Benghazi report published to vindicate Hillary: ‘We have not chosen Mrs. Clinton’
December 31, 2013 10:33 AM by Doug Powers
December 29, 2013 12:02 PM by Doug Powers